Re: PESO - 'Falls Bounty'

[ann sanfedele]

Seems to me I've liked this before :-)

ann


On 10/29/2016 7:58 PM, Ken Waller wrote:

Thanks for commenting Malcolm.

The black background was the result of the exposure I used and the 
location of the leaves on the tree.


Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller

- Original Message - From: "Malcolm Smith" 


Subject: RE: PESO - 'Falls Bounty'



Ken Waller wrote:

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=18303946

+

I love the frost edge, particularly against a deep black background.

Malcolm






--
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: PUG Themes for 2017

[ann sanfedele]

ooops - my bad.. re August and the Antipodes...

re the streetcar, subway, transportation ideasbeing edited a bit - I 
like the idea of public transport in a commuter or local senseas an 
interesting topic..


How do people get around close to home ? excluding bikes and cars - just 
group transport.


and, yeah, I get it about April


ann


On 10/29/2016 7:49 PM, Brian Walters wrote:

On Sun, Oct 30, 2016, at 10:38 AM, ann sanfedele wrote:

Igor -

I said August should be open because summer so many people are probably
away somewhere in mid-summer... so open gallery requres less thought

Oi!  Down here it's winter :-)>

Ordinarily, I'd be happy to have the Open Gallery in August but April
1997 was the first PUG so I think it would be good to celebrate the 20th
Anniversary in April 2017.  I chose 'Open Gallery' as the theme for that
month because I thought it would maximize participation.

I like the idea of choosing a previous submission for April, too.  Maybe
a 'favourites' theme for April with an encouragement to choose a
previous submission.

I guess we could have two Open Galley months.


Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/




and can be plugged in way ahead of time..  using a PUG submission from
thepast for that month might be an idea too.

OF course I like National parks :-)

ann


On 10/29/2016 2:51 PM, Igor PDML-StR wrote:

Brian,

1. I would expand on Ann's suggestion:
Instead of streetcar and subway, - may be "transportation" or "public
transport"?

2. I think "A Car I've owned" could have a limited response, even
though some car enthusiasts on the list would produce very interesting
photos.
I am not too keen on the "National Parks", I think it is a bit weaker
one, as it is more restrictive. "Park", on the other hand ...

3. Instead of "Something Red", I'd propose "Going Green"/"Go
Green"/"Turning Green". This has a more interesting breadth of
interpretations. (And could be a bit more socially responsible... ;-) )


4. How about "Blast from the Future"? ;-)

5. Just reading out loud: "A-Band-On'ed".


6. I am not sure why Ann suggested to have an open gallery in August,
- but I think it would be a good idea to have an open gallery
"PUG-20". (not PUG-XX, otherwise in 10 years it will be banned by
"Family-safe" filters) ;-) And April makes sense.

Actually, for that, - what might be a good idea is trying to reach out
to some old members of PDML (via e-mail, FB, other social media),
including, and especially previous PUG maintainers who are no longer
active here: Scott Loveless, Adelheid von Kirschten, Steve Graham.
I suspect that some PDMLers know how to contact these and other
old-timers.


Igor



Brian Walters Fri, 28 Oct 2016 20:58:20 -0700:

G'day all

Here's a list of suggested themes for 2017 - based on some previous
suggestions from the List and one or two I thought might be interesting.
  It needs to be culled down to 12 so let me know of any you think are
crap and any others you think worthy of a run.









--
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: PUG Themes for 2017

[Ken Waller]

Brian, it seems like we just suggested themes for 2016 !

I suggest for your consideration -

'f8 and be there' 
'slower than 1/15 sec'

'transportation'

Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller

- Original Message - 
From: "Brian Walters" 

Subject: PUG Themes for 2017



G'day all

Here's a list of suggested themes for 2017 - based on some previous
suggestions from the List and one or two I thought might be interesting.
It needs to be culled down to 12 so let me know of any you think are
crap and any others you think worthy of a run.

Note that April 2017 will be the 20th Anniversary of the PUG - worth
celebrating, don't you think?

This Sporting Life
Geometric Shapes in Nature
Leading Lines
Mountains
20 Years of PUGgery - an Open Gallery (April 2017)
A Car I've owned
Leaves
Less is More
National Parks
Streetcar and Subway
Blast from the Past
Abandoned
Something Red
Dry
Pollution
Doors

I've left World Photo Day out but we could possibly do an 'Extra'
gallery for August 19.


Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/



--
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 - 'Falls Bounty'

[Ken Waller]

Thanks for commenting Malcolm.

The black background was the result of the exposure I used and the location 
of the leaves on the tree.


Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller

- Original Message - 
From: "Malcolm Smith" 

Subject: RE: PESO - 'Falls Bounty'



Ken Waller wrote:

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=18303946

+

I love the frost edge, particularly against a deep black background.

Malcolm



--
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: PUG Themes for 2017

[Brian Walters]

On Sun, Oct 30, 2016, at 10:38 AM, ann sanfedele wrote:
> Igor -
> 
> I said August should be open because summer so many people are probably 
> away somewhere in mid-summer... so open gallery requres less thought

Oi!  Down here it's winter :-)>

Ordinarily, I'd be happy to have the Open Gallery in August but April
1997 was the first PUG so I think it would be good to celebrate the 20th
Anniversary in April 2017.  I chose 'Open Gallery' as the theme for that
month because I thought it would maximize participation.

I like the idea of choosing a previous submission for April, too.  Maybe
a 'favourites' theme for April with an encouragement to choose a
previous submission.

I guess we could have two Open Galley months.


Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/



> 
> and can be plugged in way ahead of time..  using a PUG submission from 
> thepast for that month might be an idea too.
> 
> OF course I like National parks :-)
> 
> ann
> 
> 
> On 10/29/2016 2:51 PM, Igor PDML-StR wrote:
> >
> > Brian,
> >
> > 1. I would expand on Ann's suggestion:
> > Instead of streetcar and subway, - may be "transportation" or "public 
> > transport"?
> >
> > 2. I think "A Car I've owned" could have a limited response, even 
> > though some car enthusiasts on the list would produce very interesting 
> > photos.
> > I am not too keen on the "National Parks", I think it is a bit weaker 
> > one, as it is more restrictive. "Park", on the other hand ...
> >
> > 3. Instead of "Something Red", I'd propose "Going Green"/"Go 
> > Green"/"Turning Green". This has a more interesting breadth of 
> > interpretations. (And could be a bit more socially responsible... ;-) )
> >
> >
> > 4. How about "Blast from the Future"? ;-)
> >
> > 5. Just reading out loud: "A-Band-On'ed".
> >
> >
> > 6. I am not sure why Ann suggested to have an open gallery in August, 
> > - but I think it would be a good idea to have an open gallery 
> > "PUG-20". (not PUG-XX, otherwise in 10 years it will be banned by 
> > "Family-safe" filters) ;-) And April makes sense.
> >
> > Actually, for that, - what might be a good idea is trying to reach out 
> > to some old members of PDML (via e-mail, FB, other social media), 
> > including, and especially previous PUG maintainers who are no longer 
> > active here: Scott Loveless, Adelheid von Kirschten, Steve Graham.
> > I suspect that some PDMLers know how to contact these and other 
> > old-timers.
> >
> >
> > Igor
> >
> >
> >
> > Brian Walters Fri, 28 Oct 2016 20:58:20 -0700:
> >
> > G'day all
> >
> > Here's a list of suggested themes for 2017 - based on some previous
> > suggestions from the List and one or two I thought might be interesting.
> >  It needs to be culled down to 12 so let me know of any you think are
> > crap and any others you think worthy of a run.
> >
> >
> 
>


-- 
--

-- 
http://www.fastmail.com - A fast, anti-spam email service.


-- 
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: PUG Themes for 2017

[ann sanfedele]

Igor -

I said August should be open because summer so many people are probably 
away somewhere in mid-summer... so open gallery requres less thought


and can be plugged in way ahead of time..  using a PUG submission from 
thepast for that month might be an idea too.


OF course I like National parks :-)

ann


On 10/29/2016 2:51 PM, Igor PDML-StR wrote:


Brian,

1. I would expand on Ann's suggestion:
Instead of streetcar and subway, - may be "transportation" or "public 
transport"?


2. I think "A Car I've owned" could have a limited response, even 
though some car enthusiasts on the list would produce very interesting 
photos.
I am not too keen on the "National Parks", I think it is a bit weaker 
one, as it is more restrictive. "Park", on the other hand ...


3. Instead of "Something Red", I'd propose "Going Green"/"Go 
Green"/"Turning Green". This has a more interesting breadth of 
interpretations. (And could be a bit more socially responsible... ;-) )



4. How about "Blast from the Future"? ;-)

5. Just reading out loud: "A-Band-On'ed".


6. I am not sure why Ann suggested to have an open gallery in August, 
- but I think it would be a good idea to have an open gallery 
"PUG-20". (not PUG-XX, otherwise in 10 years it will be banned by 
"Family-safe" filters) ;-) And April makes sense.


