Re: test

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Maybe...

Alex

On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Jack Davis  wrote:
> Yes!
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jul 5, 2015, at 5:48 AM, Knarf  wrote:
>>
>> No
>>
>>> On 5 July, 2015 8:27:18 AM EDT, David J Brooks  wrote:
>>> I know i'll regret this, but testing anyway
>>>
>>> Dave
>>
>> --
>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>
>> --
>> 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: Pre-order for Pentax Full Frame

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

I read that as "Check today's date, fools." :)

Alex

On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:
> Check today's date, folks.
>
> Paul via phone
>
>> On Apr 1, 2015, at 3:36 AM, Steve Cottrell  wrote:
>>
>> Well, I've decided if you can't beat em, join em. I've taken the plunge
>> and pre-ordered a Pentax full frame DSLR. Actually quite excited by it
>> all. Will measure the sensor on arrival and if it's even a micron short
>> of 36mm X 24mm, the hat stays safe.
>>
>> Delivery is showing as exactly 9 months from today's date - looking
>> forward to this baby.
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> 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.
>
> --
> 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: Odd Happening

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Mirror overrun - quite rare, but typical for the K-3. Make sure you
have the latest firmware (v1.11) installed; it's supposed to help.

Alex

On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 9:30 PM, Jack Davis  wrote:
>
>
> This AMI was trying to wait out a perched young eagle. Don't believe I've 
> ever spent so much time
> continuously checking a rechecking the focus for such a long period of time. 
> Could have been
> something like 20 mins. I got arm weary and kept changing location in and 
> around the rig.
> I finally decided to edge a little closer, so began to walk slowly in his 
> direction. At exactly
> that time my K-3 went off in AF-S mode speed (It was set to AF-C) and ran for 
> 7 to 10 secs. I noticed
> it was not moving any images to the buffer and found that no images were 
> taken during that burst.
> I don't believe the mirror was activated, only the shutter.(?)
> At this point, it's taking pictures and acting normally in all respects.
> I once had a shutter freeze up on my K-5 while doing a similar thing awaiting 
> a giant Red Tail hawk
> to launch. Battery removal and re-install fixed it.
> Continual focus checking for an extended period seems to have it's circuit 
> disrupting consequences.
>
> Anyone?
>
> Thanks!!
>
> Jack
>
>
>
> --
> 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: Bill Owens passing

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

I only "knew" him from his messages on PDML and your stories - yet I'm
saddened to hear that he's gone.
Rest in peace, Bill Owens.

Alex (long time lurker)

On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 8:51 PM, Bob Sullivan  wrote:
> Bill died earlier today, with family around him.
>
> As Mark recounted, he was a Grandfather Mountain Nature Photography
> regular. His pop-up camper in the pick-nick area was 'pdml central'.
> He was a kind and genial fellow.  He and Phyllis were great hosts for
> our annual gatherings.
>
> Sadly, Bob Sullivan
>
> --
> 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: Canned Air Debacle

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Bipin Gupta  wrote:
> Paul Sir, last month I bought the largest sized rocket blower for that
> mighty blast of air - Giottos AA 1900. I made sure this was the
> original and not a cheap Chinese copy. I intended to use it for
> blasting the sensor, mirror, viewing screen, viewfinder and the lens
> to dislodge dust.
>
> Then I decided to read up the internet for some resources and advice
> on use of rocket blowers.
> Here is a horror story:-
> I blasted the sensor with my Rocket Air Blower a couple of times. I
> then checked a blank screen shot and was horrified, When previously
> there were one or two dust spots, the sensor now had a dozen. Short
> story. The rubber inside the bulb of my 2-year old blower had crumbled
> and let loose the havoc on the sensor.
>
> It is best to use a good quality sensor swab and a bottle of sensor
> cleaning fluid. Even that spinning brush stuff with electrostatic
> technology is suspect. That gooey swab is still worse and some were
> withdrawn from the market.
>
> Good luck.
> Bipin.

How about the Pentax O-ICK1? I'm not aware of any other camera
manufacturer-provided sensor cleaning kit.

Alex

-- 
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: Surgery day for Doug Brewer

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

I'm usually just lurking around - did that for more than a decade -
but in this case I can't stay quiet. Best wishes to Doug!

Alex

On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Mark Roberts
 wrote:
> Today's the day our beloved listmeister is scheduled for surgery. He'd
> talked to me about turning over all the List management information
> and passwords in case of "unforeseen events" but never got around to
> doing it. So we'll just have to keep our fingers crossed and hope the
> surgeon doesn't slip up...
>
>
> --
> Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia
> www.robertstech.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: 645Z specs

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Talking about price, I didn't see mentioned 645Z's: around $8500.

Alex

On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 7:24 AM, Brian Walters  wrote:
> Quoting Paul Stenquist :
>
>> 51 megapixel 43.8 x 32.8 sensor. ISO to 204,800, and it?s a bit smaller
>> than a Nikon D4. Why would anyone want a 24 x 36 Pentax?
>
>
>
> Well, I don't, but price is one reason that people still want one.
>
>
> --
> 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.

-- 
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: The Pentax CES Display...

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Hello, Paul,

I was browsing the DPReview Pentax SLR Talk Forum, when I found this post:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52877156 (author: Mark Dimalanta)
It has snapshots from Ricoh's boot, and while it's in the background
guess which image can be seen in the first pic, top-left corner 

Regards,
Alex

On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 10:35 PM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:
> ...will include one of my photos—“Birmingham Gentleman.” The Ricoh marketing 
> people chose it after perusing the Pentax Gallery, and I provided a 50 meg. 
> tiff file. I believe they made a rather large print of it. Most of you 
> probably recall the pic. It was on the landing page of the Pentax Gallery for 
> quite a few years, and it’s been seen here before. It’s on photo.net as well: 
> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3451662&size=lg
>
> If anyone plans on attending the CES, I’d love to see a photo of the booth.
>
> Best,
> Paul
> --
> 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: The Pentax CES Display...

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

That's great, congratulations! Yes, I recall the pic - an excellent
one, there's no doubt about it.

I can't attend the CES, unfortunately; it's on the wrong continent
 (I would have loved to see your image printed properly); I hope
this means they will make a habit from having a nice gallery on every
major fair.

Regards (and Happy New Year to all pdml'ers)
Alex

On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 10:35 PM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:
> ...will include one of my photos—“Birmingham Gentleman.” The Ricoh marketing 
> people chose it after perusing the Pentax Gallery, and I provided a 50 meg. 
> tiff file. I believe they made a rather large print of it. Most of you 
> probably recall the pic. It was on the landing page of the Pentax Gallery for 
> quite a few years, and it’s been seen here before. It’s on photo.net as well: 
> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3451662&size=lg
>
> If anyone plans on attending the CES, I’d love to see a photo of the booth.
>
> Best,
> Paul
> --
> 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: Limited lens line upgrades

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

This is more difficult - from their press release
(http://www.us.ricoh-imaging.com/about/press/285) it appears the
application method is different than that of the "normal" coatings
(smc included), with a better control of the thickness and evenness;
also, compared to the otherwise superior ABC, it should be harder /
more resilient to being scratched.
I tried to dig through their patents, but I can't accurately say which
one is for the HD coating.

Alex

On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 10:48 PM, steve harley  wrote:
> on 2013-12-04 11:15 Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 7:51 PM, steve harley  wrote:
>>>
>>> are there any tests or other solid information about the qualities of HD
>>> vs
>>> SMC?
>>
>>
>> Then, the Pentax Forums review is linked to in the original post. This
>> is the specific section we're interested in:
>>
>> http://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/hd-pentax-limited-primes/aberrations-and-flare.html
>
>
> thanks, i guess i was wondering about the coating in the abstract - what
> makes it better? some of the difference in those tests seems due to the
> curved blades, but internal reflections and contrast seem to represent the
> coatings, however it also seems to vary a lot per lens design
>
> i have the 15mm SMC, and the only other Limited prime i'm strongly
> interested in is the 35; from those shots, HD on a 35 gains a smaller
> hotspot at the expense of fuzzy startbursts; bokeh doesn't seem to benefit
> at all from the curved blades; what would be most helpful for me would be a
> daylight "contrast test" on the 35, like that on the 70, on both a normal
> scene and a macro shot
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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: Limited lens line upgrades

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

"Super Multi Coating" is a bit cheesy, don't you think? Not quite on
the "Sensor Ability Fortifying Optical Compensation System" level, but
still... 

Alex

On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Igor Roshchin  wrote:
>
> I read it as:
> LIMITED (lens line) UPGRADES.
>
>
> As for the name, - yes, "HD" is ubiquitous these days, and that's what
> they are targeting.
> "SMC" is "widely known to a limited circle of people". HD is a better
> buzz word for the broader customer base.
>
>
> Wed Dec 4 12:37:11 EST 2013
> Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote:
>
>
> However, AFAIK HD is not a new version of SMC, but a different kind of
> coating (just like, but not really on the same level as Aero Bright
> Coating). I agree the name is generic, though.
>
> Alex
>
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 5:37 PM, P.J. Alling  
> wrote:
>> SMC has changed considerably over the years since it was first introduced.
>> Ricoh is doing a lot of good things with the Pentax Brand but moving the
>> nomenclature from SMC to HD isn't one of them.  SMC means something, HD is
>> generic and doesn't.
>>
>>
>> On 12/4/2013 8:45 AM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:24 PM, CollinB  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/hd-pentax-limited-primes-review.html
>>>> All SMC to HD.
>>>> And they have earned a red stripe for differentiation.
>>>>
>>> And better coatings (not that SMC was bad, but there is a difference),
>>> and rounded apertures (some are complaining about that)
>>>
>>> Alex
>>>
>>
>
> --
> 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: Limited lens line upgrades

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 7:51 PM, steve harley  wrote:
> on 2013-12-04 10:37 Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote
>
>> However, AFAIK HD is not a new version of SMC, but a different kind of
>> coating (just like, but not really on the same level as Aero Bright
>> Coating). I agree the name is generic, though.
>
>
> are there any tests or other solid information about the qualities of HD vs
> SMC?

Nothing scientific, but yes.
They had a display demonstrating the difference between HD and
"classic multicoating" at Photokina, the difference was visible
(higher contrast). Not sure if the "classic multicoating" was their
best SMC, and I wouldn't necessarily assume that.

Then, the Pentax Forums review is linked to in the original post. This
is the specific section we're interested in:
http://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/hd-pentax-limited-primes/aberrations-and-flare.html
They were able to see a difference - when there's a strong light
source in the frame, at least - and so do I. I remember seeing a
Japanese quick test showing a similar difference.

As I see it, there's no reason for me to update my smc Limiteds to HD
ones; but I'd still want the new coating on new lenses.

Regards,
Alex

-- 
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: Limited lens line upgrades

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

However, AFAIK HD is not a new version of SMC, but a different kind of
coating (just like, but not really on the same level as Aero Bright
Coating). I agree the name is generic, though.

Alex

On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 5:37 PM, P.J. Alling  wrote:
> SMC has changed considerably over the years since it was first introduced.
> Ricoh is doing a lot of good things with the Pentax Brand but moving the
> nomenclature from SMC to HD isn't one of them.  SMC means something, HD is
> generic and doesn't.
>
>
> On 12/4/2013 8:45 AM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:24 PM, CollinB  wrote:
>>>
>>> http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/hd-pentax-limited-primes-review.html
>>> All SMC to HD.
>>> And they have earned a red stripe for differentiation.
>>>
>> And better coatings (not that SMC was bad, but there is a difference),
>> and rounded apertures (some are complaining about that)
>>
>> Alex
>>
>
>
> --
> A newspaper is a device for making the ignorant more ignorant, and the
> crazy, crazier.
>
>  - H.L.Mencken
>
>
>
> --
> 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: Limited lens line upgrades

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:24 PM, CollinB  wrote:
> http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/hd-pentax-limited-primes-review.html
> All SMC to HD.
> And they have earned a red stripe for differentiation.
>
And better coatings (not that SMC was bad, but there is a difference),
and rounded apertures (some are complaining about that)

Alex

-- 
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: K-3 review as seen through the eyes of the PF

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 5:56 PM, Mark Roberts
 wrote:
> David J Brooks  wrote:
>
>>http://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/pentax-k-3-review/introduction.html
>
> I can't really understand why anyone would read a "review" from a
> fanboy site like Pantex Forums.

For the record, the owner of "Pentax Forums" also has a "Nikon Forums".

Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: K-3 Video on Youtube

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 3:38 AM, Bill  wrote:
> On 26/10/2013 5:34 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
>>
>> I can understand your feelings, that video content would be viewed as
>> superficial and suspicious if it were aired in Australia.
>
>
> Why may I ask? You have a guy, we'll give him the benefit of the doubt and
> presume he is a professional studio guy, who has may well have never touched
> a Pentax DSLR before (Pentax isn't exactly mainstream) who has been hired by
> Pentax to work with the K3.
> I'm not seeing what Boris is saying as being anything other than something
> of high probability, neither good nor bad, just something that is.
>
> What's with the judgement about it?
>
> bill

I'm also curious why, as I see nothing objectionable about that video.
As for the photographer, just google "Allen Birnbach" ;) - and yes,
he's (also?) shooting with Pentax DSLRs, 645D to be more precise.
He was asked to test the new K-3, he did it, the result was captured
into a commercial; that's all.

Alex

-- 
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: K-3: And here are your OFFICIAL specs

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Tomorrow it should be back.


On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Darren Addy  wrote:
> AND now the page is a 404 error.
> : )

Alex

-- 
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: K3 seems to target video pretty strongly

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Jan van Wijk  wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Based on new leaked images (see dpreview) from:
>
>   http://digicame-info.com/2013/10/k-3-5.html
>
> It seems the new K3 has major improvements in the video area:
>
>  - Dedicated still/movie switch on the back
>  - headphone jack (the bump on the front) as well as MIC input
>
> Not sure that is the direction I would like to take.
Video is necessary, to increase sales. I'm sure that it doesn't make
it a lesser photographic tool, and that not only the video is improved
;)
>
> However, it also has dual SD-cards slots so it seems (select button on the 
> back).
And quite likely many other improvements.
>
> For me, dynamic range and High-ISO are most important (unlikely to be better 
> than K5),
> as well as a better AF system (quite likely to be better).
We'll see in few days, right?
>
> Regards, JvW

Alex

-- 
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: Ricoh "what if"

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi  wrote:
> On Sep 29, 2013, at 8:08 AM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu 
>  wrote:
>
>>> Regardless of the speed of the AF, all FT SLR lenses have autofocused with 
>>> all Olympus mFT cameras from day one of the Pen E-P1. The E-M1 provides a 
>>> better AF solution, that's all.
>>>
>>> You will never have auto-diaphragm operation with a Pentax DSLR using a 
>>> Pentax M42 lens... That's a non-functional lens feature.
>
>> Indeed, but you also won't have open-aperture metering with K and M
>> K-mount lenses, and with Nikon entry level bodies can't autofocus with
>> all AF lenses. It's not exactly a clear cut line.
>
> The line between "obsolete but very usable" and "dead and buried" is very 
> clear cut with FourThirds SLR lenses, unlike the ones you mention above. 
> Because these lenses rely upon the mount to power the focusing mechanism as 
> well as do aperture control, without a camera that supports the mount 
> features for power and aperture control, the lenses are dead and buried.
Are the K and F mounts dead or alive? You know, you can't fully use
them as in the original versions in either case... but the current
versions are in production.
>
> Micro-FourThirds camera bodies have been specifically designed to support the 
> FourThirds lens protocol so NONE of the SLR lenses are dead and buried. They 
> may be obsolete, but they are very usable.
Again, I was talking about the mount itself, not about the ability to
adapt your lenses. You're constantly deviating the discussion towards
lens usage.
>
>> Without a good enough AF, u4/3 cameras weren't really an alternative.
>
> I disagree on at least two counts:
>
> - All Olympus mFT cameras have provided AF with FourThirds SLR lenses that 
> has been good enough for some purposes.
>
> - Even if some lenses couldn't be used with AF at all (for instance, my 
> Panasonic G1 and the Olympus 35 Macro), the lens was still perfectly usable 
> for my needs.
>
> Both of these things say "obsolete but very usable" to me. mFT cameras have 
> been a very useful alternative to my FT SLRs since 2008 when they were first 
> released.
Yet others complained, keeping their 4/3 cameras because of that. But
now it appears to be OK, the EM-1 looks terrific.
>
>>>> It doesn't really matters if they still making lenses or they're NOS, 
>>>> that's temporary; the mount is being phased out.
>>>
>>> That's true, but does it matter? Isn't it nice that Olympus and Panasonic 
>>> have provides a seamless upgrade path so owners can continue using their 
>>> existing lenses? And now with native DSLR focusing performance? It's time 
>>> to celebrate! ];-)
>> It's all good, as long as you WANT to migrate to micro4/3 ;-)
>
> I don't want to migrate to anything, nor do I need to. I want a high quality 
> FourThirds format camera that can use my existing lenses. I've been using the 
> Olympus E-1 since some time in 2008 for that purpose, I also used the G1, L1, 
> and E-5 from 2007 to 2011, and now I'll use the E-M1 for that purpose. The 
> E-M1 has a better sensor, better viewfinder, image stabilization, better AF, 
> and a host of other improvements over the E-1 (and the others). I'm using the 
> same lenses, and have a better body to work with now. Haven't migrated to 
> anything, I'm still within the same system. Only thing that's changed is that 
> I need an adapter, supplied by the camera manufacturer, to mount my lenses on 
> the newer body. Big deal. They're even giving it to me for free via a rebate 
> program.
You're overextending the meaning of a "system"; that adapter you're
using is actually a one way bridge from a system to another.
Suppose someone would hack a K-mount to NEX adapter, with full
functionality. Does that means K-mount and NEX would become the same
system?
Wait, I have an even better example: the Nikon F to 1 adapter. It
supports autofocus, auto exposure, even VR. Is Nikon 1 the same system
as the F? ;-)
>
>> But we took quite a detour from where we started - which was that the
>> youngest, designed for digital SLR mount couldn't survive - yet
>> "dinosaurs" like K and F did.
>
> I don't know where you started exactly...
>
> But so far the FourThirds SLR mount is surviving quite nicely, through 
> seamless adaptation to its Micro-FourThirds successor. Never mind the many 
> users still quite happy with their FourThirds SLR cameras.
No new 4/3 products, ever. End of story.
>
> The M-mount, which was the subject of L

Re: Ricoh "what if"

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 3:29 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi  wrote:
>
> On Sep 26, 2013, at 11:11 AM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu 
>  wrote:
>
>> Let me rephrase that: would a newly designed telecentric lens have
>> issues, with offset microlenses? (it's the other way around)
>> Of course, new sensors could make this a non-issue.
>
> It shouldn't, but depends on the implementation of the offset microlenses. 
> Only testing an actual product can answer that question properly.
>
>>> I guess you want to debate the meaning of "dead and buried."
>> Not really, I'll replace "dead and buried" with "being phased out" if
>> that makes you more comfortable. No one likes to be told he's using
>> "dead and buried" things...
>
> It's a more realistic and objective statement.
>
>>> To me, dead and buried means the bodies that take a lens' mount are out of 
>>> production, and the lens cannot be used on any other in-production body, 
>>> with or without adapter, and provide the lens full functionality. ...
>> Then, 4/3 lenses are "dead and buried" until they'll have a u4/3 body
>> capable to focus them as fast as the E-5? :-p
>
> Regardless of the speed of the AF, all FT SLR lenses have autofocused with 
> all Olympus mFT cameras from day one of the Pen E-P1. The E-M1 provides a 
> better AF solution, that's all.
>
> You will never have auto-diaphragm operation with a Pentax DSLR using a 
> Pentax M42 lens... That's a non-functional lens feature.
Indeed, but you also won't have open-aperture metering with K and M
K-mount lenses, and with Nikon entry level bodies can't autofocus with
all AF lenses. It's not exactly a clear cut line.
Without a good enough AF, u4/3 cameras weren't really an alternative.
>
>> It doesn't really matters if they still making lenses or they're NOS, that's 
>> temporary; the mount is being phased out.
>
> That's true, but does it matter? Isn't it nice that Olympus and Panasonic 
> have provides a seamless upgrade path so owners can continue using their 
> existing lenses? And now with native DSLR focusing performance? It's time to 
> celebrate! ];-)
It's all good, as long as you WANT to migrate to micro4/3 ;-)

But we took quite a detour from where we started - which was that the
youngest, designed for digital SLR mount couldn't survive - yet
"dinosaurs" like K and F did.
>
> G
Alex

-- 
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: Ricoh "what if"