Actually, for that, - what might be a good idea is trying to reach out 
to some old members of PDML (via e-mail, FB, other social media), 
including, and especially previous PUG maintainers who are no longer 
active here: Scott Loveless, Adelheid von Kirschten, Steve Graham.
I suspect that some PDMLers know how to contact these and other 
old-timers.



Igor



Brian Walters Fri, 28 Oct 2016 20:58:20 -0700:

G'day all

Here's a list of suggested themes for 2017 - based on some previous
suggestions from the List and one or two I thought might be interesting.
 It needs to be culled down to 12 so let me know of any you think are
crap and any others you think worthy of a run.





--
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: PUG Themes for 2017

[ann sanfedele]

Horrors!

ann


On 10/29/2016 12:21 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:

On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 12:15 PM, P.J. Alling
 wrote:

On this list Nude frightens me inordinately...

That reminds me: wasn't Self-Portrait mentioned as a theme possibility?




--
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: PUG Themes for 2017

[Stanley Halpin]

My first thought when I read your Nude suggestion was traditional figure study. 
OK, that is your genre, but I could find a nude tree or a denuded hillside… 

stan

> On Oct 29, 2016, at 11:53 AM, Bruce Walker  wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Bill  wrote:
>> 
>> On 10/29/2016 8:29 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:
>>> 
>>> I'd remove "A Car I've owned", "National Parks" and "Streetcar and
>>> Subway"as being way too specific. I much prefer themes with more
>>> latitude for interpretation.
>>> 
>>> For your consideration:
>>> 
>>> Journalistic
>>> Calm
>>> Underground
>>> Nude
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> As much as I like your work, I have to object to nude as a theme. One of the 
>> mandates that I was handed when I was maintaining the pug was to ensure the 
>> gallery was "family friendly".
>> I thought it was a bit prudish, but there you go.
> 
> And I have no issues with that restriction. Though I have never seen
> it written out anywhere, I rather assumed it in the past. Were I to
> submit something in the way of an actual human nude I would be sure
> and offer a family-friendly one (implied nudity, partial covering,
> etc.)
> 
> Besides, I would consider Nude to be "interpretable". Nude colour
> (beige), statues, ... ?  Or word it Naked instead. Lots of different
> meanings there. Doesn't have to be literal.
> 
> No biggee ...
> 
> -- 
> -bmw
> 
> -- 
> 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: Really mini review comparing the F 70-210 to Sigma Zoom 70-210.

[Jack Davis]

Probably my favorite longish lens
for many years was a Pentax A
70-210.
Had it been an F, I. might still have it.
 
J

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 29, 2016, at 2:36 PM, Ken Waller  wrote:
> 
> I've had and heavily use a brand new F 70- 210 for 28 years and have only one 
> real issue with it - the focus barrel, to which filters screw into, rotates 
> when it tries to attain focus, and subsequently I have to remember to reset 
> the polarizer filter - it obviously not a biggie, which is to say I really, 
> really like that lens, to the point that a few years back I picked up a 
> duplicate even though The original lens continues on like a storm trooper!
> 
> Probably my third most used lens.
> 
> Let's just keep it a secret P.J.
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
>> From: "P.J. Alling" 
>> Subject: Really mini review comparing the F 70-210 to Sigma Zoom 70-210.
>> 
>> Most people don't care.  However I recently acquired, a "new", at least 
>> to me F 70-210 from KEH.com.  So I thought I'd post the salient points 
>> of the pros and cons of the two lenses.
>> 
>> First off I think I'll say I don't hate the Sigma, I just don't love it 
>> either and life is too short to put up with things you don't love if no 
>> one is paying you for too.
>> 
>> Physical comparison, the Pentax is about 1/2 inch, (~12mm), longer, only 
>> slightly wider in diameter, and surprisingly not that much heavier than 
>> the Sigma.
>> 
>> The Pentax is mostly metal, and the Sigma is mostly plastic, most of the 
>> weight in both lenses seems to be the glass.
>> 
>> I've partially torn down a F 70-210 Pentax, (and also received back the 
>> remnants of another used as a parts donor), so while looking at it from 
>> the outside it appears to be a much more solid build, there are 
>> decisions on interior construction that aren't quite so confidence 
>> inspiring.  I haven't torn down the Sigma but if it's anything like the 
>> plastic Pentax lenses I've had apart, it is, other than in materials, 
>> maybe better built.  It would certainly be harder for things to get out 
>> of alignment, (but once they do, in most cases, you might as well throw 
>> the whole mess away).
>> 
>> The Pentax has a very long focus throw, the focus ring is very narrow, 
>> manual focus dampening is relatively light, but not too unpleasant, and 
>> can be very accurate due to the long focus throw. Auto-focus can be slow 
>> if the camera decides to rack the lens from infinity to closest focus.  
>> The Sigma has a much wider manual focus ring, slightly better dampening 
>> and a much shorter focus throw, about 45° as opposed to almost 130° for 
>> the Pentax, so focusing when the Camera decides to rack the lens from 
>> closest focus to infinity is a bit faster.  Manual focusing is still 
>> pretty easy to be fairly accurate and one of the things I really like 
>> about the Sigma is, it's, for an auto-focus lens, luxurious wide focus 
>> ring.  That said, the K-5II very seldom racked the whole focus length to 
>> find proper focus, except under the dimmest of lighting conditions.
>> 
>> Optically the Pentax is just better, maybe not much, but enough that it 
>> was noticeable.  Pretty much at all focal lengths and apertures that I 
>> normally use.  I've owned three F 70-210mm lenses and the first was the 
>> best, sharp at all focal lengths, the second was a little soft at around 
>> 210mm but still not too bad, the new one is probably somewhere between 
>> the the first and second.  The Sigma was never quite as sharp at any 
>> focal length as the second Pentax.  Not really bad it could be mostly 
>> corrected in post processing, just not as quite as sharp.
>> 
>> The Pentax focuses closer, the Sigma claims a 1:4.7 reproduction ratio, 
>> (it's written right there on the focusing scale), the Pentax according 
>> to Boz' site has a 1:4 reproduction ratio, it doesn't seem like much of 
>> a difference, but once again it feels noticeable, I was always 
>> frustrated with the Sigma in that regard.
>> 
>> The Sigma is not as flare resistant as the Pentax, or maybe it is in 
>> different ways.  It seems to be more prone to veiling flare, so if a 
>> bright light source is even close to being in frame there is a 
>> noticeable loss of contrast and sharpness, the SMC coating on the Pentax 
>> even though 15 years older is much more effective than the Sigma's.  
>> Still it's hard to get actual flair artifacts with either lens at least 
>> on a digital camera.  I don't have the dedicated lens hood for the 
>> Sigma, and an after market lens hood was one of those things I kept 
>> putting off buying.  I adopted an old Super Takumar lens hood for the 
>> Pentax which works perfectly for the focal lengths on APS-C.
>> 
>> Bokeh is different, but a lot of that has to do with how busy the 
>> background is neither of these lenses will ever be mistaken for being 
>> fast, so that's kind of a non issue. There are lots of 

Re: Fast Normal Zoom. (for APS-C)

[P.J. Alling]

Either one stumped the spell checker, so I was at a loss.  The actual 
name of the lens is "VMC Vivitar Series 1 35-85mm 1:2.8 Auto Variable 
Focusing" so I suppose I should have known how to spell it, but I'm lazy.


On 10/29/2016 4:26 PM, Igor PDML-StR wrote:


Hi P.J.

Let me just link my previous response to a very similar question 
earlier this year:

https://www.mail-archive.com/pdml@pdml.net/msg731281.html

You may want to read my yet earlier response linked within that message.

I hope this helps.

Igor

P.S. It is "varifocal", not "Varafocal". ;-)
In the era of film cameras, I was happy to get Tokina ATX-Pro 
28-70/2.6-2.8, as besides being fast it was parfocal. With zoom, that 
allows zooming in to focus more precisely. Also, changing zoom after 
you've focused is easier: you don't need to think about refocusing.





P.J. Alling Sat, 29 Oct 2016 10:08:41 -0700 wrote:

So I've been getting along using a combination of a Manual focus 
Varafocal, (Vivitar 35-85mm f2.8), and a FA 20-35mm which satisfies 
most of my needs, but they can be damnably inconvenient, the varafocal 
makes me think that sometimes I need extra fingers and more inertial 
processing for my brain to keep track of stop down metering, 
re-framing and refocusing, which leads to a lot more missed shots than 
I'm happy with. Swapping to the 20-35 and back, is sometimes necessary 
at very inconvenient times which also leads to missed shots.



It doesn't look like a Full Frame camera is in my budget for quite 
some time, and let's face it, I've come to terms with APS-C. The K-5II 
is more than sufficient for most of what I do, in fact is better than 
most needs. A more identical backup body is what I'm more likely to 
get than an actual full frame camera, maybe a K-7 another K-5[II(s)], 
or K3 thought the latter would have some of the same problems as using 
the K20D as backup, though the K5II hasn't failed me yet.



So I'm looking at APS-C lenses.

I've kind of narrowed it down to five lenses, at this point, based on 
reviews.



Pentax FA* 16-55 f2.8 available new.

Sigma 17-50 f2.8, comes in couple versions, latest version still 
available new.