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 11:03 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi  wrote:
>
> On Sep 25, 2013, at 10:19 AM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu 
>  wrote:
>
>>> The M mount has a short registration, but the lenses designed for the M 
>>> mount were not originally designed for a digital sensor. That's the issue 
>>> there, not the short registration. The reason a short registration distance 
>>> is favorable to digital sensors is that you can design the lens to have 
>>> more elements behind the primary nodal point to help re-direct the light 
>>> path across the image field to intercept the sensor orthogonally.
>>
>> In theory, I agree - but for compatibility reasons I don't expect this
>> to change. Does it mean the future lenses should be designed in the
>> same manner?
>
> It means that, in the future, lenses should be designed with the light path 
> optimized for digital sensors in mind. This has no influence on their use 
> with film cameras, if such use is desired. If the manufacturer continues to 
> desire compatibility with older lenses for new bodies, it means that sensor 
> customization and optimization to include those older lenses must be 
> incorporated as well.
Let me rephrase that: would a newly designed telecentric lens have
issues, with offset microlenses? (it's the other way around)
Of course, new sensors could make this a non-issue.
>
>>> This was not a consideration in designing lenses for use with film, and for 
>>> compactness reasons (amongst others) RF film camera lenses were designed 
>>> with very tight primary nodal point to imaging plane distances. SLR film 
>>> camera lenses had to clear the swinging mirror, which was the primary 
>>> reason for the deep mount registration and fostered lens designed that were 
>>> 'naturally' more akin to digital sensor lens designs.
>> Precisely; it was a coincidence but the "old" lenses - the better ones
>> - are working quite well for digital sensors, because of this. With
>> the large focal range specific to a DSLR, using offset microlenses
>> would not be an option.
>
> Offset micro-lenses is only one implementation available to optimize a sensor 
> for older lenses. It's not the one being used by Leica in the M Type 240, for 
> instance. Canon used offset micro-lenses in their first full-frame DSLR, but 
> it raised some interesting issues with specifically the shorter focal lengths 
> that they were trying to correct for. They've changed designs since then too.
>
>> The telecentricity Olympus loudly promoted was a natural
>> characteristic of the classic SLR lenses.
>
> No, it isn't. SLR lenses are not necessarily telecentric designs. See 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecentric_lens for a simple definition of a 
> telecentric lens design.
You are, of course, correct. However, I wasn't talking about
telecentric lenses in a strict sense (and AFAIK FourThirds lenses
themselves are "near" telecentric designs).
My point was... wait, you explained it nicely:
> SLR lens designs have to clear the swinging mirror, which with short focal 
> lengths tends to mean using a retrofocus or inverted-telephoto design to 
> project the primary nodal point to the rear of the lens allowing the hard 
> bits to move forward out of the way of the mirror, rather than a symmetric 
> design which tends to have hard bits projecting deep into the camera as focal 
> length decreases. A side-effect of these SLR short-focal-length lens designs 
> is that they're more easily compatible with digital sensors because of this. 
> (For instance, the Pentax FA24/2 AL ... a terrific lens on film ... performed 
> poorly on digital sensors, showing both lateral and longitudinal chromatic 
> aberrations, issues with corner sharpness, etc. Other SLR lenses have done 
> better.)
>
> Many pre-digital SLR lenses do work very well indeed. Few to none work as 
> well as lenses which are optimized for digital sensors with respect to 
> measurable lens performance criteria. However, I often use older lenses 
> because they have pleasing aberrations, image rendering, and quirks that I 
> like—so what "works well" is a judgement call beyond simplistic performance 
> measurement.
>
>> I'm afraid it is; with no new FourThirds lenses since 2008, and the
>> 2010's E-5 being replaced by the EM-1, as Olympus says. Maybe not
>> "buried", but they're definitely phasing it out.
>> Being able to adapt your lenses on another mount doesn't change this.
>
> I guess you want to debate the meaning of "dead and buried."
Not really, I'll replace "dead and buried" with "

Re: Ricoh "what if"

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi  wrote:
>
> On Sep 25, 2013, at 2:02 AM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu 
>  wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 10:19 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi  wrote:
>>> ...However, neither M nor F mounts are ideal for 24x36mm digital 
>>> sensors—they can be made to work, but ideally a lens mount for a digital 
>>> sensor should be larger diameter relative to the format and a shorter 
>>> registration distance ...
>>
>> It might not be ideal, but they work pretty well; surprisingly, the M
>> mount has more issues due to the small registration distance
>> (requiring offset microlenses to compensate).
>
> The M mount has a short registration, but the lenses designed for the M mount 
> were not originally designed for a digital sensor. That's the issue there, 
> not the short registration. The reason a short registration distance is 
> favorable to digital sensors is that you can design the lens to have more 
> elements behind the primary nodal point to help re-direct the light path 
> across the image field to intercept the sensor orthogonally.

In theory, I agree - but for compatibility reasons I don't expect this
to change. Does it mean the future lenses should be designed in the
same manner?
>
> This was not a consideration in designing lenses for use with film, and for 
> compactness reasons (amongst others) RF film camera lenses were designed with 
> very tight primary nodal point to imaging plane distances. SLR film camera 
> lenses had to clear the swinging mirror, which was the primary reason for the 
> deep mount registration and fostered lens designed that were 'naturally' more 
> akin to digital sensor lens designs.
Precisely; it was a coincidence but the "old" lenses - the better ones
- are working quite well for digital sensors, because of this. With
the large focal range specific to a DSLR, using offset microlenses
would not be an option.
The telecentricity Olympus loudly promoted was a natural
characteristic of the classic SLR lenses.
>
>>> Canon was roundly dissed when they obsoleted the FL/FD mount in the 1980s 
>>> and thereby obsoleted many owners' expensive lens collections. However, 
>>> they were prescient in developing the EOS mount which is huge diameter 
>>> (about 51mm) and a relatively short (44mm) register. The change has stood 
>>> them in good stead in the long term, although it cost them a lot of 
>>> customers once upon a time.
>> The large diameter should help at least in making large aperture
>> lenses; but the registration distance is a mere mm and a half away
>> from Pentax'.
>
> Yes, there are only so many degrees of freedom when you have to clear a 
> large, swinging mirror.
>
>>> Olympus ... worked with Kodak and developed the FourThirds mount.. This 
>>> lens mount is the only one in production that actually has the ideal sensor 
>>> size/diameter/register depth combination for digital capture SLRs and 
>>> lenses up to f/1.4 aperture settings. The Micro-FourThirds design is 
>>> essentially the same ...
>>
>> Which is interesting, because unlike the "inadequate dinosaurs" (F and
>> K) that mount it's now dead and buried - FourThirds lens owners being
>> supposed to jump to the new mirrorless EM-1.
>> I'm not aware of any Olympus FourThirds lens larger than f/2 - though
>> Panasonic made a 25mm f/1.4.
>
> The FourThirds SLR lens mount is hardly "dead and buried". The full range of 
> Olympus FourThirds lenses, consumer/high grade/super high grade, is in 
> production and is 100% compatible with Micro-FourThirds camera use via four 
> available dedicated adapters. I used my FourThirds SLR lenses interchangeably 
> with Micro-FourThirds lenses as long ago as 2008 when the Panasonic G1 was 
> released. The only thing that was different between using the lenses on 
> SLR-FT vs mFT bodies was the auto-focus performance, because the SLR bodies 
> of necessity supported PDAF (which is what the SLR lens line was designed 
> for) and the mFT bodies of necessity supported CDAF focusing protocols.
I'm afraid it is; with no new FourThirds lenses since 2008, and the
2010's E-5 being replaced by the EM-1, as Olympus says. Maybe not
"buried", but they're definitely phasing it out.
Being able to adapt your lenses on another mount doesn't change this.
>
> Micro-FourThirds mount design is the same, with a reduction in diameter to 
> match the shorter register and enhance compactness of the bodies. The Olympus 
> E-M1 model introduces PDAF sensels on chip to provide both focusing 
> protocols, so if anything FourThirds SLR lenses are n

Re: Ricoh "what if"

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 10:19 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi  wrote:
> This should be qualified. Leica, just like Nikon and Pentax, deemed that it 
> was more important to maintain compatibility with their existing lens lines 
> than to redesign the lens mount on the M and F mount bodies, respectively. 
> However, neither M nor F mounts are ideal for 24x36mm digital sensors—they 
> can be made to work, but ideally a lens mount for a digital sensor should be 
> larger diameter relative to the format and a shorter registration distance, 
> to enable more flexibility in lens design for the digital capture medium.
It might not be ideal, but they work pretty well; surprisingly, the M
mount has more issues due to the small registration distance
(requiring offset microlenses to compensate).
>
> Canon was roundly dissed when they obsoleted the FL/FD mount in the 1980s and 
> thereby obsoleted many owners' expensive lens collections. However, they were 
> prescient in developing the EOS mount which is huge diameter (about 51mm) and 
> a relatively short (44mm) register. The change has stood them in good stead 
> in the long term, although it cost them a lot of customers once upon a time.
The large diameter should help at least in making large aperture
lenses; but the registration distance is a mere mm and a half away
from Pentax'.
>
> Olympus was unsuccessful in bringing out an auto-focus SLR lineup and had 
> pretty much left their pro system (OM) on the sidelines for years, delivering 
> a couple of new bodies and lenses only for the last decade of its production 
> history. When they started to think SLR with digital capture, they worked 
> with Kodak and developed the FourThirds mount, which has an even shorter 
> register than Canon EOS (38mm) and about the same outer diameter. This lens 
> mount is the only one in production that actually has the ideal sensor 
> size/diameter/register depth combination for digital capture SLRs and lenses 
> up to f/1.4 aperture settings. The Micro-FourThirds design is essentially the 
> same, scaling down the bayonet diameter along with the register depth to 
> maintain the same characteristics, and allowing for more compact body 
> designs—it was only made possible by the invention of high-resolution EVFs 
> and large sensors with Live View capability.
Which is interesting, because unlike the "inadequate dinosaurs" (F and
K) that mount it's now dead and buried - FourThirds lens owners being
supposed to jump to the new mirrorless EM-1.
I'm not aware of any Olympus FourThirds lens larger than f/2 - though
Panasonic made a 25mm f/1.4.

Alex

-- 
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: Ricoh "what if"

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 9:02 PM, Larry Colen  wrote:
> I've been thinking about upcoming cameras from a Pentax-centric point
> of view.  We keep asking for a Pentax "full frame" camera, and the
> latest rumors seem to have being mirrorless.  There are a lot of
> technical advantages in terms of light path to mirrorless, and there is
> the advantage of you see what the sensor sees.
> --
> Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc

You are mistaken, fortunately. There are no rumors regarding a
mirrorless Pentax "full frame" camera, as there are none regarding an
APS-C mirrorless. What you read was the mirrorless fans propadanda -
no offense to all those nice people who happen to prefer mirrorless
cameras, but won't shout loudly about how DSLRs should die.
On the contrary, in an interview the then-Pentax Ricoh Imaging's Head
of Business Development, Mr. Toshiyuki Kitazawa, was saying "it was
our conclusion that APS-C should be the utmost size for mirrorless
segment" (thanks to lensroar @ Pentaxforums for the translation).

Regards,
Alex

-- 
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: New weatherproof flash units & HD Limited lenses

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Yes, Canon's 600EX-RT is weather sealed; same for the 580EX-II.

Alex

On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Bruce Walker  wrote:
> Tanya, I carry some clear plastic bags to pop over flashes if there's
> danger of wetting. You could also spray waterproofing on the softbox
> shell fabric, and/or Scotchguard. If you're using them in the rain I
> think you'd want to do that anyway. Flashes inside softboxes are
> pretty safe from light rain.
>
> But I guess I do have to agree that knowing there's no danger from
> water on your flashes would let you concentrate on finishing the
> shoot.
>
> However, one question: you said that Pentax having waterproof flashes
> would stop you from switching to Canon. Uh, were you just joshing
> there? Does Canon have waterproof flashes? Just curious.

-- 
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: New Pentax model(s) announcement 3/27 (or next week)?

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 2:37 AM, P.J. Alling  wrote:
> If RiceWhine keeps resetting his clock eventually he'll be right about
> something.
I doubt it, if there is even an one day gap the new product
announcements will sneak in between.

Just FTR, he's now claiming Pentax will give up on the K-mount. The
sky is falling, run to the caves! ;)

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: New rumors....5 dslrs, aps-c compact....

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

I don't care much about what "rumors" say (by the way, the 5 DSLRs in
a month is obviously fake). Photorumors are still clinging to the
Pentaxforum's 1st April K-3 joke, they will post garbage without a
second thought.
>From the few interviews with Pentax officials I'd say the FF is most
likely coming, but not in the next months. Apparently it's in
development, but - when the last interview was held - it still needed
the OK from the financial dept.

Alex

On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Darren Addy  wrote:
> Back on 9/12/12 I said:
> "Call me gullible, but I do think the Pentax FF is still coming and
> that it will be similar to the Sony A99. I think the rumors that Sony
> is requiring a 6 month lead time for their A99 before letting someone
> else use the sensor makes sense. But that means that if it isn't
> announced by April, I will have to assume that one is never coming."
> - - -
> All rumors so far, seem to point to that timeline.
> If Pentax is now going to offer a similar model with anti-alias and
> sans-anti-alias they could easily be announcing a lot of bodies
> quickly.
> If the FF is offered in both, and the "K-3" 24mp is offered in both,
> that's 4 new models right there.
>
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Zos Xavius  wrote:
>> http://photorumors.com/2013/03/10/pentax-rumored-to-announce-several-new-dslrs-and-a-new-compact-aps-c-camera/
>>
>> Photorumors is generally right on with their information,  but  time will 
>> tell.
>>
>> Here's hoping a  FF is finally announced!

-- 
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 - Broken Ankle Update (good news)

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Good luck, and speedy recovery!

Alex

On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 1:51 AM, knarftheria...@gmail.com
 wrote:
> In for x-rays today. Ankle reduction worked as hoped. Bone healing where it 
> should be.
>
> Old splint (partial cast) off. New full cast on. Still not a walking cast but 
> I'm getting used to these crutches so that's ok.
>
> More x-rays in three weeks and then a walking cast. Three weeks in a walking 
> cast and I should be good to go.
>
> Best news today: no surgery! (Yay!)
>
> Other news: got an inside job at my courier company. Permanent. Started 
> yesterday.
>
> Frank's not a bike messenger anymore.
>
> Cheers,
> frank

-- 
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: Update on Kodak agony

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

I see things differently. Pentax still exists; they simply changed
owners. From the founding family, to shareholders, then Hoya, and now
Ricoh. The Pentax core survived these changes, and is alive&well.
There is a big difference between this, becoming just a name to be
passed between companies. My point of view, maybe not absolutely
technically correct, tries to emphasis this difference.

You have valid points about those "ultimate decisions", however such
things are subject to modifications even with no ownership change; and
Ricoh proved they won't abuse their power (unlike a certain
shareholder group, back when Pentax Corporation was struggling for
their independence).

Regards,
Alex


On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 7:27 PM, Mark C  wrote:
> Exactly. From WIkipedia (of all places):
>
> ^"Pentax is a brand name used by Pentax Ricoh Imaging Company for cameras,
> sport optics (e.g. binoculars), etc., Hoya Corporation for its
> medical-related products & services,[1] TI Asahi for its surveying
> instruments,[2] and Seiko Optical Products for some of its optical
> lenses.[3]"
>
> The Pentax Ricoh company no doubt incorporates many attributes of the
> formerly independent Asahi Optical Company including patents, assets,
> personnel etc. But ultimate decisions about design philosophy, future
> direction, market placement, etc rest with RIcoh (for cameras).  That's OK
> with me and IMO better than Hoya.
>
> - Mark
>
>
> On 3/5/2013 10:00 AM, David Parsons wrote:
>>
>> What he is saying is Pentax doesn't exist as a company.  It's purely
>> IP at this point.  Hoya bought the Pentax IP, then sold it to Ricoh.
>> There is no Pentax, it's a brand name owned by Ricoh.
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 8:06 AM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 1:32 AM, Mark C  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 3/4/2013 12:31 PM, John Sessoms wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Won't be the first time a company NAME lives on after the company is
>>>>> dead
>>>>> & buried.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As in the case of   Pentax?
>>>>
>>>> Mark
>>>
>>> FTR, there is a company called Pentax Ricoh Imaging, and it's pretty
>>> much alive ;)
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best regards,
>>> Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: Update on Kodak agony

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 1:32 AM, Mark C  wrote:
> On 3/4/2013 12:31 PM, John Sessoms wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Won't be the first time a company NAME lives on after the company is dead
>> & buried.
>
>
> As in the case of   Pentax?
>
> Mark

FTR, there is a company called Pentax Ricoh Imaging, and it's pretty
much alive ;)

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: Why would you buy a Pentax FF camera?

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

The natural order of things:

Step 1. Buy it
Step 2. Find the reasons why you "needed" that.

I think such discussions are premature ;)

Alex

On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 5:42 PM, John Sessoms  wrote:
> I think the thing that has been lost is all the discussion is the simplest
> reason of all ... Because I want one!
>
> Not "need". I do understand the difference. I "want" one, and I have the
> money set aside to buy what I "want".

-- 
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: Perhaps the rumors of a Pentax FF cameras are true after all...

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Funny :)
By the way, apparently Pentax Japan confirmed the FF, in a
not-yet-released Pentaxforums interview. Since last year they started
talking about FF (as in: "we're developing it, marketing must think
about a profitable solution").
I hope a certain event involving a hat would be properly documented;
fortunately, there is plenty of time to find the proper seasoning.

Regards,
Alex

On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Steve Cottrell  wrote:
> On 2/2/13, P. J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>>Look what shows up as a current product at B&H
>>
>  Pentax_22190_Wide_Angle_35mm_f_2_0.html>
>
> And the perfect accompaniment...
>
>  Yamaha_RHH135_RHH_135_Hi_Hat_Cymbal.html>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Cheers,
>   Cotty

-- 
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- back to reading and posting -( and couple of PUG comments)

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Happy Birthday!

On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 12:33 AM, Ann Sanfedele  wrote:
> sorry guys, haven't been up to keeping up much for a bit
> so I'll be a spoiled brat and point out that today is my 76th birthday -
> been busy with ebay and other stuff for a few weeks.
>

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: Cameras and Photography

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 1:05 PM, William Robb
 wrote:
> On 10/12/2012 3:34 AM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote:
>
>> Maybe I'm missing something, but since diffraction is actually
>> affecting what's projected on the sensor, in other words its effect
>> being the same regardless of the pixel count, why would the end result
>> be worse for a higher resolution sensor?
>> Isn't that only because we're now used to pixel peeping, which means
>> applying different magnification levels (and quite insane ones, too)?
>
>
> I will have to bow to the knowledge of pixel peepers and mathematicians. I
> am but a simple photographer who neither pixel peeps nor can add past nine
> with his shoes on.
The Internet is full of "knowledge", the diffraction wall being only
one small and mostly harmless example.
>
>>
>> By the way, IMO 24MP and higher resolutions (even in APS-C) are
>> inevitable; Pentax will have to update their sensors anyway when Sony
>> would phase out the older ones.
>>
> More pixels
Whether we want them or not.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: Cameras and Photography

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Hello, again,

On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 7:01 PM, Tom C  wrote:
>> From: Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu 
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Comments interlined below.
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 6:36 PM, Tom C  wrote:
>>>
>>> They're really only competing in the APS-C arena and that's about it.
>>> The 645D is just about out of everyone's price range including mine.
>>> Was it ever relevant?
>> The 645D is definitely relevant, just not to people like you or me.
>> Same for the Q, which sells quite well in Japan.
>>>
>
> The question is are those cameras and others, in toto, making money
> for Pentax or Pentax Ricoh?
Probably, I can't say I know.
The 645D is, afaik, the best selling digital medium format camera (at
least in Japan, where the information is more freely available) - and
they have big plans for it.
I would be surprised if the Q weren't making a profit; after all, it
shouldn't cost much more to build than a high end compact. It's
aggressively marketed in Japan, and the Japanese people seems to like
it - at a time it was #1 in bcnranking.jp's top selling ILCs.
>
>>> The K5 and derivatives may be solid cameras in their own right. Having
>>> used Pentax for 20 years I'd be lying and stupid to say they didn't
>>> make a product that delivered good results.
>> True, but unfortunately the lack of higher end solution could be felt 
>> sometimes.
>>>
>
> We agree there. :)
Yep, we definitely do.
>
>>> Fact's are they have only about 2% of market share and predictions are
>>> it will decline.
>> Which facts? Whose predictions?
>> The only 2%-like figure I saw some time ago (it was even less, about
>> 1.5%) included compacts, and since units were counted it was mostly
>> about compacts. I couldn't care less if Pentax were to abandon
>> compacts altogether (but, Pentax, please: if you'll do it send me an
>> Optio WG-2, first).
>
> The low end of the P&S compact market is dying due to camera phones.
> How can you sell a camera if they're essentially being given away with
> cell phones to people who largely find that quality 'good enough'?
Then we agree those total market share figures aren't really relevant.
Even the DSLR market share is relevant only as a starting point.
>
>> About declining, nope, Pentax is actually heading in the opposite
>> direction; because they're now Pentax Ricoh, and not some fund starved
>> Hoya division. The next year, if we'll survive the imaginary
>> apocalypse, should be very interesting IMO.
>>>
>
> I'm not as sure about that. I remember the same high hopes expressed
> both when they partnered with Samsung and when Hoya acquired them.
But I am, at least about their intentions.
Samsung did nothing, other than providing an average sensor and
rebadging some Pentax products (while they were developing their own
system, behind their partner's back).