Tamron 17-50 f2.8 also comes in a couple of versions latest version 
still available new.



Pentax FA 17-70, seems to be discontinued, but still available new.

Sigma 17-70, three versions, latest one still available new.


All of them have pluses and minuses, the Pentax FA* is the most 
expensive, the first version of the Tamron is least expensive, of 
course it's only really available used. I like the idea of the 17-70 
as it would cut down on the necessity of changing lenses when things 
are moving fast.



I know there are people on the list who've used later Sigma 17-70, and 
the two Pentax lenses, but what about the Sigma 17-50 and Tamron 17-50 
has anybody got any experience with them? Optically good? Mechanically 
crap? Vice Versa?



It comes down to the fact that I don't trust most reviewers. I'll pick 
up something that's gotten bad reviews play with it a while and think, 
this isn't nearly as bad as I expected, hell this even seems to be 
pretty good, and things that have gotten good reviews and think, what 
the f*#k was that guy talking about this is pretty horrible. You guys 
have real world experience, what is it.








--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve 
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


--
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: Really mini review comparing the F 70-210 to Sigma Zoom 70-210.

[Ken Waller]

I've had and heavily use a brand new F 70- 210 for 28 years and have only one 
real issue with it - the focus barrel, to which filters screw into, rotates 
when it tries to attain focus, and subsequently I have to remember to reset the 
polarizer filter - it obviously not a biggie, which is to say I really, really 
like that lens, to the point that a few years back I picked up a duplicate even 
though The original lens continues on like a storm trooper!

Probably my third most used lens.

Let's just keep it a secret P.J.


-Original Message-
>From: "P.J. Alling" 
>Subject: Really mini review comparing the F 70-210 to Sigma Zoom 70-210.
>
>Most people don't care.  However I recently acquired, a "new", at least 
>to me F 70-210 from KEH.com.  So I thought I'd post the salient points 
>of the pros and cons of the two lenses.
>
>First off I think I'll say I don't hate the Sigma, I just don't love it 
>either and life is too short to put up with things you don't love if no 
>one is paying you for too.
>
>Physical comparison, the Pentax is about 1/2 inch, (~12mm), longer, only 
>slightly wider in diameter, and surprisingly not that much heavier than 
>the Sigma.
>
>The Pentax is mostly metal, and the Sigma is mostly plastic, most of the 
>weight in both lenses seems to be the glass.
>
>I've partially torn down a F 70-210 Pentax, (and also received back the 
>remnants of another used as a parts donor), so while looking at it from 
>the outside it appears to be a much more solid build, there are 
>decisions on interior construction that aren't quite so confidence 
>inspiring.  I haven't torn down the Sigma but if it's anything like the 
>plastic Pentax lenses I've had apart, it is, other than in materials, 
>maybe better built.  It would certainly be harder for things to get out 
>of alignment, (but once they do, in most cases, you might as well throw 
>the whole mess away).
>
>The Pentax has a very long focus throw, the focus ring is very narrow, 
>manual focus dampening is relatively light, but not too unpleasant, and 
>can be very accurate due to the long focus throw. Auto-focus can be slow 
>if the camera decides to rack the lens from infinity to closest focus.  
>The Sigma has a much wider manual focus ring, slightly better dampening 
>and a much shorter focus throw, about 45° as opposed to almost 130° for 
>the Pentax, so focusing when the Camera decides to rack the lens from 
>closest focus to infinity is a bit faster.  Manual focusing is still 
>pretty easy to be fairly accurate and one of the things I really like 
>about the Sigma is, it's, for an auto-focus lens, luxurious wide focus 
>ring.  That said, the K-5II very seldom racked the whole focus length to 
>find proper focus, except under the dimmest of lighting conditions.
>
>Optically the Pentax is just better, maybe not much, but enough that it 
>was noticeable.  Pretty much at all focal lengths and apertures that I 
>normally use.  I've owned three F 70-210mm lenses and the first was the 
>best, sharp at all focal lengths, the second was a little soft at around 
>210mm but still not too bad, the new one is probably somewhere between 
>the the first and second.  The Sigma was never quite as sharp at any 
>focal length as the second Pentax.  Not really bad it could be mostly 
>corrected in post processing, just not as quite as sharp.
>
>The Pentax focuses closer, the Sigma claims a 1:4.7 reproduction ratio, 
>(it's written right there on the focusing scale), the Pentax according 
>to Boz' site has a 1:4 reproduction ratio, it doesn't seem like much of 
>a difference, but once again it feels noticeable, I was always 
>frustrated with the Sigma in that regard.
>
>The Sigma is not as flare resistant as the Pentax, or maybe it is in 
>different ways.  It seems to be more prone to veiling flare, so if a 
>bright light source is even close to being in frame there is a 
>noticeable loss of contrast and sharpness, the SMC coating on the Pentax 
>even though 15 years older is much more effective than the Sigma's.  
>Still it's hard to get actual flair artifacts with either lens at least 
>on a digital camera.  I don't have the dedicated lens hood for the 
>Sigma, and an after market lens hood was one of those things I kept 
>putting off buying.  I adopted an old Super Takumar lens hood for the 
>Pentax which works perfectly for the focal lengths on APS-C.
>
>Bokeh is different, but a lot of that has to do with how busy the 
>background is neither of these lenses will ever be mistaken for being 
>fast, so that's kind of a non issue. There are lots of other minor 
>differences, most of which aren't important in the digital era, such as 
>color rendering more a matter of taste, and easily manipulated in photo 
>software.
>
>I guess I could go on a lot longer.  Let's get to the bottom line.
>
>The Sigma is a real bargain, you can pick one up for less than $40. in 
>Ex to LN condition, (or as KEH.com would call it Bargain), or 

Re: Peso: Christmas Cactus

[Igor PDML-StR]

Bill,

A very nice image (with the caveats pointed out by Bruce)!
I probably wouldn't have recognized the plant by the flour: it is so 
threatenly big! (The leaves fragments could've been a giveaway).


BTW, in Russia, this very popular plant is called "Decembrist", - for the 
same reason why it is called "Christmas" Cactus.
(Although the word "Decembrist" has yet another historical meaning, - as 
it refers to a big revolt back in 1825 [obviously, December] that left a 
huge and long-lasting impact on the society and the culture in Russia.)



Igor.



Bill Sat, 29 Oct 2016 11:31:59 -0700 wrote:

Our Christmas Cactus runs a few months fast as a rule.


Shot with the K1 using a Bellows K and a Fujinon EX 90mm f/5.6 enlarging 
lens at f/11.


This is a 24 shot focus stack using pixel shift.

http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrphoto/new_photos/cacti1.html

Enjoy

bill

--
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: Christmas Cactus

[Bill]

Thanks Ken, Jack and Daniel for looking and commenting.

--
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: Christmas Cactus

[Bill]

On 10/29/2016 12:38 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:

Oh yeah. Can reach out and touch that. Nice, Bill.


Thanks Bruce. The Fuji is a really nice lens for this sort of thing. 
The 90 is the longest Fuji lens I have, but I also have a crap load of 
El-Nikkors, I'm pretty sure I have a 150mm floating around someplace.


fyi: focus stack glitch on petal at bottom center. A few other places
near petal edges, too.


Yah, I know. I might have to break down and get one of those auto gizmos 
that move the camera to avoid this sort of thing.


But aside from that, fabulous looking.


Thanks, I appreciate it.



On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Bill  wrote:

Our Christmas Cactus runs a few months fast as a rule.

Shot with the K1 using a Bellows K and a Fujinon EX 90mm f/5.6 enlarging
lens at f/11.
This is a 24 shot focus stack using pixel shift.

http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrphoto/new_photos/cacti1.html

Enjoy

bill

--
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: PUG Themes for 2017

[Henk Terhell]

Well, there is still time to decide whether to take a holiday to the 
alpes or make a picture of the pile on my desk.

I got an excuse now for both.

Henk

Op 2016-10-29 om 17:56 schreef ann sanfedele:
HEnk _ ha.. I was going to say something about that too- but mountains 
are often visited on vacationby some of us lowlanders, yes?


or some not such nice mountains... mountains of paperwork, eg

ann


On 10/29/2016 9:06 AM, Henk Terhell wrote:

.. And in my area/country there are no mountains.

Henk

Op 2016-10-29 om 14:47 schreef ann sanfedele:
LOtsof nice sugggestions - more I could cope with than not..(read _ 
I could put my hands on something without too muchstress)


I'd remove "leading Lines", pollution, cars owned , something red

Is April the official anniversary of the PUG?  I think having an 
open gallery in August would bebetter


I like streetcars and subways but maybe include busses as some 
people live in places where there are no


streetcars or subways..

my two cents, sense, etc


On 10/28/2016 11:57 PM, Brian Walters wrote:

G'day all

Here's a list of suggested themes for 2017 - based on some previous
suggestions from the List and one or two I thought might be 
interesting.

  It needs to be culled down to 12 so let me know of any you think are
crap and any others you think worthy of a run.

Note that April 2017 will be the 20th Anniversary of the PUG - worth
celebrating, don't you think?