I remember different things about the Hoya hostile takeover. I
remember a prolonged scandal, when the Pentax board didn't accept the
merger plan proposed by Pentax and Hoya's CEOs - which ended when
Pentax was basically forced to accept the buyout (due to shareholders'
pressure). I remember how Hoya actually wanted the medical division,
but had to accept the Imaging Business division as well.

OTOH, Ricoh wanted Pentax Imaging Systems; they founded a separate
company, Pentax Ricoh Imaging Company - yes, Pentax Ricoh, in this
specific order; and they entrusted to the newly founded company their
own camera division.
Now everywhere I can hear them talking about stuff like growth or
doubling the sales in 2013. I'm hearing they hired back R&D engineers,
to make up for those fired by Hoya. They have 2-years roadmaps
totaling 8 K-mount lenses + 1 TC, 4 645D ones and 3 for Q; and, most
important, they're on track with the execution.

>>> If Pentax was working on a FF body they should certainly say so,
>>> rather than hide it. As some have pointed out, the lack of a FF lens
>>> line is problematic in that regard.
>> Remember Nikon? They said nothing about working on the D3, until
>> they've made it, am I right?
>
> I wasn't paying attention to Nikon back then, but I'll grant that you
> are. Now however a FF body is more of an expectation as opposed to a
> surprise.
>
>> For whatever it's worth, Pentax declared they are working on "full
>> frame technologies" (while insisting a market ready product is nowhere
>> near, and not making any promise). They agree with the FF lens line
>> issue, but I'm sure that's something that could be fixed.

Re: Cameras and Photography

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Hello,

Comments interlined below.

On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 6:36 PM, Tom C  wrote:
>
> They're really only competing in the APS-C arena and that's about it.
> The 645D is just about out of everyone's price range including mine.
> Was it ever relevant?
The 645D is definitely relevant, just not to people like you or me.
Same for the Q, which sells quite well in Japan.
>
> The K5 and derivatives may be solid cameras in their own right. Having
> used Pentax for 20 years I'd be lying and stupid to say they didn't
> make a product that delivered good results.
True, but unfortunately the lack of higher end solution could be felt sometimes.
>
> Fact's are they have only about 2% of market share and predictions are
> it will decline.
Which facts? Whose predictions?
The only 2%-like figure I saw some time ago (it was even less, about
1.5%) included compacts, and since units were counted it was mostly
about compacts. I couldn't care less if Pentax were to abandon
compacts altogether (but, Pentax, please: if you'll do it send me an
Optio WG-2, first).
About declining, nope, Pentax is actually heading in the opposite
direction; because they're now Pentax Ricoh, and not some fund starved
Hoya division. The next year, if we'll survive the imaginary
apocalypse, should be very interesting IMO.
>
> If Pentax was working on a FF body they should certainly say so,
> rather than hide it. As some have pointed out, the lack of a FF lens
> line is problematic in that regard.
Remember Nikon? They said nothing about working on the D3, until
they've made it, am I right?
For whatever it's worth, Pentax declared they are working on "full
frame technologies" (while insisting a market ready product is nowhere
near, and not making any promise). They agree with the FF lens line
issue, but I'm sure that's something that could be fixed... in a
decade or so.

--
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: After reading the K5xxx reviews ...

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

If you're happy with the K20D, I don't see why you should change it.
K-5's (sensor) limits are definitely much higher, but if you use the
K20D where it gives good results...

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 6:38 PM, John Sessoms  wrote:
> It's still not enough to make me want to buy one.
>
> Thank you very much.

-- 
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: After reading the K5xxx reviews ...

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Collin,

I agree, those "context switches" weren't easy on them, and roller
coaster corporate ride is a good way to describe what it happened (the
founder family lost control when Pentax become publicly owned, which
allowed Sparx to push Pentax into Hoya's arms, and finally Hoya sold
them to Ricoh - every step led to, or allowed another). It was
unfortunate that Hoya didn't wanted Pentax Imaging Systems Business
(but the medical division), and was unwilling to invest into it; when
the hostile takeover took place, they were no savior for the ISB and I
wonder if Pentax would've been now in a better shape without them.

But that was in the past. I hope your pessimism will be dispelled soon
(think months, up to one year).

Alex Sarbu

On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Collin Brendemuehl
 wrote:
> Larry,
>
> Yes, I have done embedded systems and have also taken products from concept 
> to market.  Been there, done that.
>
> What I have not done is taken part is the corporate shift that saw Pentax 
> move from (1) Family Owned, to (2) Public Ownership, to (3) Hoya, to (4) 
> Ricoh.  I think that transition series was rougher on the company than 
> anything else.  If I had to place the cause for the baby steps, in my mind it 
> would be the roller coaster corporate ride that the company has been on for 
> -- what is it -- only around 5 years?  That's a lot to manage.  I do applaud 
> the company for lasting this long through fiscal storm and even earthquake 
> (which damaged many Japanese company's processes) without going under.
>
> Still, I am a bit of a pessimist.  After all, as an American I want to see 
> more production. :-)
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Collin Brendemuehl
> "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose"
> -- Jim Elliott

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: After reading the K5xxx reviews ...

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Collin Brendemuehl
 wrote:
> It's difficult for me to conclude anything except that Pentax
> just does not have the capacity to produce anything more advanced.
> All the buyer gets is a few tweaks.
> Baby steps are not adequate in today's technology world.
>
> They needs a new partner -- someone larger than Ricoh -- who is
> interested in making the company into something great.
> Perhaps Apple or Google will buy the company and run with it right.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Collin Brendemuehl

Such conclusions are premature; the product we saw so far (from
October 2011) are "Pentax-Hoya" projects. There simply wasn't enough
time (less than a year, including analyzing the business and
formulating a plan) to build a "true" Pentax Ricoh camera. What they
could do was to finish products already in pipeline, including ones
frozen by Hoya (the DA 560mm for example).
Please be patient, next year we should see more interesting stuff.

I also strongly believe that either Apple or Google would kill Pentax;
photography and gadgets/web content are too different for it to work.
Don't worry, Ricoh will prove to be a good "master".

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: K-5IIs review and comparison to K-5

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 5:44 AM, Rob Studdert  wrote:
>
> Nah, if I upgrade it has to be another system, Pentax are just falling
> further and further behind the competition with each incarnation. It's
> a pity really. Save for the hassle and cost of going through the big
> sell-off and re-buying everything I would have left the brand some
> years ago. I just put in my Lotto and hope these days.
>
With Pentax finally freed from Hoya's shackles, I wonder if it's
indeed a good time to jump ship... unless you need something "better",
now.
Anyway, I don't think Pentax is "falling further and further behind
the competition" - the K-30 and the K-5 II(s) are solid products and,
for example, Nikon still didn't replaced the D300s.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: K-5IIs review and comparison to K-5

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 3:50 PM, SV Hovland  wrote:
> There are already reports from K-30 users that this model is better than K-5. 
> And K-5 II is using a similar AF system as K-30 so I expect it to be more of 
> an upgrade than Adam at Pentaxforums seems to know.
>
> My K-5 is in for a repair (lens release button fell of) so K-5 IIs is more 
> than tempting.
>
> Stig Vidar Hovland

The K-5 II uses a new AF system, the SAFOX X - with redesigned optics,
works from EV -3 and the center point has additional accuracy with
f/2.8 (or faster) lenses.
The K-30's SAFOX IXi+ is the K-5's SAFOX IX+ with optics redesigned to
counter chromatic aberrations (probably to solve the tungsten light
issues).

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: Rest In Peace: Richard Day

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi  wrote:
> Some others on the PDML might recall Richard Day, whom I met in early 2005 on 
> the DPReview Pentax SLR forum. Several of us visited with Richard and his 
> wife Pat on a PDML get together in Oxford during the Spring of 2005. I've 
> visited Richard and Pat a few times since then when on my travels to the 
> British Isles, and we've stayed in frequent touch via email and letter.
>
> Richard's not been well the past couple of years and knew his time was 
> coming. He wrote me this past July to say farewell as he didn't know whether 
> he would make the year out or be able to communicate much further.  He's been 
> in hospice for several weeks now. This morning I received this note from a 
> mutual friend of ours from London:
>
>> Sad to report that Richard died at 1.30 am today, local time. The final 
>> decline was very rapid but he was not in pain for long. I think he knew when 
>> I last saw him that he’d never make it home, but the hospice he was in was 
>> brilliant and they gave him fantastic care.
>>
>> Pat would like any donations to go to the Sue Ryder organisation who run 
>> this and other hospices.
>>
>> http://www.sueryder.org/What-we-do/Care-centres/Leckhampton-Court-Hospice
>
> Richard is survived by his wife, Pat, and by his sons and their families. All 
> fine people whom I have been honored to spend time with. He was a great 
> enthusiast for Pentax cameras and loved the pursuit of Photography in all its 
> forms.
>
> Godspeed, Richard, you will be missed.
>
> Godfrey

I'm sorry to hear that.
I never had the pleasure of meeting Richard, nor even exchanging
e-mails and talk about e.g. photography - but I remember his
contribution, and his genuine love for photography.

Rest in peace, Richard.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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 - good deal for 24" IPS monitor

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

And it is indeed "cost-effective".
A mistake in my previous message: the "good" Dell monitor is the
U2410, which cost about $491 (@amazon.com). That's over $200 extra.

Alex Sarbu

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Igor Roshchin  wrote:
>
> Alex,
>
> This is a good point that I should have mentioned explicitly.
> Indeed, it is not as good as some other Ultrasharp Dells, but from the
> reviews I read about it, it still provides very reasonable colors.
> That's why I called it's "cost-effective".
> I didn't remember what exactly was inferior, and didn't have time
> to look it up. So, your clarification can be useful to people
> interested.
>
> Igor
>
>
> Wed Aug 22 07:50:11 EDT 2012
> Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Igor Roshchin 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > If somebody is interested, there seems to be a very good deal
>> > for a cost-effective reasonable quality IPS 24" monitor from Dell
>> > U2412M:
>> > http://www.tomshardware.com/news/deals-discount-electronics-coupons-logicbuy,17078.html
>> >
>> > I just tried, and the coupon is still working (presumably, until
>> > Monday,
>> > Aug.27)
>> >
>> > HTH,
>> >
>> > Igor
>>
>> Please be aware this is a budget e-IPS monitor, with a 6-bit panel
>> (unlike its older brother, the U2411); but given its price, it could
>> be a good deal.
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Alex Sarbu


-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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 - good deal for 24" IPS monitor

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Igor Roshchin  wrote:
>
> If somebody is interested, there seems to be a very good deal
> for a cost-effective reasonable quality IPS 24" monitor from Dell
> U2412M:
> http://www.tomshardware.com/news/deals-discount-electronics-coupons-logicbuy,17078.html
>
> I just tried, and the coupon is still working (presumably, until Monday,
> Aug.27)
>
> HTH,
>
> Igor

Please be aware this is a budget e-IPS monitor, with a 6-bit panel
(unlike its older brother, the U2411); but given its price, it could
be a good deal.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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 have a secret...

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Who said anything about Pentax? It must be the new Nikon D600 :p

Alex

On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 4:45 AM, Jeffery Smith  wrote:
> I give up. There will be a full frame Pentax in September? If not, I'll be 
> disappointed by the ... hype?
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> Jeffery L. Smith
> New Orleans, Louisiana
> USA
>
> On May 31, 2012, at 20:38, Tanya Love  wrote:
>
>> ...but you didn't hear it from me.
>>
>> Let me say two things only:
>>
>> 1. September
>> 2. FF
>>
>> I can hardly contain myself!!
>>
>> tan. :-)

-- 
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: card FAIL?

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 9:53 PM, P. J. Alling
 wrote:
> I've never had a card fail that way, I've had the case crack and the write
> protect tab fall out, (why the heck do we have a feature that first appeared
> on floppy disks, and wasn't such a good idea then still on a solid state
> memory device).
>
> It sounds like a reasonable error message.  The camera cannot access the
> card, so of course the camera will report that there is space for 0 images.
>  That doesn't rule out that the read/write device in the camera isn't
> defective and somehow damaged the card, but it seems much more likely that
> the card simply died.  Like all electronics heat stress will eventually kill
> it.  Sandisk claims a MTBF of 1,000,000 hours, I don't  know what brand you
> use, I could find a number for Sandisk, but that's an arithmetic average, so
> a card could die at any time, it just has the probability of lasting about
> 114 years, (if I did the math correctly).
I'd like to know how that MTBF was calculated. I bet with the card
mostly sitting in your backpack :)

I had a card go bad, once - IIRC it was a Transcend. The camera (an
*istD) was "writing" the images just "fine", but the file wasn't
(like it had a "bad sector" it couldn't write on). Since then, all my
cards are Sandisk; and I had a Sandisk going bad, too, completely
fried - but that was because of some lousy reader. Since then, all my
readers are Sandisk&Lexars :)
The camera behaviour seems indeed reasonable.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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 have weakened

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Joking aside, I have a K-5 and I can't agree more. There will be a K-5
replacement, but the K-30 is not it.
Enjoy your new camera!

Alex

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 8:25 PM, Rick Womer  wrote:
> No; this was planned a few weeks ago (a Landmark Birthday is coming up).  The 
> K-30 is not a K-5 replacement, in several respects.
>
> Rick
>
> http://photo.net/photos/RickW
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu 
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List 
> Cc:
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 11:30 AM
> Subject: Re: I have weakened
>
> Pentax just announced the K-30. Coincidence? ;)
>
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 5:51 AM, Rick Womer  wrote:
>> K-5 ordered.
>>
>> Rick
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Alex Sarbu

-- 
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 have weakened

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Pentax just announced the K-30. Coincidence? ;)

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 5:51 AM, Rick Womer  wrote:
> K-5 ordered.
>
> Rick

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: Official K-30 page

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Hello,

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 1:38 AM, Darren Addy  wrote:
> A quick comparison of the K-5 specs with the K-30 seems to show only
> minor(?) differences.
>
> K-30 lacks HDMI out? (not mentioned, anyway)
> K-30 lacks 3.5 stereo microphone (built-in monaural only)?

Unfortunately, yes

> K-30 lacks infrared (for remote)?

The K-30 has infrared remote (front only)

>
> K-5 also has electronic level function (verification via viewfinder
> and LCD panel)
> K-30 no mention of electronic level function

The K30 has electronic level.

>
> Drive differences
> K-5: Continuous Hi = 7.0 FPS (22 jpg, 8 RAW)
> K-30: Continuous Hi = "approx 6 FPS (30 jpg, 8 RAW)
> K-5: Continuous Lo = 2 FPS (unlimited JPG, 12 RAW)
> K-30: Continuous Lo = Approx 3 FPS (unlimited JPG, 10 RAW)

The K-5 can shoot way more than 8 RAW frames, officially 20 (with
firmware 1.01) and with a fast card, over 20.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: Mr. Bunnell on lens pricing...

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

The best camera must be the 41MP Nokia - most MP per buck ;)

Alex

On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Tom C  wrote:
> The 645D is a 40MP camera. The D800/E is a 36MP camera. Cost per MP 
> calculation:
>
> 645D is $250/MP
> 800E is $92/MP
> (K-5 is $62.50/MP if priced at $1000)
>
> In those terms, the 800E is delivering a lot of bang for the buck and
> there's a full compliment of AF lenses available.
>
> The D800E has 90% of the resolution of a 645D yet the cost is only 1/3
> that of a 645D. The K-5 has about 48.5% the resolution of the D800E
> and the cost is slightly less than 1/3 that of a D800E. Both the D800E
> and K-5 offer significant bang for the buck.
>
> I agree with your rationale on the K-5, It's why I continued to buy
> Pentax after Pentax, K-mount after K-mount. On the other hand many
> people will find themselves scrounging for, or purchasing new FF
> lenses in K-mount, were Pentax to come out with a FF body.  Using only
> legacy non-AF lenses or APS-C lenses on such a body would negate many
> of the potential benefits.

>
> Tom C.

-- 
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: Neck strap

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 5:03 PM, Steve Desjardins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd like to get someone a nice, comfortable neck strap as a gift.  (I
>  use a wrist strap)  Recommendations?
>

I have the Pentax neoprene strap - IMO it's much better than the standard one.
A leather strap should be even better, but I couldn't find one.

---
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: AF problems of my K10D

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 6:28 PM, Boris Liberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
>  It seems that AF of my K10D is slowly deteriorating. It started with my
>  new FA 43/1.9 Ltd that would not focus sometimes. That is, the lens
>  would be in focus, but electronics would not confirm - lost shot.
>
>  Today I went to the Jerusalem zoo with Galia's class. I took Tamron
>  28-75/2.8 - fine lens that focuses very fast and precise. Few times I
>  would point the lens at a sitting or standing buy or girl under bright
>  sun and the lens would go  back and forth around focus point and
>  never converge. It wouldn't give up, it would just  back and 
>  forth - very annoying.
>
>  I switched to forced central point AF and went on shooting, but I am
>  really starting to fear that my K10D is going to the service.
>
>  Any ideas as to how to reset the darn thing or how to verify it so that
>  I can present a solid case to the local service people. The story such
>  as above may not impress them...
>
>  Thanks.
>
>  Boris

Try to blow some air over the AF sensors, maybe they're just dirty.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: next week's news

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 11:24 AM, Peter Fairweather
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  Samsung feature very strongly with a 2 page advertisement centre
>  spread on the GX20. On the front page you can read about their plans
>  to produce their own lenses rather than rely on Tokina.  With help
>  from their partners Schneider they will be able to create very high
>  quality products
>
>  Peter
>

Rely on Tokina? Since when Tokina took over the Pentax lens factory
from Vietnam?
Liars.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: Q. regarding the 70mm Limited on FF/film

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Feb 7, 2008 6:04 PM, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The DA 40mm is said to be the same optical formula as the M 40mm which
> is soft in the corners on 35mm.  It is however eminently  pocketable.
> There were few Pentax 35mm cameras that could set the aperture from the
> body so I still say the 70mm not a FF lens.
>

Well, I have one of them :) (an MZ-6)

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: Q. regarding the 70mm Limited on FF/film

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Feb 7, 2008 1:08 PM, Derby Chang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote:
> > Hello,
> > I'd like to know if the 70mm Limited will cover (with good results)
> > the 35mm frame, and for that I need your help.
> > I've saw some time ago a test but I can't find it again :( I remember
> > the 70mm was OK re. vignetting, however I don't know if the corners
> > are sharp (from what I've saw the DA 40mm is very bad in the corners
> > on FF). I'll try to get/borrow a 70mm and take few test shots, but if
> > someone on this list already did that I'd appreciate any info.
> > I know, the 77mm would be safer - but I haven't shoot film for some
> > time anyway... besides, I like the QSF on the DA Limited.
> > Thanks!
> >
> >
>
> Hi Alexandru,
>
> I did a quick and dirty test a little while ago, but took it off my
> site. For you, here it is again temporarily.
>
> http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc/temp/07_10_DA/index.htm
>
> While the DA21 is really not usable, the DA40 and DA70 are fine, if you
> have a film cam that can control the aperture from the body. Rather fine
> lenses on film, I have to say.
>
> D

Thank you all for your answers, thanks for re-posting the test.
>From what I've saw the 40 w/o seems quite soft in the extreme corners,
the 70 is much better but since the images are too small I can't say
for sure (well, for portraits it doesn't matter much). So I'll bother
you again: if you have the full-res images could you please take a
look and post your impression about sharpness in the edges/corners?
The light falloff don't look that bad.
-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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.

Q. regarding the 70mm Limited on FF/film

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Hello,
I'd like to know if the 70mm Limited will cover (with good results)
the 35mm frame, and for that I need your help.
I've saw some time ago a test but I can't find it again :( I remember
the 70mm was OK re. vignetting, however I don't know if the corners
are sharp (from what I've saw the DA 40mm is very bad in the corners
on FF). I'll try to get/borrow a 70mm and take few test shots, but if
someone on this list already did that I'd appreciate any info.
I know, the 77mm would be safer - but I haven't shoot film for some
time anyway... besides, I like the QSF on the DA Limited.
Thanks!

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: Pentax Big Anouncement is tomorrow and the silence here is deffening.

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Jan 23, 2008 7:42 PM, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Where's all the speculation?
>

Speculation? We already know everything about the new camera, and the
lenses 

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: WTB: M42 to K-mount adapter

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On Nov 15, 2007 3:24 PM, .timber>>code <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wish it would this easy in Hungary. Here we rarely have the Hama version
> ... and that's all. Buying a Pentax version of PK-M42 adapters ...
> sounds like a dream :D
>
> .t

Buy from Romania, it's just across the border :)

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: shutter count

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 11/2/07, Peter Fairweather <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John
>
> Thanks to advice received here I've cracked the numbering problem.
>
>  I do wonder whether formatting the card each time is better than deleting 
> all.
>
> Perhaps someone can enlighten os?
>
> Peter
>

I would format it, at least from time to time but it's more or less the same.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: shutter count

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 11/1/07, Doug Franklin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter Fairweather wrote:
>
> > I've even looked at the manual without success. I'm sure this wasn't a
> > problem on my DS. Any hints?
>
> Darn, I'd swear I remembered a setting like this in the Custom Functions
> (or Pentax Functions or whatever they're calling them now).  Let me dig
> up my K10D manual and see if I can find it.  It'll be a few hours when I
> get home from work before I can look in the manual, though.
>
> --
> Thanks,
> DougF (KG4LMZ)
>
> --

You can always look at the online version from the Pentax Imaging or
PentaxSLR sites :)
About the problem: Menu/Rec.Mode/Memory/File No is checked?