This Sporting Life
Geometric Shapes in Nature
Leading Lines
Mountains
20 Years of PUGgery - an Open Gallery (April 2017)
A Car I've owned
Leaves
Less is More
National Parks
Streetcar and Subway
Blast from the Past
Abandoned
Something Red
Dry
Pollution
Doors

I've left World Photo Day out but we could possibly do an 'Extra'
gallery for August 19.


Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/













--
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: Fast Normal Zoom. (for APS-C)

[Igor PDML-StR]

Hi P.J.

Let me just link my previous response to a very similar question earlier 
this year:

https://www.mail-archive.com/pdml@pdml.net/msg731281.html

You may want to read my yet earlier response linked within that message.

I hope this helps.

Igor

P.S. It is "varifocal", not "Varafocal". ;-)
In the era of film cameras, I was happy to get Tokina ATX-Pro 
28-70/2.6-2.8, as besides being fast it was parfocal. With zoom, that 
allows zooming in to focus more precisely. Also, changing zoom after 
you've focused is easier: you don't need to think about refocusing.





P.J. Alling Sat, 29 Oct 2016 10:08:41 -0700 wrote:

So I've been getting along using a combination of a Manual focus 
Varafocal, (Vivitar 35-85mm f2.8), and a FA 20-35mm which satisfies most 
of my needs, but they can be damnably inconvenient, the varafocal makes me 
think that sometimes I need extra fingers and more inertial processing for 
my brain to keep track of stop down metering, re-framing and refocusing, 
which leads to a lot more missed shots than I'm happy with. Swapping to 
the 20-35 and back, is sometimes necessary at very inconvenient times 
which also leads to missed shots.



It doesn't look like a Full Frame camera is in my budget for quite some 
time, and let's face it, I've come to terms with APS-C. The K-5II is more 
than sufficient for most of what I do, in fact is better than most needs. 
A more identical backup body is what I'm more likely to get than an actual 
full frame camera, maybe a K-7 another K-5[II(s)], or K3 thought the 
latter would have some of the same problems as using the K20D as backup, 
though the K5II hasn't failed me yet.



So I'm looking at APS-C lenses.

I've kind of narrowed it down to five lenses, at this point, based on 
reviews.



Pentax FA* 16-55 f2.8 available new.

Sigma 17-50 f2.8, comes in couple versions, latest version still available 
new.



Tamron 17-50 f2.8 also comes in a couple of versions latest version still 
available new.



Pentax FA 17-70, seems to be discontinued, but still available new.

Sigma 17-70, three versions, latest one still available new.


All of them have pluses and minuses, the Pentax FA* is the most expensive, 
the first version of the Tamron is least expensive, of course it's only 
really available used. I like the idea of the 17-70 as it would cut down 
on the necessity of changing lenses when things are moving fast.



I know there are people on the list who've used later Sigma 17-70, and the 
two Pentax lenses, but what about the Sigma 17-50 and Tamron 17-50 has 
anybody got any experience with them? Optically good? Mechanically crap? 
Vice Versa?



It comes down to the fact that I don't trust most reviewers. I'll pick up 
something that's gotten bad reviews play with it a while and think, this 
isn't nearly as bad as I expected, hell this even seems to be pretty good, 
and things that have gotten good reviews and think, what the f*#k was that 
guy talking about this is pretty horrible. You guys have real world 
experience, what is 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.

Really mini review comparing the F 70-210 to Sigma Zoom 70-210.

[P.J. Alling]

Most people don't care.  However I recently acquired, a "new", at least 
to me F 70-210 from KEH.com.  So I thought I'd post the salient points 
of the pros and cons of the two lenses.


First off I think I'll say I don't hate the Sigma, I just don't love it 
either and life is too short to put up with things you don't love if no 
one is paying you for too.


Physical comparison, the Pentax is about 1/2 inch, (~12mm), longer, only 
slightly wider in diameter, and surprisingly not that much heavier than 
the Sigma.


The Pentax is mostly metal, and the Sigma is mostly plastic, most of the 
weight in both lenses seems to be the glass.


I've partially torn down a F 70-210 Pentax, (and also received back the 
remnants of another used as a parts donor), so while looking at it from 
the outside it appears to be a much more solid build, there are 
decisions on interior construction that aren't quite so confidence 
inspiring.  I haven't torn down the Sigma but if it's anything like the 
plastic Pentax lenses I've had apart, it is, other than in materials, 
maybe better built.  It would certainly be harder for things to get out 
of alignment, (but once they do, in most cases, you might as well throw 
the whole mess away).


The Pentax has a very long focus throw, the focus ring is very narrow, 
manual focus dampening is relatively light, but not too unpleasant, and 
can be very accurate due to the long focus throw. Auto-focus can be slow 
if the camera decides to rack the lens from infinity to closest focus.  
The Sigma has a much wider manual focus ring, slightly better dampening 
and a much shorter focus throw, about 45° as opposed to almost 130° for 
the Pentax, so focusing when the Camera decides to rack the lens from 
closest focus to infinity is a bit faster.  Manual focusing is still 
pretty easy to be fairly accurate and one of the things I really like 
about the Sigma is, it's, for an auto-focus lens, luxurious wide focus 
ring.  That said, the K-5II very seldom racked the whole focus length to 
find proper focus, except under the dimmest of lighting conditions.


Optically the Pentax is just better, maybe not much, but enough that it 
was noticeable.  Pretty much at all focal lengths and apertures that I 
normally use.  I've owned three F 70-210mm lenses and the first was the 
best, sharp at all focal lengths, the second was a little soft at around 
210mm but still not too bad, the new one is probably somewhere between 
the the first and second.  The Sigma was never quite as sharp at any 
focal length as the second Pentax.  Not really bad it could be mostly 
corrected in post processing, just not as quite as sharp.


The Pentax focuses closer, the Sigma claims a 1:4.7 reproduction ratio, 
(it's written right there on the focusing scale), the Pentax according 
to Boz' site has a 1:4 reproduction ratio, it doesn't seem like much of 
a difference, but once again it feels noticeable, I was always 
frustrated with the Sigma in that regard.


The Sigma is not as flare resistant as the Pentax, or maybe it is in 
different ways.  It seems to be more prone to veiling flare, so if a 
bright light source is even close to being in frame there is a 
noticeable loss of contrast and sharpness, the SMC coating on the Pentax 
even though 15 years older is much more effective than the Sigma's.  
Still it's hard to get actual flair artifacts with either lens at least 
on a digital camera.  I don't have the dedicated lens hood for the 
Sigma, and an after market lens hood was one of those things I kept 
putting off buying.  I adopted an old Super Takumar lens hood for the 
Pentax which works perfectly for the focal lengths on APS-C.


Bokeh is different, but a lot of that has to do with how busy the 
background is neither of these lenses will ever be mistaken for being 
fast, so that's kind of a non issue. There are lots of other minor 
differences, most of which aren't important in the digital era, such as 
color rendering more a matter of taste, and easily manipulated in photo 
software.


I guess I could go on a lot longer.  Let's get to the bottom line.

The Sigma is a real bargain, you can pick one up for less than $40. in 
Ex to LN condition, (or as KEH.com would call it Bargain), or for free, 
the way I did. Optical and mechanical quality is reasonable, you get a 
lot more than your 40 bucks worth. It's so cheap that it's almost not 
worth selling it.  So I'm not going to.  It will sit on the shelf 
collecting dust, (as a backup for that inevitable day when something 
comes loose in the F 70-210 and I have do decide to repair or replace), 
next to my film cameras and actual great lenses I seldom seem to use 
because they are inconvenient,  (more convenient to use on a Pentax 
Digital than if I was a Canon user with a collection of the same 
vintage, but still)...


The Pentax is just better, slightly heavier, slightly bigger, mostly 
metal with that cool feel of solidity that the K-5II has in the hand.  
They don't 

Re: Peso: Christmas Cactus

[Jack Davis]

Ideal exposure!

J

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 29, 2016, at 12:28 PM, Ken Waller  wrote:
> 
> Very nice capture. Well composed and healthy looking subject.
> Color seems a little flat to me.
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
>> From: Bill 
>> Subject: Peso: Christmas Cactus
>> 
>> Our Christmas Cactus runs a few months fast as a rule.
>> 
>> Shot with the K1 using a Bellows K and a Fujinon EX 90mm f/5.6 enlarging 
>> lens at f/11.
>> This is a 24 shot focus stack using pixel shift.
>> 
>> http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrphoto/new_photos/cacti1.html
>> 
>> Enjoy
>> 
>> bill
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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: Christmas Cactus

[Ken Waller]

Very nice capture. Well composed and healthy looking subject.
Color seems a little flat to me.


-Original Message-
>From: Bill 
>Subject: Peso: Christmas Cactus
>
>Our Christmas Cactus runs a few months fast as a rule.
>
>Shot with the K1 using a Bellows K and a Fujinon EX 90mm f/5.6 enlarging 
>lens at f/11.
>This is a 24 shot focus stack using pixel shift.
>
>http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrphoto/new_photos/cacti1.html
>
>Enjoy
>
>bill


-- 
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: Christmas Cactus

[Daniel J. Matyola]

Great close-up of one of y favorite indoor flowering plants.  A really
strong image, to my eye.


Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola

On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Bill  wrote:

> Our Christmas Cactus runs a few months fast as a rule.
>
> Shot with the K1 using a Bellows K and a Fujinon EX 90mm f/5.6 enlarging
> lens at f/11.
> This is a 24 shot focus stack using pixel shift.
>
> http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrphoto/new_photos/cacti1.html
>
> Enjoy
>
> bill
>
> --
> 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: PUG Themes for 2017

[Igor PDML-StR]

Brian,

1. I would expand on Ann's suggestion:
Instead of streetcar and subway, - may be "transportation" or "public 
transport"?


2. I think "A Car I've owned" could have a limited response, even though 
some car enthusiasts on the list would produce very interesting photos.
I am not too keen on the "National Parks", I think it is a bit weaker one, 
as it is more restrictive. "Park", on the other hand ...


3. Instead of "Something Red", I'd propose "Going Green"/"Go 
Green"/"Turning Green". This has a more interesting breadth of 
interpretations. (And could be a bit more socially responsible... ;-) )



4. How about "Blast from the Future"? ;-)

5. Just reading out loud: "A-Band-On'ed".


6. I am not sure why Ann suggested to have an open gallery in August, - 
but I think it would be a good idea to have an open gallery "PUG-20". (not 
PUG-XX, otherwise in 10 years it will be banned by "Family-safe" filters) 
;-) And April makes sense.


Actually, for that, - what might be a good idea is trying to reach out to 
some old members of PDML (via e-mail, FB, other social media), including, 
and especially previous PUG maintainers who are no longer active here: 
Scott Loveless, Adelheid von Kirschten, Steve Graham.
I suspect that some PDMLers know how to contact these and other 
old-timers.



Igor



Brian Walters Fri, 28 Oct 2016 20:58:20 -0700:

G'day all

Here's a list of suggested themes for 2017 - based on some previous
suggestions from the List and one or two I thought might be interesting.
 It needs to be culled down to 12 so let me know of any you think are
crap and any others you think worthy of a run.


--
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: Christmas Cactus

[Bruce Walker]

Oh yeah. Can reach out and touch that. Nice, Bill.

fyi: focus stack glitch on petal at bottom center. A few other places
near petal edges, too.

But aside from that, fabulous looking.


On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Bill  wrote:
> Our Christmas Cactus runs a few months fast as a rule.
>
> Shot with the K1 using a Bellows K and a Fujinon EX 90mm f/5.6 enlarging
> lens at f/11.
> This is a 24 shot focus stack using pixel shift.
>
> http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrphoto/new_photos/cacti1.html
>
> Enjoy
>
> bill
>
> --
> 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.



-- 
-bmw

-- 
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: Christmas Cactus

[Bill]

Our Christmas Cactus runs a few months fast as a rule.

Shot with the K1 using a Bellows K and a Fujinon EX 90mm f/5.6 enlarging 
lens at f/11.

This is a 24 shot focus stack using pixel shift.

http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrphoto/new_photos/cacti1.html

Enjoy

bill

--
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: Fast Normal Zoom. (for APS-C)

[Paul in MKE]

I've had the Sigma 17-50/2.8 for about three months now and am happy 
with the results.  I might have gotten the 17-70 but the additional $100 
wasn't in my budget at the time.  It's still nicely discounted at 
Adorama and B and H, although B and H says the offer ends on 10/31.  I 
do wish it didn't zoom "backwards", though.


These were all done with the Sigma 17-50...

http://studio1941.com/China%20Lights/#

-p


On 10/29/2016 12:06 PM, P.J. Alling wrote:
So I've been getting along using a combination of a Manual focus 
Varafocal, (Vivitar 35-85mm f2.8), and a FA 20-35mm which satisfies 
most of my needs, but they can be damnably inconvenient, the varafocal 
makes me think that sometimes I need extra fingers and more inertial 
processing for my brain to keep track of stop down metering, 
re-framing and refocusing, which leads to a lot more missed shots than 
I'm happy with.  Swapping to the 20-35 and back, is sometimes 
necessary at very inconvenient times which also leads to missed shots.


It doesn't look like a Full Frame camera is in my budget for quite 
some time, and let's face it, I've come to terms with APS-C.  The 
K-5II is more than sufficient for most of what I do, in fact is better 
than most needs.  A more identical backup body is what I'm more likely 
to get than an actual full frame camera, maybe a K-7 another 
K-5[II(s)], or K3 thought the latter would have some of the same 
problems as using the K20D as backup, though the K5II hasn't failed me 
yet.


So I'm looking at APS-C lenses.

I've kind of narrowed it down to five lenses, at this point, based on 
reviews.


Pentax FA* 16-55 f2.8 available new.

Sigma 17-50 f2.8, comes in couple versions, latest version still 
available new.


Tamron 17-50 f2.8 also comes in a couple of versions latest version 
still available new.


Pentax FA 17-70, seems to be discontinued, but still available new.

Sigma 17-70, three versions, latest one still available new.


All of them have pluses and minuses, the Pentax FA* is the most 
expensive, the first version of the Tamron is least expensive, of 
course it's only really available used.  I like the idea of the 17-70 
as it would cut down on the necessity of changing lenses when things 
are moving fast.


I know there are people on the list who've used later Sigma 17-70, and 
the two Pentax lenses, but what about the Sigma 17-50 and Tamron 17-50 
has anybody got any experience with them? Optically good? Mechanically 
crap? Vice Versa?


It comes down to the fact that I don't trust most reviewers. I'll pick 
up something that's gotten bad reviews play with it a while and think, 
this isn't nearly as bad as I expected, hell this even seems to be 
pretty good, and things that have gotten good reviews and think, what 
the f*#k was that guy talking about this is pretty horrible.  You guys 
have real world experience, what is it.





--
Being old doesn't seem so old now that I'm old.


--
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: Fast Normal Zoom. (for APS-C)

[Boris Liberman]

Shipping from Israel (EMS, with proper insurance and tracking) is
about USD 25... But let it not be the obstacle.

On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 8:14 PM, P.J. Alling  wrote:
> Boris, let me think about what I might need for samples.  Much as I'd like
> to take you up on the 17-70, the shipping from Israel would probably negate
> the great price. The 24-60 looks like a very good lens, but I'm already
> using an A 24mm f2.8 as an e-35mm equivalent.  I was really looking for
> something a little wider than the 20mm ~e-28mm on the K-5II.
>
>
> On 10/29/2016 1:30 PM, Boris Liberman wrote:
>>
>> In my experience,
>>
>> Pentax (which by the way is 16-50/2.8, not 16-55/2.8, as you put it)
>> fast lens is the best in terms of color, convenience (weather sealing
>> may come in handy) and it is just 1 mm wider than others. It has
>> distortion and it is not very sharp towards the borders at wide zoom
>> settings. It has this SDM motor and it is your call, whether you take
>> this issue seriously or just dismiss it.
>>
>> Tamron seems to be very sharp, but I have witnessed it on Canon APS-C
>> camera, which also means that extreme corners are just cropped out due
>> to difference in crop factor between Canon and Pentax APS-C cameras.
>>
>> I have Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5 - very first version. I think that it in
>> terms of picture quality it gives probably 90% of Pentax has to offer
>> for fraction of the price. The color rendering is different though...
>>
>> Actually, Peter, if you so desire, I can send you some RAW files shot
>> with both Pentax 16-50 and Sigma 17-70. Name the conditions, I would
>> see if I have proper samples for you.
>>
>> As well, I can enable you with Sigma very cheaply.
>>
>> There are other options out there, such as Sigma 24-60/2.8 that I can
>> also enable you with. It is roughly the size of Pentax 16-50, fast and
>> really very good. It is full frame too, so if you see a full frame
>> Pentax camera in the future, it can be an advantage over proper APS-C
>> lenses.
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 7:06 PM, P.J. Alling 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> So I've been getting along using a combination of a Manual focus
>>> Varafocal,
>>> (Vivitar 35-85mm f2.8), and a FA 20-35mm which satisfies most of my
>>> needs,
>>> but they can be damnably inconvenient, the varafocal makes me think that
>>> sometimes I need extra fingers and more inertial processing for my brain
>>> to
>>> keep track of stop down metering, re-framing and refocusing, which leads
>>> to
>>> a lot more missed shots than I'm happy with.  Swapping to the 20-35 and
>>> back, is sometimes necessary at very inconvenient times which also leads
>>> to
>>> missed shots.
>>>
>>> It doesn't look like a Full Frame camera is in my budget for quite some
>>> time, and let's face it, I've come to terms with APS-C.  The K-5II is
>>> more
>>> than sufficient for most of what I do, in fact is better than most needs.
>>> A
>>> more identical backup body is what I'm more likely to get than an actual
>>> full frame camera, maybe a K-7 another K-5[II(s)], or K3 thought the
>>> latter
>>> would have some of the same problems as using the K20D as backup, though
>>> the
>>> K5II hasn't failed me yet.
>>>
>>> So I'm looking at APS-C lenses.
>>>
>>> I've kind of narrowed it down to five lenses, at this point, based on
>>> reviews.
>>>
>>> Pentax FA* 16-55 f2.8 available new.
>>>
>>> Sigma 17-50 f2.8, comes in couple versions, latest version still
>>> available
>>> new.
>>>
>>> Tamron 17-50 f2.8 also comes in a couple of versions latest version still
>>> available new.
>>>
>>> Pentax FA 17-70, seems to be discontinued, but still available new.
>>>
>>> Sigma 17-70, three versions, latest one still available new.
>>>
>>>
>>> All of them have pluses and minuses, the Pentax FA* is the most
>>> expensive,
>>> the first version of the Tamron is least expensive, of course it's only
>>> really available used.  I like the idea of the 17-70 as it would cut down
>>> on
>>> the necessity of changing lenses when things are moving fast.
>>>
>>> I know there are people on the list who've used later Sigma 17-70, and
>>> the
>>> two Pentax lenses, but what about the Sigma 17-50 and Tamron 17-50 has
>>> anybody got any experience with them? Optically good? Mechanically crap?
>>> Vice Versa?
>>>
>>> It comes down to the fact that I don't trust most reviewers. I'll pick up
>>> something that's gotten bad reviews play with it a while and think, this
>>> isn't nearly as bad as I expected, hell this even seems to be pretty
>>> good,
>>> and things that have gotten good reviews and think, what the f*#k was
>>> that
>>> guy talking about this is pretty horrible.  You guys have real world
>>> experience, what is it.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve
>>> immortality through not dying.
>>> -- Woody Allen
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> PDML@pdml.net
>>> 

Re: Fast Normal Zoom. (for APS-C)

[P.J. Alling]

Boris, let me think about what I might need for samples.  Much as I'd 
like to take you up on the 17-70, the shipping from Israel would 
probably negate the great price. The 24-60 looks like a very good lens, 
but I'm already using an A 24mm f2.8 as an e-35mm equivalent.  I was 
really looking for something a little wider than the 20mm ~e-28mm on the 
K-5II.


On 10/29/2016 1:30 PM, Boris Liberman wrote:

In my experience,

Pentax (which by the way is 16-50/2.8, not 16-55/2.8, as you put it)
fast lens is the best in terms of color, convenience (weather sealing
may come in handy) and it is just 1 mm wider than others. It has
distortion and it is not very sharp towards the borders at wide zoom
settings. It has this SDM motor and it is your call, whether you take
this issue seriously or just dismiss it.

Tamron seems to be very sharp, but I have witnessed it on Canon APS-C
camera, which also means that extreme corners are just cropped out due
to difference in crop factor between Canon and Pentax APS-C cameras.

I have Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5 - very first version. I think that it in
terms of picture quality it gives probably 90% of Pentax has to offer
for fraction of the price. The color rendering is different though...

Actually, Peter, if you so desire, I can send you some RAW files shot
with both Pentax 16-50 and Sigma 17-70. Name the conditions, I would
see if I have proper samples for you.

As well, I can enable you with Sigma very cheaply.

There are other options out there, such as Sigma 24-60/2.8 that I can
also enable you with. It is roughly the size of Pentax 16-50, fast and
really very good. It is full frame too, so if you see a full frame
Pentax camera in the future, it can be an advantage over proper APS-C
lenses.

On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 7:06 PM, P.J. Alling  wrote:

So I've been getting along using a combination of a Manual focus Varafocal,
(Vivitar 35-85mm f2.8), and a FA 20-35mm which satisfies most of my needs,
but they can be damnably inconvenient, the varafocal makes me think that
sometimes I need extra fingers and more inertial processing for my brain to
keep track of stop down metering, re-framing and refocusing, which leads to
a lot more missed shots than I'm happy with.  Swapping to the 20-35 and
back, is sometimes necessary at very inconvenient times which also leads to
missed shots.

It doesn't look like a Full Frame camera is in my budget for quite some
time, and let's face it, I've come to terms with APS-C.  The K-5II is more
than sufficient for most of what I do, in fact is better than most needs.  A
more identical backup body is what I'm more likely to get than an actual
full frame camera, maybe a K-7 another K-5[II(s)], or K3 thought the latter
would have some of the same problems as using the K20D as backup, though the
K5II hasn't failed me yet.

So I'm looking at APS-C lenses.

I've kind of narrowed it down to five lenses, at this point, based on
reviews.

Pentax FA* 16-55 f2.8 available new.

Sigma 17-50 f2.8, comes in couple versions, latest version still available
new.

Tamron 17-50 f2.8 also comes in a couple of versions latest version still
available new.

Pentax FA 17-70, seems to be discontinued, but still available new.

Sigma 17-70, three versions, latest one still available new.


All of them have pluses and minuses, the Pentax FA* is the most expensive,
the first version of the Tamron is least expensive, of course it's only
really available used.  I like the idea of the 17-70 as it would cut down on
the necessity of changing lenses when things are moving fast.

I know there are people on the list who've used later Sigma 17-70, and the
two Pentax lenses, but what about the Sigma 17-50 and Tamron 17-50 has
anybody got any experience with them? Optically good? Mechanically crap?
Vice Versa?

It comes down to the fact that I don't trust most reviewers. I'll pick up
something that's gotten bad reviews play with it a while and think, this
isn't nearly as bad as I expected, hell this even seems to be pretty good,
and things that have gotten good reviews and think, what the f*#k was that
guy talking about this is pretty horrible.  You guys have real world
experience, what is it.


--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


--
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.






--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve 
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


--
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: Fast Normal Zoom. (for APS-C)

[Boris Liberman]

In my experience,

Pentax (which by the way is 16-50/2.8, not 16-55/2.8, as you put it)
fast lens is the best in terms of color, convenience (weather sealing
may come in handy) and it is just 1 mm wider than others. It has
distortion and it is not very sharp towards the borders at wide zoom
settings. It has this SDM motor and it is your call, whether you take
this issue seriously or just dismiss it.

Tamron seems to be very sharp, but I have witnessed it on Canon APS-C
camera, which also means that extreme corners are just cropped out due
to difference in crop factor between Canon and Pentax APS-C cameras.

I have Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5 - very first version. I think that it in
terms of picture quality it gives probably 90% of Pentax has to offer
for fraction of the price. The color rendering is different though...

Actually, Peter, if you so desire, I can send you some RAW files shot
with both Pentax 16-50 and Sigma 17-70. Name the conditions, I would
see if I have proper samples for you.

As well, I can enable you with Sigma very cheaply.

There are other options out there, such as Sigma 24-60/2.8 that I can
also enable you with. It is roughly the size of Pentax 16-50, fast and
really very good. It is full frame too, so if you see a full frame
Pentax camera in the future, it can be an advantage over proper APS-C
lenses.

On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 7:06 PM, P.J. Alling  wrote:
> So I've been getting along using a combination of a Manual focus Varafocal,
> (Vivitar 35-85mm f2.8), and a FA 20-35mm which satisfies most of my needs,
> but they can be damnably inconvenient, the varafocal makes me think that
> sometimes I need extra fingers and more inertial processing for my brain to
> keep track of stop down metering, re-framing and refocusing, which leads to
> a lot more missed shots than I'm happy with.  Swapping to the 20-35 and
> back, is sometimes necessary at very inconvenient times which also leads to
> missed shots.
>
> It doesn't look like a Full Frame camera is in my budget for quite some
> time, and let's face it, I've come to terms with APS-C.  The K-5II is more
> than sufficient for most of what I do, in fact is better than most needs.  A
> more identical backup body is what I'm more likely to get than an actual
> full frame camera, maybe a K-7 another K-5[II(s)], or K3 thought the latter
> would have some of the same problems as using the K20D as backup, though the
> K5II hasn't failed me yet.
>
> So I'm looking at APS-C lenses.
>
> I've kind of narrowed it down to five lenses, at this point, based on
> reviews.
>
> Pentax FA* 16-55 f2.8 available new.
>
> Sigma 17-50 f2.8, comes in couple versions, latest version still available
> new.
>
> Tamron 17-50 f2.8 also comes in a couple of versions latest version still
> available new.
>
> Pentax FA 17-70, seems to be discontinued, but still available new.
>
> Sigma 17-70, three versions, latest one still available new.
>
>
> All of them have pluses and minuses, the Pentax FA* is the most expensive,
> the first version of the Tamron is least expensive, of course it's only
> really available used.  I like the idea of the 17-70 as it would cut down on
> the necessity of changing lenses when things are moving fast.
>
> I know there are people on the list who've used later Sigma 17-70, and the
> two Pentax lenses, but what about the Sigma 17-50 and Tamron 17-50 has
> anybody got any experience with them? Optically good? Mechanically crap?
> Vice Versa?
>
> It comes down to the fact that I don't trust most reviewers. I'll pick up
> something that's gotten bad reviews play with it a while and think, this
> isn't nearly as bad as I expected, hell this even seems to be pretty good,
> and things that have gotten good reviews and think, what the f*#k was that
> guy talking about this is pretty horrible.  You guys have real world
> experience, what is it.
>
>
> --
> I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve
> immortality through not dying.
> -- Woody Allen
>
>
> --
> 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.