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 10/21/07, Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> According to Ken Takeshita:
>
> Seems there's a strong rumour in Japan that Pentax would go with
> Cypress 14Mpix FF sensor.
>
> It seems someone is going to use that sensor and since Pentax is the
> only brand not "affiliated" with any sensor brand for now...
>
> http://news.fengniao.com/69/691199.html
> http://download.cypress.com.edgesuite.net/design_resources/datasheets/contents/ibis4_14000_8.pdf
>
> Have fun ;)
>
> --
> Thibault Massart aka Thibouille
> --

Afaik, that's a very old sensor.
And Pentax will also need to launch at least few FF (zoom) lenses,
let's say one or two standard zooms (f/4 and f/2.8) and a tele zoom
(60-250?).

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 10/19/07, Rebekah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> What's wrong with dreaming of FF?
>
> rg2
>

Dreaming? It was only a dream?

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
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: Metz Flash

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 9/19/07, Frits Wüthrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There was a discussion some time ago about a Metz flash for the K10D and other
> DSLRs from Pentax, the 58AF 1P. Technikdirect has it now for 300 euro,
> shipping in 1 to 2 days.
> http://www.technikdirekt.de/main/en/foto/fotodigital/blitzgeraete-zubehoer/176029/-/Article.html?
> --
> Frits Wüthrich
>

Do you know if it's 100% compatible with K10D? (including e.g. wireless)
>From Metz's it seems it is, but just to be sure...
Thanks.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: OT DVD RAM

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 6/19/07, graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Interesting, you sure your drive will handle DVD-RAM? What software are you 
> using to >burn it? Nero and Roxio do have an option to erase the disk. If you 
> are using Windows >built-in stuff, who knows.
>

I may be wrong, but AFAIK a DVD-RAM can be used without any special
software, just like a harddisk.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: Pentax marketing

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 6/12/07, Scott Loveless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tom Reese wrote:
> > this Pentax marketing deal seems a bit odd:
> >
> > http://www.mad.co.uk/Main/News/Articlex/9bb65e3aea564c28a376d78b3479b46b/Pentax-reels-in-NFA-deal.html
> >
> > does anyone besides me think this is a little fishy?
> >
> > Tom Reese
> >
> >
> Gee, Tom, I wonder what line of products they'll be marketing.
>
> Scott Loveless
>

The fisheye zoom, maybe?

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: Pentax Board To Resign

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 5/25/07, Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I  can't imagine Sparx has any intention to retain its shares. When an
> equity firm pushes for a merger, it usually indicates that they plan to
> cash out their shares.
> Paul
>
> -
>
> I hope so. One thing doesn't add up, though: Why would Sparx insist on
> the right to interview new appointees to the board if they are cashing out?
>
> Joe
>

Because they want to be sure the new board will support the buyout.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: Areas with Room For Improvement in Pentax DSLRs

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 5/16/07, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OH GOD, Canon has a EOS 10D and Pentax has a K10D?
> That is BAD. Whoever came second shouldnt have named
> theirs nearly the same a competitor's camera model.
> Im surprised a damn law suit didnt come out of that one...
> jco
>

100% agree. Instead of that "whoever came second" I would retreat the
model from the market. Even better, I would exit the camera business.
Of course, that would be Canon 
http://www.alpareflex.com/Cameras/10d.htm

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: Any one regret upgrading to the K10D?

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 5/16/07, Tim Øsleby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I went the same route, from DS to K10D.
> I liked the DS, but it made me feel like a man at the end of a good camera.
>
> I'm not looking back. Kept both. And are still using the DS a bit. Different
> cameras for different needs and use.
> Have you had the K10D for long? It might grow on you.
>
> Tim Typo
> Mostly Harmless

I hope it won't grow, it's already quite big 
At first, I thought the K10D is big&heavy; now I'm used with it's feeling.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: K10D......no AF in remote mode!

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 4/25/07, Steve Bullock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> > (Side note: I love the fact that Pentax put an IR remote sensor both
> > front and back. It makes working in the field with a tripod and the
> > mirror-up prefire a joy. One less bloody wire and device dangling
> > from the camera and likely to get caught on my clothes or a bush,
> > etc., as I move about... :-)
> >
> > Godfrey
> >
> I can't get my K10D (FW1.10) to use pre-fire if I use the remote control.
> The manual (p84) implies the remote should work with the 2s timer but it
> doesn't for me.
>
> Steve
>

The IR remote won't work with the 2s timer, but you can use the cable
release/wired remote instead.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: USB 1 and USB 2

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 4/15/07, David J Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi gang.
>
> Last month i took my PC into the local shop to add more Ram (was 256,
> now 728 DRAM) and to upgrade my 4 USB 1.1 connections to USB 2
> connections. After rebooting to check the Ram, he looked at my system,
> and said because i have XP and Service Pack II i should have USB 2.
>
> I tried connecting my known USB 2 device, the Lexar Multi card reader,
> and i get the pop up from my start up bar, that says"This device would
> run better on a USB 2 connection.
>
> Can anyone tell me whats up with this. Do i need to physically change
> the ports or is there something in SP II, that just needs to be set.
>
> If so, i cannot find anything.
>
> Windows XP Home and SPII. As a comparison, if i download a 2gig card
> to the Mac, known USB II it takes about 4 minutes or so, on the PC
> about 25  or more.
>
> Dave
>
> --
> Equine Photography
> www.caughtinmotion.com
> http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/
> Ontario Canada
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>

Upgrade the USB ports? I don't know how one can do that, except using
a PCI board with an USB controller. Do you have such a board on your
PC?

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: Interesting...

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 4/14/07, David Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Apr 14, 2007, at 7:36 PM, Thibouille wrote:
>
> > Very common. Same goes for hard drives.
> > Manufacturer sell devices with capacity calculated as if (only
> > marketting purpose of course) 1GB was 1000 MB, 1MB = 1000KB and 1 KB =
> > 1000 Bytes which of course wrong (1024, not 1000).
>
> To be pedantic, SI prefixes really are base-10 so IMO the
> manufacturers are actually telling the truth.
>
> - Dave
>
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>

Computers don't use base 10. Truth? It's only a lie, even if they call
it 'standard' and try to force us to use ridiculous designations like
'kibibytes' and 'mebibytes'.
I'm a programmer, and I know 1 km = 1024 meters ;)

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Non speedy SD cards and K10D

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

I would avoid blue Sandisk cards. Actually even Ultra II are not that
fast (but they are decent).
For now I'm using Twinmos, a 2GB and a 4GB one, both 150X. Yes, the
4GB is a SD and not a SDHC card - finding a SDHC reader is a pain in
the (beep). Some 4GB+ SDHC will come with a reader, btw.
The K10D can shoot 9 pefs and about 11 dngs before slowing down, using
those cards. YMMV.
-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: How many K10s do we have now? a poll.

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

And another...

Alex Sarbu

On 2/24/07, Bill Sawyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And another...
>
> Bill Sawyer
> Livonia, MI

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

Re: Looking for a K10D ...

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 1/2/07, David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've got one in my camera bag.
>
> Dave (helpful aren't I? :-)
>
> On 1/2/07, Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I know I'm not the only one.. but if anybody knows where to find one,
> > I'd be very grateful.
> >
> > My location is brussels, Belgium but I probably can move to
> > Netherlands, West of Germany or  notrh of France if needed.
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>

And the other one is in my bag  

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: Happy New Year!

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 1/1/07, Gianfranco Irlanda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Happy 2007 from a strangely cloudy Naples!
>
> Ciao,
>
> Gianfranco
>
>

Happy New Year!
>From the newest European Union member :) (Romania)

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: What Makes a Pentax a Pentax?

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 12/22/06, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> JOKE. But yeah, I like my gear and I don't mind being called a nutter
> for giving inanimate objects names and such. It's all a bit of fun :-)
>
> Cheers,
>  Cotty
>

I think I'll call the K10D Woody Woodpecker. Just engage the DR system
and you'll know why 

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: What Makes a Pentax a Pentax?

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 12/22/06, Markus Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But as far as I have seen reported on this list very few buy a Samsung DSLR?
> Would they if the price difference to the Pentax "twin" would be maybe 20%
> or more or do they simple want the Pentax logo for any (sentimental) reason
> despite the cost ?
> greetings
> Markus

Have you ever heard about Samsung DSLR firmware upgrades? I didn't.
But the main reason for me is sentimental :)

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: K10D review online

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 12/16/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Dec 15, 2006, at 12:39 PM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote:
>
> >> 10 stops ... That's in line with what my testing indicated ... :-)
> >
> > Did you used special techniques to "recover" more DR from the raws? (I
> > assume you were not using jpeg).
>
> No. It is my estimate based on judging what I see in the RAW
> exposures I've made comparing against similar scene dynamics with the
> *ist DS body, which I measured as having 7-9 stops of DR (depending
> on ISO). I see about a stop more total DR with the K10D and probably
> closer to 9 stops on average, rather than 8.
>
OK, nice to hear that.
In fact now I'm thinking that the jpeg "issue" may be a design
decision. *If* it's tuned for better tonal gradation (I hope I'm using
the correct words), the dynamic range will be lowered (since you have
only 8 bits/channel to store the data). But I have no idea if this is
really the case.
I don't use jpeg anyway. So I don't really care :)

> > And what do you think about the other "issues" with this camera? You
> > know, banding (the blue channel stuff with long exposures, I'm not
> > talking about underexposed ISO1600), soft jpegs and so on.
>
> I haven't seen any of these issues yet, nor have I tested for them
> specifically. The situations where they might occur are not very
> typical of the kind of shooting I do, and my first priorities have
> been to evaluate the camera as a tool for my photography. I've evaluated
>
> - sequence capture performance, and differences between different
> card speeds
> - RAW conversion with several tools
> - AF accuracy and consistency
> - detail resolution
> - metering accuracy and consistency
> - AntiShake
>
> as well as am working to learn all the new features and how to use
> them appropriately. I don't think I've taken it off Av and Manual
> exposure control yet for more than a test to see how the other
> exposure functions work. I'll keep going ... ;-)
>

There is only one thing that worries me - banding. I was disappointed
with the DS performance during some star trails shooting (I was stupid
enough to forgot my ME Super cable release at home so I was using
digital), so I would like to know my next camera will be better.