-- 
Boris

-- 
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.

Fast Normal Zoom. (for APS-C)

[P.J. Alling]

So I've been getting along using a combination of a Manual focus 
Varafocal, (Vivitar 35-85mm f2.8), and a FA 20-35mm which satisfies most 
of my needs, but they can be damnably inconvenient, the varafocal makes 
me think that sometimes I need extra fingers and more inertial 
processing for my brain to keep track of stop down metering, re-framing 
and refocusing, which leads to a lot more missed shots than I'm happy 
with.  Swapping to the 20-35 and back, is sometimes necessary at very 
inconvenient times which also leads to missed shots.


It doesn't look like a Full Frame camera is in my budget for quite some 
time, and let's face it, I've come to terms with APS-C.  The K-5II is 
more than sufficient for most of what I do, in fact is better than most 
needs.  A more identical backup body is what I'm more likely to get than 
an actual full frame camera, maybe a K-7 another K-5[II(s)], or K3 
thought the latter would have some of the same problems as using the 
K20D as backup, though the K5II hasn't failed me yet.


So I'm looking at APS-C lenses.

I've kind of narrowed it down to five lenses, at this point, based on 
reviews.


Pentax FA* 16-55 f2.8 available new.

Sigma 17-50 f2.8, comes in couple versions, latest version still 
available new.


Tamron 17-50 f2.8 also comes in a couple of versions latest version 
still available new.


Pentax FA 17-70, seems to be discontinued, but still available new.

Sigma 17-70, three versions, latest one still available new.


All of them have pluses and minuses, the Pentax FA* is the most 
expensive, the first version of the Tamron is least expensive, of course 
it's only really available used.  I like the idea of the 17-70 as it 
would cut down on the necessity of changing lenses when things are 
moving fast.


I know there are people on the list who've used later Sigma 17-70, and 
the two Pentax lenses, but what about the Sigma 17-50 and Tamron 17-50 
has anybody got any experience with them? Optically good? Mechanically 
crap? Vice Versa?


It comes down to the fact that I don't trust most reviewers. I'll pick 
up something that's gotten bad reviews play with it a while and think, 
this isn't nearly as bad as I expected, hell this even seems to be 
pretty good, and things that have gotten good reviews and think, what 
the f*#k was that guy talking about this is pretty horrible.  You guys 
have real world experience, what is it.



--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve 
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


--
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: PUG Themes for 2017

[Bruce Walker]

On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 12:15 PM, P.J. Alling
 wrote:
>
> On this list Nude frightens me inordinately...

That reminds me: wasn't Self-Portrait mentioned as a theme possibility?

-- 
-bmw

-- 
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: PUG Themes for 2017

[P.J. Alling]

Some of us could take pictures of clothed models while we were nude, to 
capture the look of revulsion on their faces...


On 10/29/2016 11:53 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:

On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Bill  wrote:

On 10/29/2016 8:29 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:

I'd remove "A Car I've owned", "National Parks" and "Streetcar and
Subway"as being way too specific. I much prefer themes with more
latitude for interpretation.

For your consideration:

Journalistic
Calm
Underground
Nude



As much as I like your work, I have to object to nude as a theme. One of the mandates 
that I was handed when I was maintaining the pug was to ensure the gallery was 
"family friendly".
I thought it was a bit prudish, but there you go.

And I have no issues with that restriction. Though I have never seen
it written out anywhere, I rather assumed it in the past. Were I to
submit something in the way of an actual human nude I would be sure
and offer a family-friendly one (implied nudity, partial covering,
etc.)

Besides, I would consider Nude to be "interpretable". Nude colour
(beige), statues, ... ?  Or word it Naked instead. Lots of different
meanings there. Doesn't have to be literal.

No biggee ...




--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve 
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


--
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: PUG Themes for 2017

[P.J. Alling]

A car I owned doesn't have to be the specific car, but the idea of that 
car, or the same model in a different setting.  Streetcar and Subway can 
also be an idea.  I don't have a problem with any of these, any more 
than I have with the more general ones where I have a dearth of ideas.  
On this list Nude frightens me inordinately...


On 10/29/2016 10:29 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:

I'd remove "A Car I've owned", "National Parks" and "Streetcar and
Subway"as being way too specific. I much prefer themes with more
latitude for interpretation.

For your consideration:

Journalistic
Calm
Underground
Nude


On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 11:57 PM, Brian Walters  wrote:

G'day all

Here's a list of suggested themes for 2017 - based on some previous
suggestions from the List and one or two I thought might be interesting.
  It needs to be culled down to 12 so let me know of any you think are
crap and any others you think worthy of a run.

Note that April 2017 will be the 20th Anniversary of the PUG - worth
celebrating, don't you think?

This Sporting Life
Geometric Shapes in Nature
Leading Lines
Mountains
20 Years of PUGgery - an Open Gallery (April 2017)
A Car I've owned
Leaves
Less is More
National Parks
Streetcar and Subway
Blast from the Past
Abandoned
Something Red
Dry
Pollution
Doors

I've left World Photo Day out but we could possibly do an 'Extra'
gallery for August 19.


Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/

--
--

--
http://www.fastmail.com - The way an email service should be


--
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.






--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve 
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


--
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: PUG Themes for 2017

[ann sanfedele]

HEnk _ ha.. I was going to say something about that too- but mountains 
are often visited on vacationby some of us lowlanders, yes?


or some not such nice mountains... mountains of paperwork, eg

ann


On 10/29/2016 9:06 AM, Henk Terhell wrote:

.. And in my area/country there are no mountains.

Henk

Op 2016-10-29 om 14:47 schreef ann sanfedele:
LOtsof nice sugggestions - more I could cope with than not..(read _ I 
could put my hands on something without too muchstress)


I'd remove "leading Lines", pollution, cars owned , something red

Is April the official anniversary of the PUG?  I think having an open 
gallery in August would bebetter


I like streetcars and subways but maybe include busses as some people 
live in places where there are no


streetcars or subways..

my two cents, sense, etc


On 10/28/2016 11:57 PM, Brian Walters wrote:

G'day all

Here's a list of suggested themes for 2017 - based on some previous
suggestions from the List and one or two I thought might be 
interesting.

  It needs to be culled down to 12 so let me know of any you think are
crap and any others you think worthy of a run.

Note that April 2017 will be the 20th Anniversary of the PUG - worth
celebrating, don't you think?

This Sporting Life
Geometric Shapes in Nature
Leading Lines
Mountains
20 Years of PUGgery - an Open Gallery (April 2017)
A Car I've owned
Leaves
Less is More
National Parks
Streetcar and Subway
Blast from the Past
Abandoned
Something Red
Dry
Pollution
Doors

I've left World Photo Day out but we could possibly do an 'Extra'
gallery for August 19.


Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/










--
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: PUG Themes for 2017

[Bruce Walker]

On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Bill  wrote:
>
> On 10/29/2016 8:29 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:
>>
>> I'd remove "A Car I've owned", "National Parks" and "Streetcar and
>> Subway"as being way too specific. I much prefer themes with more
>> latitude for interpretation.
>>
>> For your consideration:
>>
>> Journalistic
>> Calm
>> Underground
>> Nude
>>
>>
>
> As much as I like your work, I have to object to nude as a theme. One of the 
> mandates that I was handed when I was maintaining the pug was to ensure the 
> gallery was "family friendly".
> I thought it was a bit prudish, but there you go.

And I have no issues with that restriction. Though I have never seen
it written out anywhere, I rather assumed it in the past. Were I to
submit something in the way of an actual human nude I would be sure
and offer a family-friendly one (implied nudity, partial covering,
etc.)

Besides, I would consider Nude to be "interpretable". Nude colour
(beige), statues, ... ?  Or word it Naked instead. Lots of different
meanings there. Doesn't have to be literal.

No biggee ...

-- 
-bmw

-- 
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: PUG Themes for 2017

[John]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Make_a_mountain_out_of_a_molehill

On 10/29/2016 9:18 AM, Daniel J. Matyola wrote:

Well, I guess we will learn how creative you can be with that theme. 

There is always Keukenhof or  Aalsmeer for "mountains of tulips."

On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Henk Terhell  wrote:


in my area/country there are no mountains.





Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola



--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.

--
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: PUG Themes for 2017

[David J Brooks]

On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Bill  wrote:
> On 10/29/2016 8:29 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:
>>
>> I'd remove "A Car I've owned", "National Parks" and "Streetcar and
>> Subway"as being way too specific. I much prefer themes with more
>> latitude for interpretation.
>>
>> For your consideration:
>>
>> Journalistic
>> Calm
>> Underground
>> Nude
>>
>>
>
> As much as I like your work, I have to object to nude as a theme. One of the
> mandates that I was handed when I was maintaining the pug was to ensure the
> gallery was "family friendly".
> I thought it was a bit prudish, but there you go.

Does a cat coming back from being spayed count as a nude.??

Dave
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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: PUG Themes for 2017

[Bill]

On 10/29/2016 8:29 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:

I'd remove "A Car I've owned", "National Parks" and "Streetcar and
Subway"as being way too specific. I much prefer themes with more
latitude for interpretation.

For your consideration:

Journalistic
Calm
Underground
Nude




As much as I like your work, I have to object to nude as a theme. One of 
the mandates that I was handed when I was maintaining the pug was to 
ensure the gallery was "family friendly".

I thought it was a bit prudish, but there you go.



--
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: PUG Themes for 2017

[Bruce Walker]

I'd remove "A Car I've owned", "National Parks" and "Streetcar and
Subway"as being way too specific. I much prefer themes with more
latitude for interpretation.

For your consideration:

Journalistic
Calm
Underground
Nude


On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 11:57 PM, Brian Walters  wrote:
> G'day all
>
> Here's a list of suggested themes for 2017 - based on some previous
> suggestions from the List and one or two I thought might be interesting.
>  It needs to be culled down to 12 so let me know of any you think are
> crap and any others you think worthy of a run.
>
> Note that April 2017 will be the 20th Anniversary of the PUG - worth
> celebrating, don't you think?
>
> This Sporting Life
> Geometric Shapes in Nature
> Leading Lines
> Mountains
> 20 Years of PUGgery - an Open Gallery (April 2017)
> A Car I've owned
> Leaves
> Less is More
> National Parks
> Streetcar and Subway
> Blast from the Past
> Abandoned
> Something Red
> Dry
> Pollution
> Doors
>
> I've left World Photo Day out but we could possibly do an 'Extra'
> gallery for August 19.
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Brian
>
> ++
> Brian Walters
> Western Sydney Australia
> http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/
>
> --
> --
>
> --
> http://www.fastmail.com - The way an email service should be
>
>
> --
> 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.



-- 
-bmw

-- 
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: PUG Themes for 2017

[Henk Terhell]

OK, I saw mountains of problems here, but I will find some pile here or 
there.


Henk


Op 2016-10-29 om 15:18 schreef Daniel J. Matyola:

Well, I guess we will learn how creative you can be with that theme. 

There is always Keukenhof or  Aalsmeer for "mountains of tulips."

On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Henk Terhell  wrote:


in my area/country there are no mountains.




Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola



--
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: Cottonwood and Sagebrush

[Daniel J. Matyola]

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:50 PM, Brian Walters 
wrote:

> I never knew that cottonwoods turned that colour.


Neither did I!

Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola
-- 
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: PUG Themes for 2017

[Daniel J. Matyola]

Well, I guess we will learn how creative you can be with that theme. 

There is always Keukenhof or  Aalsmeer for "mountains of tulips."

On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Henk Terhell  wrote:

> in my area/country there are no mountains.




Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola
-- 
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: PUG Themes for 2017

[Henk Terhell]

.. And in my area/country there are no mountains.

Henk

Op 2016-10-29 om 14:47 schreef ann sanfedele:
LOtsof nice sugggestions - more I could cope with than not..(read _ I 
could put my hands on something without too muchstress)


I'd remove "leading Lines", pollution, cars owned , something red

Is April the official anniversary of the PUG?  I think having an open 
gallery in August would bebetter


I like streetcars and subways but maybe include busses as some people 
live in places where there are no


streetcars or subways..

my two cents, sense, etc


On 10/28/2016 11:57 PM, Brian Walters wrote:

G'day all

Here's a list of suggested themes for 2017 - based on some previous
suggestions from the List and one or two I thought might be interesting.
  It needs to be culled down to 12 so let me know of any you think are
crap and any others you think worthy of a run.

Note that April 2017 will be the 20th Anniversary of the PUG - worth
celebrating, don't you think?

This Sporting Life
Geometric Shapes in Nature
Leading Lines
Mountains
20 Years of PUGgery - an Open Gallery (April 2017)
A Car I've owned
Leaves
Less is More
National Parks
Streetcar and Subway
Blast from the Past
Abandoned
Something Red
Dry
Pollution
Doors

I've left World Photo Day out but we could possibly do an 'Extra'
gallery for August 19.


Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/







--
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 - Jump!

[ann sanfedele]

My least favorite, because jumpers know you are there  - or so it 
appears.   Not that it isn't a nice shot- but not as intersting to me as 
the rest.


ann


On 10/29/2016 1:39 AM, Marco Alpert wrote:

Thanks, Brian!

- Marco


On Oct 28, 2016, at 7:57 PM, Brian Walters  wrote:

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016, at 04:47 PM, Marco Alpert wrote:

Featuring an encore appearance of the man with the dog:

http://www.alpert.com/marco/photo16/peso28.html



Nicely timed - and the encore appearance is a welcome component of the
image.


Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/

--





--
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: PUG Themes for 2017

[ann sanfedele]

LOtsof nice sugggestions - more I could cope with than not..(read _ I 
could put my hands on something without too muchstress)


I'd remove "leading Lines", pollution, cars owned , something red

Is April the official anniversary of the PUG?  I think having an open 
gallery in August would bebetter


I like streetcars and subways but maybe include busses as some people 
live in places where there are no


streetcars or subways..

my two cents, sense, etc


On 10/28/2016 11:57 PM, Brian Walters wrote:

G'day all

Here's a list of suggested themes for 2017 - based on some previous
suggestions from the List and one or two I thought might be interesting.
  It needs to be culled down to 12 so let me know of any you think are
crap and any others you think worthy of a run.

Note that April 2017 will be the 20th Anniversary of the PUG - worth
celebrating, don't you think?

This Sporting Life
Geometric Shapes in Nature
Leading Lines
Mountains
20 Years of PUGgery - an Open Gallery (April 2017)
A Car I've owned
Leaves
Less is More
National Parks
Streetcar and Subway
Blast from the Past
Abandoned
Something Red
Dry
Pollution
Doors

I've left World Photo Day out but we could possibly do an 'Extra'
gallery for August 19.


Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/




--
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 - The local sky show

[Jostein]

Thanks Dan, Marco, Bruce W., Ken, Paul, Alan C, Gonz, Chris, Ann, 
Malcolm, Godfrey, Cotty, Boris, Jack D, Brian and Igor for commenting. 
Much appreciated.


Thanks to everyone else who bothered to look, too.

Jostein

Den 26.10.2016 18.59, skrev Jostein:

From last night, about 400 meters from our house.
http://www.alunfoto.no/innhold/nordlys-over-huflatten/

Kp index is equally high tonight, but clouds are not cooperating. :-(

Jostein




--
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: Could a K-3 II video for two hours continuously?

[Steve Cottrell]

On 27/10/16, Larry Colen, discombobulated, unleashed:

>A friend asked me to photograph his daughter's bat mitzvah this weekend. 
>He'd like to have video of the ceremony, put a camera on a tripod and 
>let it go.I've got a 15 year old JVC, also a K-3 and a K-3 II.  I 
>know that the early pentax SLRs would only video for a few minutes 
>before having to stop and restart.

Holy shit. A locked-off camera on a single shot of the whole thing?? How
long does it last? Is the area of interest a small confined area or is
it spread throughout a room? Is there more than one speaker? How will
sound be recorded of that (those) speakers?

Sounds like a GoPro set to medium shot clipped onto a nearby convenient
mount would be best here for budget, do-with-it-what-you-will video


>By the way, I'm willing to do this as a favor for a friend, he's willing 
>to pay me.  Neither of us have any idea what professionals charge. 
>It'll be about 6hours with ceremony, dinner and party.  Anybody have a 
>rough idea what it would cost him to hire someone that does this for a 
>living?

Sure. Just shooting with no editing, anywhere from 250 to 650 USD for
the day (plus any travel expenses) depending on level of production, kit
required, experience.

If an edit is required as well to produce (say) a 30 minute video then
basically you're looking at the number of days it will take to produce
the finished item. For a 30 minute video, that's easily a week's work
and (including the shooting day) I would be charging about 3500 USD.

If the video required was a much more watchable 10 minutes, you're
looking at about half that (from me).

Caveat: I only work to broadcast standard as it is the way I was
trained, and know of no other way. Assume that any freelancer who works
on broadcast TV shooting and editing is at the top of their game and
will produce a guaranteed end product that will be adored by all who watch.

Sure, you can get specialists who concentrate on weddings, bar mitzvahs
(and even bat mitzvahs) but unless you watch a showreel of existing
work, it's an unknown punt. There is nothing worse than hiring someone
to produce something that looks like it will be amazing, to find that it
turns out cheesy and labored to the point of boredom. Especially at eye-
watering prices.

Beware also the man-power required. A troop of half a dozen video
wedding specialists (aka students) roaming about seemingly capturing
every single angle of the action non-stop is absolutely no guarantee
that a watchable product will result. I can guarantee you that I would
rather hire one single broadcast shoot/edit (with documentary or news
experience) than that mob-handed brigade. 

Ultimately, you get what you pay form but there are plenty of sharks
being paid too much for the shit they churn out. The viewer will decide,
but an expensive way of learning you've got a lemon!

Bottom line if commissioning: VIEW THE SHOWREEL !



-- 


Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__Broadcast, Corporate,
||  (O)  |Web Video Production
--
_



-- 
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.