> > I must decide if I'll buy this camera now or later :) It costs a lot
> > of money (for me, at least), and I don't really need it - my DS is a
> > fine camera - but I know I *want* it!
>
> The *ist DS is an excellent performer and has been the basis of my
> work for almost two years. I think I get a tremendous lot out of it,
> am probably exploiting it near its capabilities now. The K10D has
> more capability particularly in the areas of dynamic range, overall
> performance accuracy/consistency, and low-light hand-held work.
> Whether it's worth the price to you is a question only you can answer.
>
> Don't let a review pundit's biases and opinions be the basis upon
> which you make a decision.

Don't worry, I won't. I think we all agree that Phil Askey made a
mistake regarding SR, I don't expect this to be the only one (whatever
the reason). Overall, I still like his reviews and find them useful -
but you can't find that much from a review.

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

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: K10D review online

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 12/15/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 10 stops ... That's in line with what my testing indicated ... :-)
>
> G

Did you used special techniques to "recover" more DR from the raws? (I
assume you were not using jpeg).
And what do you think about the other "issues" with this camera? You
know, banding (the blue channel stuff with long exposures, I'm not
talking about underexposed ISO1600), soft jpegs and so on.

I must decide if I'll buy this camera now or later :) It costs a lot
of money (for me, at least), and I don't really need it - my DS is a
fine camera - but I know I *want* it!
Thanks.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

K10D review online

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Hello,

For the few of you who didn't know this yet:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk10d/

Highly recommended (just)

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: About our Hungarian friend [Was Re: my first shots with the Pentax K10D]

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

Hello, Attila.

What do you think about the camera?
It was one of the 10 K10D's which reached Romania?

I was able to play with one, just a little. Except for a small
ergonomic glitch (I think the body is too thick for my hand, but it's
nothing too serious) I liked it very much. And the SR seems to work.
Maybe those "banding problems" will help me resist the enablement for
a while. Or maybe I'll buy a K10D as soon as the next batch is here.


On 12/14/06, Boros Attila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Kostas, thank you for clearing this up.
>
> Godfrey, no offense taken.
>
> --
> Attila
>

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: No more K10 talk please

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 11/26/06, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You guys are killing me.
>
> William Robb
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>

In few days the K10D should reach Romania. I'll go to see it (and to
clean/repair my *istDS, it's wheel doesn't work properly).
I really don't want to spend that much on a new camera, but I don't
think I have a choice.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: Pentax's Tatamiya Interview Part II, #4

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 11/2/06, K.Takeshita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> a nice translation of the interview

Thanks!
I've posted links to the pdml archive (with your translation) on
Romanian forums, I hope you don't mind. A lot of people are interested
in this camera.

--
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: Shake Reduction Question

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 10/20/06, John Celio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Sorta like aperture simulators.  ;-D
>
> John Celio
>

What is an aperture simulator? Does my *istDS have one? ;-)

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: K10D 22 bit A/D conversion

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 10/15/06, Digital Image Studio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The fact is that the sensor likely has a full well capacity of about
> 35k electrons, yes the output signal from the CCD is analogue but the
> noise on top of the wanted signal offers far less real data than a 22
> bit system can resolve. The fact is that a 15 or 16 bit ADC should
> suffice to record all wanted information. The 22 bit ADC will
> primarily be resolving random noise in the 6 to 7 bits, in other words
> when combined with this sensor it's sheer overkill.
>

When combined with this sensor.
But what about other sensors? Like the 18MP Kodak one? I don't see any
reason why the 645D won't use the already developed 22bit ADC (and the
image processor as well).

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: Another Aperture Simulator Survey

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 10/12/06, Mark Erickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Simple question:
>
>  How many K10D sales (total worldwide) do you
>  think Pentax will lose by not including the
>  Aperture Simulator feature?
>

0.
I don't think Pentax will be able to meet the demand, at only 13000 units/month.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: Size comparo: K10D vs K100D

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 9/19/06, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 19/9/06, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
> >There is no such thing as a 'superior' EVF ;)
>
> You'd be surprised. The CRT viewfinders on TV cameras are pretty good.
>
>
> Cheers,
>  Cotty
>
>

When you talk about a pretty good CRT my 19" Iiyama comes to my mind.
No, thanks! - I like small cameras 

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: Size comparo: K10D vs K100D

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 9/19/06, Takeshita K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maybe Pentax might be the first one to adopt a superior EVF for
> K1D ;-).  Then again, they are still too conservative in adopting too
> radical a feature as a pioneer, unlike their past.
>
> Ken
>

There is no such thing as a 'superior' EVF ;)

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: Japan DSLR Stats

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 8/25/06, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For the first time since I've been using Pentax on a regular basis,
> there is a light at the end of the tunnel.

That's the train 

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: CF v SD Cards

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 8/23/06, Digital Image Studio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 23/08/06, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > What attitude? If you want to complain about something, I'd recommend
> > the stop-down coupler which is currently missing from the digital
> > SLRs, btw.
> > Actually I think that supporting a single card format (SD. Well, the
> > *istD is history) is a great idea. I hope Pentax will stick with SDs.
>
> It would amuse me if they changed to a another card format but then
> again I only have one SD card currently.
>
> --

Sorry; stick with SD = use SD in all their cameras (i.e. no new camera
with only a CF slot).

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: CF v SD Cards

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 8/22/06, jtainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It's not the money. It's the attitude Pentax has displayed.
>
> Joe
>

What attitude? If you want to complain about something, I'd recommend
the stop-down coupler which is currently missing from the digital
SLRs, btw.
Actually I think that supporting a single card format (SD. Well, the
*istD is history) is a great idea. I hope Pentax will stick with SDs.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: any views on K100D vs. Canon Rebel XT (350D)?

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 8/22/06, Toralf Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> As for speed, I've tried the 350D only with the kit lens, and it didn't
> strike me as being faster than what I'm used to from older film
> Pentaxes. As people are reporting a somewhat significant speedup on the
> K100D compared to older digital models, which were probably already
> faster than e.g. my MZ-5n, I wouldn't be surprised if it beats Canons
> with cheap lenses. But again, I didn't really compare the 350D and my
> Pentaxes side-by-side.
>
> - Toralf
>

My *istDS is slower than my MZ-6. The MZ-5n should be even faster, and
the MZ-S... well...

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: funny K10D story

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 7/16/06, Aaron Reynolds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The clutch I played with was on the new 40mm limited pancake.  It also
> appears on the new primes.  Someone who's played with the new zooms
> will have to tell you whether or not it appears on those as well.  The
> clutch works on any body, though the lenses have no aperture ring so
> they are not fully compatible with older bodies.
>
> -Aaron3w
>

I've tested the DA 16-45 f/4 (btw are you also dissapointed by it's
construction? There is a huge play in the focusing ring and the
barrel, almost as in the FA 28-80 f/3.5-5.6)  with my MZ-6, after AF
locked, I was able to turn the focus ring, but only in one direction.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: funny K10D story

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 7/11/06, Aaron Reynolds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Funny, or perhaps encouraging.

Funny? What are you talking about? Now I'll have to buy that thing! I
don't need it, of course - my DS is a wonderful camera (even if the AF
could be faster); but...
Well, time to do some shopping training with the DA 16-45 :(

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: AF 1.7 converter

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 6/18/06, John Coyle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anyone have any ideas on current prices for this?  I just searched Ebay with
> no luck on current auctions.
>
> John Coyle
> Brisbane, Australia
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>

Grr... few days ago I've saw a brand new one, ~260 euro (VAT
included). But I live in Romania, we have the lowest salaries and the
highest prices :(
Actually I think it's the same adapter I've saw last year.

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

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

Re: Semi OT... DVD rewriter

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 5/5/06, John Whittingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hmm... a week ago, I was in a computer store, wanting to buy a LG
> 4167B. Instead, I choosed a Plextor - big mistake. That Plextor - the
> PX750A - is actually a very expensive Teac.

Nothing wrong with Teac they made some of the best CD writers of all time,
you're paying the extra for the Plextor firmware/software bundle etc. they're
a great product IMHO.

John



Well, this drive don't support any of the 'advanced' Plextor functions
(like media quality scan). It can't be made region-free. The write
quality is not the best.
But it's not that bad either, even if there are cheaper and better
drives available.

--
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

Re: Semi OT... DVD rewriter

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 5/5/06, mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hi,

My ancient (one of the first x2 rewriters in the country!!!) CDRW drive seems 
to be expiring.  Just in time for me to fill my HDD with PEF files.

I'm looking at a Philips PBDV1660G/00 DVD+-RW.

Anyone got any nasty experiences, humerous stories, prices cheaper than £29.36?

Other recommendations?

mike



You should take a look at www.cdfreaks.com
The review is here: http://www.cdfreaks.com/article/267 Overall, it
seems a good drive.
Hmm... a week ago, I was in a computer store, wanting to buy a LG
4167B. Instead, I choosed a Plextor - big mistake. That Plextor - the
PX750A - is actually a very expensive Teac.

--
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

Re: Autofocus with Manual Lenses

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 4/12/06, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I seem to recall that if a certain converter is used on an autofocus body
> with a manual lens, the lens acts like it's an autofocus optic.  Is this
> correct?
>
>
> Shel
>

Yes: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/teleconverters/F1.7X.html

--
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

Re: Pixel size

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 3/20/06, Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Yes, in fact there's two different 10MP sensors available for 1.3x crop.
> The first is used in the Leica Digital Module-R, and the second is a
> different sensor used in the upcoming M Digital. Both are ~1.3x
> (actually the M Digital is 1.39x crop, so really ~1.4x) 10MP sensors.
> I'm not sure exactly who makes these sensors though.
>
> -Adam
>
>

Thanks, I really forgot about Leica :)


--
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu

Re: Pixel size

[Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu]

On 3/20/06, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alex,
> Can I show you an "APS-H version"? Explain.
> I think it would be a mistake for Pentax not to price the up-coming
> 10MP at a level just under the D200. At the moment I don't recall the
> 30D pricing.
> IMHO, being late to that pricing segment of the market requires a bit
> of catching up. Save the bragging prices for that follow-up pro
> flagship (heard that word lately?) with innovative features.
>
> Jack
>

I was saying that I don't know of any APS-H (1.3 crop factor) sensor,
except for the Canon one.
That's also my opinion; the new Pentax shouldn't be too expensive (and
I think that an APS-H sensor - again, I don't know they could find one
- will unnecessary raise the price). I would prefer a feature packed
(Pentax-style, not useless gimmicks please!) APS-C camera than a
'cheap' APS-H one.

--
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu