FS: SMC 85/1.8
http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/for_sale/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: gladness and disappointment
Hi Bernd, If the fungus has not (yet) managed to eat itself into the glass, it can be cleaned completely. However, zooms are very difficult to disassemble and to assemble, so it is a wise decision to give the lens back. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: A*85/1.4 - one for $1,100+, one for $438
Hi Bernd, it's not completely true that there is no insurance available at all. I sent a parcel with a lens to an Australian PDML member. There was an insurance available, but not for the complete way. IIRC it was insured up to Australia. Inside Australia it was not insured. As I understand it, the German Post Office changed their insurance conditions recently (2001). I too sent a package to Australia in March 2001, and it was not insured. If I would transfer money to America, it would cost me about 15..20 US$ !! That's crazy. Only escape is via VISA, PAYPAL and similiar possibilities. Note that PayPal charges extra for currency conversion. Even if we want to transfer money to other European countries ( most of them use now the EURO, so there are no currency eychanges ), the fees are still about 10..15 US$. We wait hopefully that these fees get cancelled, but up to now I have no date for that. As long as the banks don't get forced by the government, I suppose they will take a lot of money for such transfers. in an insured envelope works extremely well, even if it is against the rules. $ works too, only you have to pay the exchange fees. Hey American guys, do you still claim about the nationalistic Germans? I am sure that this was a joke... Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: A*85/1.4 - one for $1,100+, one for $438
Hi Bob, We just talked about a A*85/1.4 that went for over $1,100. This one sold the same day for $438 ! All because the seller restricted his market to Germany. Tell me why he did this? I know the seller personally, and can tell you why he did this. Simply because it is too much hassle to deal with international transactions. I do it on the KMP, and see how many explanations and conditions I need to put (http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/for_sale/). It is difficult and expensive to receive playment from outside the EU, and there is no way to insure packages that go to the USA. So, how likely is it that someone will send $1000 to an unknown person in Germany, and wait for an uninsured package worth $1000 to come back? I sold some items recently, and some of them went to the USA. The average transaction took about 20 days. I have lived in the USA, and know about personal checks, cashiers checks, bank checks, money orders, etc. But most buyers in Germany are not aware or not willing to deal with all this hassle. I see many Pentax bargains on German Ebay. I wish that I had an easy way to pay from the USA. Any suggestions? See my For Sale page. Cheers, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
I need a picture of the Z-1p grip
...for the KMP. Thanks a lot, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
FS: M85/2
http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/for_sale/ Note that I will be out of town until Thu, May 6! Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
KMP Update
Hi all, I am in the middle of a big KMP update, but since I've managed to get in a few interesting pictures lately, I am making this intermediate update... * http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/bodies/photos/LX_FB-1_FC-1.jpg * Optical diagrams for FA* 200/4 Macro, FA 28-90/3.5-5.6, FA28-105/3.2-4.5. * Declared the F* and FA* 250-600/5.6 to be using the same optical formula. Until now they were 17-15 and 18-16, but I am 99% sure that the difference is that someone did not count the rear filter of the F* lens. So now both are shown as 18-16. * Added an image for the (non-SMC) Pentax-A 70-200f4. * Improved images of M35f2, 50F4 Macro, M100f4Macro, M150f3.5, motor drive MD, battery grip M, superA, NiCd battery pack LX, motor drive LX, databack LX, remote battery pack, K20/4, K28/3.5, FA* 85/1.4, MZ-3, Z-1p, A1.4X-L, A2X-L, A1.4X-S, F* 300/4.5, K2 DMD, P50, F50/1.7, FB-1, FC-1. Enjoy! Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
FS: superProgram, programA, motor drive A, grip A
http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/for_sale/ Note that I will be out of town until Thu, May 6! Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: For Boz: Differences in SMC coatings?
Hi Mark, Boz: You replied below that the SMC coating is different between the K24mm/f2.8 and the A-version. What's the difference? Your excellent equipment page doesn't suggest that these would be different. Well, I still have lots of work on the KMP. see my comments on the K/A 15/3,5. I have just acquired a nice K24, and the front element has a beautiful, low reflective green tint. How is the A-version different? The A has a deep-red/brownish tint. The coatings of the A lenses are typically better than those of the M than those of the K lenses. Cheers, Boz PS: I will be away from computers until the end ofnext week. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: WTB: dead Pentax A 2.8/24
I have a Pentax A 2.8/24 lens that has a front lens element group problem requiring the replacement of this (no longer available) assembly. Before I toss it in my parts box, I am wondering if anyone has one of these lenses that is damaged/unusable but has a clean front group in their parts box that I could possibly buy. The front assembly from the (K) 24/2,8 will also work. THe only difference will be the glass coating. Cheers, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: new lenses -- advice?
Mishka wrote: I have a guy offering me A 35/2 and A 24/2.8 for $390. Both are supposedly excellent. Is that a good deal? Yes. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Bodies w/ Spot Metering?
Hi, Would you feel better about this if you noticed that the ones with the date back are priced lower than the ones without? (Used to be the case on the BH website; I haven't looked lately to see if they still list it without, for more.) I used to own an MZ-5n with a dateback. I then made an offer on the PDML to swap the dateback for a normal one, with all transaction-related expenses accepted by the other side. The swap was successful, and now I own the more expensive non-Date version. :-) Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
FS: K35/2, Euro 99
http://www.fotofun.be/secondhand/secondhand.html Cheers, Paul, Arnold, and Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
??? Price of 400/4 for 6x7
Hi all, 1. What would be a reasonable price for a really, really clean Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 400/4 lens for 6x7? 2. What about one with a sizeable dent in the lens hood (rest of the lens in LN condition)? Anyone interested in buying such a lens? TIA, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: ???: Soligor 90/2,5 Macro
Hi All, I was away for a few days, so sorry for the alte reply. From the pictures and descriptions that I received, the lens seems to be the same as the Vivitar 90/2,8 Macro. The thing about this one, is that it has the A aperture setting. I still have not had time to test out the lens, but I will compare it with my A100/2,8 Macro, and will report here. Cheers and thanks to all, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
???: Soligor 90/2,5 Macro
Hi all, Does anyone have any info on the following (Ka mount!!!) lens: Soligor C/D Macro MC 90mm f/2.5 (62mm filter diameter) I bough it recently, and I am absolutely amazed at the the build quality and the solid feel (I have not yet managed to make any pics with it). The lens goes to 1:1 without extension tubes, and turns more than 360 degrees between infinity and 1:1. When focusing towards infinity, the focusing ring moves away from the lens mount but at the same time another part of the lens moves further away from focusing ring, thus moving away from the lens mount twice as fast as the focusing ring itself. I know that Soligor does not produce their own lenses. So, the question is, can anyone identify this lens? Which lens have I really got? It looks and feels like a winner! Thanks, Boz PS: I'll try to post pics of it tonight... -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: ???: Soligor 90/2,5 Macro
Hi Jeff, Soligor C/D Macro MC 90mm f/2.5 (62mm filter diameter) Would not be surprised if it wasn't the same as the Vivitar Series 1 lens from the same time with a Soligor label. There were a number of lenses sold os both Vivitar and Soligor that were optically identical and physically almost identical. Well, that was my first thought, and I bought the lens because I thought that it might be the Vivitar which is reputed to be on par with the A100/2.8 Macro. But the Vivitar is a 1:2 Macro, and goes to 1:1 with an extension tube. The f/2,8 Lens is the 1:1, at least at Vivitar. Tamron has a 1:1 90/2,5 Macro, but the lenses look too different from each other. Now I am thinking Kiron or something like that... Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Wiring 2 AF500FTZ via built in 5p connector?
Hi Leon, Brendan was asking about connecting two flashes to each other DIRECTLY, i.e. one cord runs from the 5p connector of one flash to the 5p connector of the second flash. Yes it will. The 5p system is meant for daisy chaining just like that. I quite often use 2 in a chain and have used up to 4 and they work fine TTL. How can you daisy-chain 4 flashes when each flash has onyl one 5p connector? Thanks, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax USA White Green A* Lenses ?
Hi Fred, http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/wtgrn.htm Or, is it just a case of sloppy image color consistency? Well, the colors are not consistent. Just compare the dark parts of both lenses (shouldn't bothe be dark grey?). But I think that you are right and the 300 is white and the 600 greenish. BTW, a few days ago I saw the F* 250-600/5,6 and A* 400/2,8 side by side. The F lens was whitish and the A lens was greenish. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Build a cable release F yourself
Hi all, Some of you have already done this, but now there is a page with easy-to-undesrtand instructions on how to build a remote release for the SF, Z/PZ and MZ/ZX cameras. Check it out at http://www.kajko.wdb.pl/wezyk/e_wezyk.html Cheers, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: More image theft...
tom wrote: Oh no! He's now stolen his image drom Dario! The problem is that noone has bid on his auction, and he can change the HTML. Anyone brave enough to bid on a redhead? I'll get Dario to change his image. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: dental macro and macro lens
Nitin Garg wrote: What is the difference between a dental macro and macro lens ? The dental version has markings on the barrel that tell you the magnification ratios when the lens is used in combination with one of the two close-up lenses tat make up the Dental closeup set See the KMP under Macro Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe, go to http://wwwpdmlnet and follow the directions Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pugkomkonorg
KMP Copyright Infringement(s)
Hi all, What can I do against this: http://cgi.ebay.de/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1334153963 I don't mean legally, but I would appreciate ideas on how to place the copyright notices so that they are not so easy to remove. Am I dreaming when thinking of images that do not allow themselves to be screencaptured and edited? TIA, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP Copyright Infringement(s) (Thanks to all)
Hi, Thank you all for your comments and suggestions. Sadly, I have had to watermark all KMP images that I own, and now you all have to pay the price of seing the lower-quality images. If anyone needs a good image that I own, drop me a line. I am going to pursue the issue a bit more with the commercial firm that stole my image(s). I have to find them first because the eBay seller says he has no records of the exact URL. But I'll try it. Thanks again, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: For the KX owner who has everything
Paul F. Stregevsky wrote: Asahi - Pentax Belt Buckle - Pentax KX metal buckle, Limited Edition, made for Honeywell, 8.5cmx5.7cm, circa 1976, excellent ++ $40.00 http://www.manfredschmidt.com/asahi.html See it at: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/bodies/photos/ Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: For REAL Pentax fans only...
dave o'brien wrote: On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, Bojidar Dimitrov wrote: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/collection/ Someone *needs* a polariser very, very badly. dave and a tripod You don't seem to be a REAL Pentax fan, Dave. Noticing the technical incompetence of the photos means that your heart was not beating fast enough while looking at them... Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Alarm (Re: auth 584e5e78 subscribe pentax-discuss thewho_@hotmail.com)
Oliver Raymond wrote: auth 584e5e78 subscribe pentax-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] ^^ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
For REAL Pentax fans only...
http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/collection/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Equipment used for the new KMP pictures
Hi all, After a couple of questions how I have made the new body, lens, etc. images for the KMP (for example FA*300/4.5, A16/2.8 Fish, A24/2.8, LX, superProgam, etc.), here is a short description. No, I did not use my most favorite of all, the A100/2.8 Macro. No, no, I used a Canon zoom lens!!! Why you ask? Well, because I cannot mount my lens on a digital body, and this is definitely a digital project. I needed pictures of high (photographic) quality but with maximum dimension 500 pixel or less. Ao I played _a lot_ with lighting setups, higher contrast, lower contrast, DOF, etc. Imagine how much film I would have burned, how long I would have waited for the film development, and how many extra exposures I would have made... My final setup is like this. Casio QV-4000 digital camera (with a Canon 7-21 mm f/2-2.5 lens). Bogen tripod with a 3D Bogen head. A small white plate as floor and some styropor left, right, and behind the white floor plate. Two halogen lights, one pointed directly at the subject, one pointing towards one of the styropor walls (long live the manual white-balance of the Casio!!!). Exposures of 1/6 second at f/8, two-second self-timer. Turned on the grid in camera's display for proper alignment. Resolution: 1024x768. Digital manipulation using PaintShopPro 6.0: increase contrast a bit, darken a bit, reduce size to about 1/4, sharpen a bit. Add copyright notice, add a frame. Save a progressive-scan JPG. And that's that. The biggest problem of all is to find equipment to photograph... Best wishes to all, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: A macro lighting question
Hi Flavio, Moreover I can't imagine a way to mount it on a homemade bracket so as to point it directly on the subject. Well, the AF280T can be tilted _down_ 15 degrees, and that might do the trick. Plus it has minimum TTL range of only 25 cm. Hope this helps, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
FS: SFXn, KX (black)
http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/for_sale/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
KLD: M50/2 and A50/2
Hi All, In order to make the description of the following lens more complete and the KMP (http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/) even more helpfull, I am collecting your opinions on the following lens(es): SMC Pentax-M 1:2 50mm SMC Pentax-A 1:2 50mm Please answer only if you have direct experience with the lens(es) in question. 1. What do you like about this lens? What do you diskile about it? 2. Do you use the lens often? When and under what conditions? Do you prefer it over other lenses with similar focal length? 3. How does the lens handle? 4. What is your impression of the optical performance of this lens? Is it sharp? How good is its bokeh? What about color rendition, distortion, flare-resistance, etc.? Please post aour answers to to the PDML, so that others may comment on your answer. After I feel that the discussion has come to an end, I will summarize your answers and place them on the page dedicated to the len(es) in question. Thanks in advance, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
KLD (important)
Hi all, I would like to resurrect an old idea --- the KMP Lens Discussion, or short, KLD. From now on, whenever I have time, I will choose a lens and place it for discussion on the PDML. I will ask about why you like the lens, or why not, etc. All that have direct experience with this lens are welcome to post their answers to the PDML. I will then summarize the answers and place the text in the appropriate lens page. So, look for messages with subjects like the following: KLD: A50/2 or KLD: K35/1.4. Cheers, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
FS: A100/2.8 Macro, SMC 135/2.5
http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/for_sale/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
KMP update (important)
Hi all, I have just uploaded the newest version of the KMP. There are several things that I would like to point out: 1. I now have a page dedicated to each lens. For most lenses these pages contain only the technical data, but I would like to _SLOWLY_ add descriptions and optical evaluations for each lens (like for the 15/3.5, M40/2.8 or FA43/1.9). For this I will need your help. Please see my other post entitled README: KLD. 2. The lens pages are now in a form with which I am satisfied. If anyone feels strongly that certain informations should be removed, added or presented in a different way, please feel free to voice your opinion. My preference is be for a public discussion (on the PDML), so that other parties can participate too. 3. The current lens pages represent the last state of my lens knowledge. If anything is wrong or missing, TELL ME ABOUT IT! There a lots of places where you can help. 4. You will notice about 50 new pictures of lenses, bodies, flashes, etc. I have photographed all my equipment and that of a few other Pentax afficionados. But there are still many low-quality pictures on the KMP. If you something of which I have a bad picture, MAKE A NICE PICTURE AND SEND IT TO ME! 5. I now have a For Sale page. The link is in the middle of the top menu. 6. Is there a tool that can take a directory with GIF and JPG images and list each file name followed by the pixel width and height of the images? 7. Enjoy the new KMP! Cheers, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: 50mm 1.2
Hi all, Alexander Krohe wrote: I think also lenses of the same generations may have individual coatings. It is not unreasonable to think that lenses with different focal lengths also have slightly different SMC versions. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: 50mm 1.2
Hi all, Arnold Stark wrote: I believe that the SMC Pentax 1:1.2 50mm is the later version of the K50/f1.2 because the mm in the name of K series lenses exists only for K series lenses that were still made while the M series lenses were already there. Am I the only one who has noticed the different fonts on the different versions of the 50/1.2? I have only seen SMC Pentax 1:1.2/50 written in the font of the K lenses and SMC Pentax 1:1.2 50mm with the font for the M lenses. I personally strongly prefer the M-series font. 3:-) Merry Christmas, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: fov change with IF lenses
Hi Frank, It's more complicated than you were hoping... http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/extras/focalLength/index.html Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: 50 1.2 and ZX-M
Hi Albano, I can't understand this thing about overexposure. Why just with the 50 1.2? I have seen this warning too. My only explanation is that the body cannot deal with f/1.2 lenses, but why they are talking about 1 stop overexposure I am not sure. Maybe it cannot deal with f/1.4 lenses either... Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: full frame on digital slrs
Hi, In addition to what Kent says, there is alsothe issue with leaving enough space for the mirror to be able to swing up and down... Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
All lens data missing from the KMP
Hi, See if you can help with any of the following: Thanks, Boz === Missing optical diagrams: A 100/2,8 Macro; FA* 200/4 Macro; FA 24-90/3,5-4,5; FA 28-105/3,2-4,5; F 35-105/4-5,6; A 35-210/3,5-4,5; M 80-200/4,5 (version 2); F* 250-600/5,6; Unknown maximum magnification: A 16/2,8 Fish; 17/4 Fish; 18/3,5; 24/2,8; A 24/2,8; 24/3,5; 30/2,8; 35/2; 35/3,5; 40/2,8; 55/1,8; 55/2; A* 85/1,4; 85/1,8; M 85/2; 85/2,2 Soft; M 100/2,8; A 100/2,8; 105/2,8; 120/2,8; M 120/2,8; A* 135/1,8; 135/2,5; A 135/2,8; 135/3,5; M 135/3,5; M 150/3,5; 150/4; 200/2,5; A* 200/2,8; 200/4; M 200/4; A 200/4; A* 300/2,8; 300/4; M* 300/4; A* 300/4; 400/5,6; M 400/5,6; FA* 400/5,6; 500/4,5; A* 600/5,6; 1000/8; M 24-35/3,5; M 24-50/4; A 24-50/4; F 24-50/4; FA 24-90/3,5-4,5; 28-50/3,5-4,5; M 28-50/3,5-4,5; A 28-80/3,5-4,5; F 28-80/3,5-4,5; FA 28-80/3,5-4,7; A 28-135/4; AF 35-70/2,8; M 35-70/2,8-3,5; A 35-70/3,5-4,5; F 35-70/3,5-4,5; A 35-70/4; A 35-105/3,5; F 35-105/4-5,6; A 35-135/3,5-4,5; F 35-135/3,5-4,5; A 35-210/3,5-4,5; M 40-80/2,8-4; 45-125/4; A 70-210/4; F 70-210/4-5,6; M 75-150/4; 80-200/4,5; M 80-200/4,5 (version 1); M 80-200/4,5 (version 2); 85-210/3,5; 85-210/4,5; F 100-300/4,5-5,6; FA 100-300/4,5-5,6; 135-600/6,7; F* 250-600/5,6 18/3,5: cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal); FA 31/1,8 Limited: number of aperture blades; 50/1,2 Gold: weight, cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal); 50/1,2 Special: weight, cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal); FA* 200/4 Macro: focus limiter (yes/no), focus clamp (yes/no); A* 300/2,8: cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) FA* 300/2,8: cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) 300/4: cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) F* 300/4,5: cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) FA* 300/4,5: cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) A* 400/2,8 cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) M 400/5,6: cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) A 400/5,6: cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) FA* 500/4,5: cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) F* 600/4: cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) FA* 600/4: cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) A* 600/5,6: cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) 1000/8: cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) 1000/11 Mirror: list of the built-in filters, cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) A* 1200/8: number of aperture blades, cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) 2000/13,5: list of the built-in filters, cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) M 2000/13,5: list of the built-in filters, cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) F 17-28/3,5-4,5 Fish: cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) FA 24-90/3,5-4,5: rear-focus (yes/no); FA* 28-70/2,8: IF (yes/no), rear-focus (yes/no); FA 28-105/3,2-4,5: IF (yes/no), rear-focus (yes/no), number of aperture blades, cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) FA 28-105/4-5,6 [IF] (Silver): rear-focus (yes/no) 135-600/6,7: cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) F* 250-600/5,6: cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) FA* 250-600/5,6: cap type (clip-on, slip-on), internal cap diameter, cap material (rubber, plastic, metal) -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important
KMP, Lenses, the complete TODO list
Hi all, I have been off-line for a while (both in the real and in the stylistic meaning of the word), sorry... Anyhow, I am slowly progressing with my database idea, and I have the first fruits from it --- a complete list of ALL missing lens information. Please everyone scan the list below and see if you can contribute. Some of the missing info is extremely easy to gather (assuming that you own one of the rarer lenses)... I will post the list in a separate e-mail. You can reply to it (and thus to the list) or directly to me: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
OT: Translate from Japanese please
Hi, could someone translate from Japanese please: http://www.BDimitrov.de/temp/colors.gif TIA, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: 17mm fish-eye advice
Bojidar Dimitrov wrote: Hi Caril, Sorry, my spell-checker played a bad joke here... Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Multi-segment metering and exposure compensation
Hernan Mouro wrote: I just read this at Boris's site (http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/extras/K-mount/Kaf.html): Well, my name is Bojidar, but IÄll answer anyway... :-) Speaking about multi-segment metering: (...) since algorithm is rather complex, it is very difficult to judge when it will fail and in which direction. Hence, it is not advisable to use exposure compensation together with multi-segment metering. So, would you use exposure compensation only in spot meter mode? What do you think? How much do you trust multi-segment metering? Well, OK, now that I read this, I agree that it sounds misleading. What I wanted to say was that I would not _COMPENSATE_ matrix metering because I don't know in which direction to compensate. What I will do is _BRACKET_ matrix metering. Then I am quite certain to get a properly exposed slide. On a similar note, I have learned to trust matrix metering, and when I do bracket, in 95% of the cases I end up with the first frame properly exposed and the one over- and one under-exposed. I will rewrite the passage above to reflect this. Thanks for pointing it out. Cheers, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.BDimitrov.de/kmp/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Things to do in Belgium...
John Francis wrote: Bob Walkden asked: I'm taking a day-trip to Brussels (Bruxelles) on Saturday. I'd like to see any suggestions, too - I'll be in Brussels I don't know about things to do and see, but make sure you try some beer! Anything that looks like champagne but the label says beer should be top-of-the-world quality. And this from a guy who lives in Germany... :-) Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
OT: Bookmark the KMP again
Hi to all who use Internet Epxlorer 5.0 or later, By following these steps, you can get an icon that is suited to the content of the KMP: - remove your existing bookmark(s) of the KMP, - go to another web page, http://www.carus.de/ for example, - go to http://www.BDimitrov.de/kmp/ - create the bookmark again. Cheers, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.BDimitrov.de/kmp/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Question about ZX5n Focusing Screen
Having grown up on a Super Program which has been replaced with a ZX-5n, I've always wanted to replace the focusing screen on the ZX-5n. Is it really feasible to use the ZX-M screen on a ZX-5n? I would be very interested in this repair. Hi, The way I see things, this would not be advisable, partly due to the fact that the split-image in the middle of the screen will affect metering adversely. Specifically, spot metering will probably be way off. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Traveling in Deutschland
looking for suggestions for lesser-known destinations, with the emphasis on photographic opportunities. I will be spending a week in the south (around Freiburg), a few days around Muenchen and Erlangen/Neurnberg, and around five days looping through the north (Koeln, Hamburg, Berlin Two towns in Northern Germany that are definitely worth a visit are Luenebeurg (Lüneburg) and Luebeck (Lübeck). Expect lots of elaborate brick buildings and beautiful old churches and castles. Bring your wide-angle lenses! Have fun, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Sticky foam
Hi, Thanks to all who replied to my query about repairing sticky foam! Cheers, Boz PS: I've been a bit busy with non-Pentax things lately, but things will change soon I hope. -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.BDimitrov.de/kmp/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Sticky foam
Hi all, One of my older bodies is developing a problem: the foam where the mirror rests while in the up position is becoming sticky (this is not the LX sticky-mirror problem). Can anyone help me with the following: 1. What is a suitable replacements material? 2. Are there any sourses of such material (preferably in Germany or at least in Europe)? 3. Is the replacement something that one could do alone? Thanks in advance. Cheers, Boz PS: Is this coming as plain text? _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.BDimitrov.de/kmp/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: How to disassemble a Pentax Lens and put it together again
Recently Hugo Kok wrote: another question to check out the Pentax Data Base that is YOU. Situation is: comparing three of my lenses with fixed aperture (let's say: 5.6), the light meter gives on all three of them a different exposure time. That is: 50mm OK, 85mm +1 stop, 135mm +1/2 stop. After extensive comparisons in which all possible other explanations were ruled out, it left me with the only remaining cause: the 'pen' inside the mount of the lens that mechanically tells the camera what aperture is momentarily in use is not in proper place in two of the lenses. No, no, no. Two possibilites are: non-uniform subject, that is, you have different portions of the image with the different lenses or the light changes a bit while you change lenses. Another one is that the aperture blades are not 100% corectly positioned. in other words, the aperture setting 5,6 is in reality 7,1 or something like that. Now here's my question: is it possible to open up the rear of the lens myself, adjust the relative position of the 'pen' a little and at the same time be reasonably confident to end up with a working lens? It is possible to open the lens but there is no possibility to adjust the position of the lever. The only adjustment is to the positions of the blades, but these are calibrated and then the adjustment screws are fixed with paint or glue. All in all, not an advisable operation. The only thing that I think you can do is inspect that lever for dirt or damage, and this only externally, without disassembling the lens. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
OT: This account is now dead
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is no longer in operation. Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phred.org/pentax/k/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Long exposures!
On 10 May 2001, at 11:13, Ayash Kanto Mukherjee wrote: My next experiment was to decrease the aperture by 5 stops, i.e., f/22 and therefore the exposure has to be increased by 5 stops, i.e., 64 sec. I got a very horrible result. It was severely underexposed. Decreasing the aperture and increasing the time accordingly will NORMALLY produce a picture with the same brightness. You have to EITHER close the aperture OR decrease the time. Now, why didn't this happen with your second shot? First, the MZ-M like 99,9% of all cameras meter on automatic only up to 30 seconds, so you didn't get your 64 seconds. Second and more important, when a film receives very little light, then the trick with doubling the time does not really work. You have to tripple or even quadrupple the time for one f-stop difference. Anyhow, try your shot again, with the same lighting. Set the camera to manual operation, and take several shots: f/5,6 and 4 seconds and f/8 and 4 seconds. This should give you two pics with -1 and -2 stop exposure. In other words, 1 stop and 2 stop darker than your initial photo. NOW; BIG WARNING. Even if this yields correct exposure on the negatives, the lab that makes the prints will automatically apply +1 and +2 stop correction in order to correct your underexposed pictures. You need to tell them NOT to do that automatic correction. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Off camera TTL flash options?
Hi Rob, Recently Rob Studdert wrote: I would like to put together a remote flash connection system so that I can use up to three flashes in parallel on my LX (am maybe the MZ-S) for creative TTL flash with macro images. This is where Pentax screwed up. If you want to use an LX or a SuperProgram for TTL flash then you must stick to the 4P equipment (analog). The P/PZ and MZ/ZX bodies of course support both the 4P and 5P setups (not yet sure about the MZ-S). I am fully aware of the components which allow this for the LX system however I am tired of chasing the parts which it seems are becoming more and more difficult to find let alone ridiculously expensive. Very true... In any case I am not really pleased with height of the Flash grip and would prefer a simple low profile device with a tripod socket on its base for adaption to a macro flash bracket. I expect that to fulfil my needs I will need to modify existing components (and maybe also integrate third party products into the system). You might have to resort to this option. Can the new digital flashes be connected in parallel like the old analogue units (I have absolutely no experience with them)? Yes. The remote flash options available for the digital system look like what I am after (I saw a photo of Mark Cassinos set up on his equipment page however Bozs site has broken links and last time I looked BH had no pictures). Can the new systems be used to facilitate basic TTL off-camera flash for the LX? No, sorry. You will need to use a Z/PZ or MZ/ZX body for this. As for the broken links, I just saw that off-camera flash page is borken. Are there any others? The correct address for the off-camera page is http://www.phred.org/pentax/k/extras/offCameraFlash.html Can someone provide links to pictures of the components (especially from directly above so that I can see the contact configuration)? 4P and 5P cosrds and sockets are incompatible. You will have to use either only 4P equipment (on LX, SuperProgram and the AF bodies) or only 5P equipment (with the AF bodies). Anyone have any suggestions? Three non-TTL flashes on 3rd-party slave triggers. You will have to experiment with the distance/power settings to get the results you are after. Good luck, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: F 35-135/ 3.5-4.5 Macro
Hi, Okay... question to all the lens gurus out there. I am in need of a decent quality mid range zoom lens for little league portraits. Therefore I need something that can handle both team shots and indivuals. I had been using my A 50 (or M 28 depending on space) for the teams and a M 135 for individuals. With as many teams as we shoot in a day this is a little inconvienient. Optical quality is not extremely important since we rarely enlarge even to 8x10, but speed is since we are often shooting in less than ideal conditions and the boss hates dark backgrounds. Maybe you want to invest in a second body, so that you can have one body with the 28 and one body with the 50? Anyway, I found this lens on KEH for a reasonable amount, and was wondering if anyone has had any experience with this lens. The main thing I wonder is, is it better than the new Sigma 28-105/2.8-4? While awaiting my new flash (which broke the other day, rememeber) I shot with my bosses N90s with this lens (sigma) it seems like a decent lens but I'd like to stay away from Sigma; however, the speed of this lens is very attractive. Also the 35-135 macro could serve me more purposes than simply little league portraits. So please any comments you have as to my little dilema are greatly appreciated. I have no experience with either lens. But I've heard horible things about the optical qualities of this particular Sigma lens. On the other hand, the quality of the F-zooms has been extremely high and their build also very solid. I think that you can get the Pentax zoom with confidence that it is the better lens. But think seriously about the idea with two cameras too. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
KLD: 135/2,5 (SMC, 58 mm filter)
Hi I am collecting opinions of the following lens. I will summarize the answers in the appropriate page of the KMP. SMC 135/2.5 (the SMC lens with 58 mm filter thread, not the Takumar) === What is your opinion of this lens? Is it any good? What do you use it for? What do you like about it? How well built is it? How is the handling (weight, size, etc.)? How about optical qualities: resolution, contrast, color, distortion, bokeh, light fall-off, etc.? Can you make a better picture of it than the one that I already have on the KMP? Is there any piece of information about this lens that I am missing that you can provide? Please post your answers to the PDML. TIA, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phred.org/pentax/k/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
OT: Boz's e-mail address
Hi all, My dearly-loved Unix accound is going away... No more elm... I must join the world of Microsoft... I too will start sending e-mails with senseless attachments... The point of this message, however, is to inform you all that along with the account I am going to lose my present e-mail address too. So, effective immediately, do not use [EMAIL PROTECTED] any more! Instead, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for all Pentax-related correspondence and [EMAIL PROTECTED] for all private matters. Thanks, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phred.org/pentax/k/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: thinking about getting MZ-5N, but have a lot of manual lenses
Recently Frank Wajer wrote: K 28mm f3.5 M 50mm f1.7 M 100mm f4.0 macro K 135mm f2.5 A 35-105mm f3.5 What would be a nice lens to get with the MZ-5N? The standard zooms like 28-70 or 35-80 overlap with the lenses I have, so ??? Well, a 28-80 zoom is actually missing, but what would be even better is the new FA 24-90/3,5-4,5. The new FA 28-105/3,2-4,5 would also be nice, and would free up the funds tied up by the A 35-105/3,5. Of course, these are new lenses (maybe not even for sale everywhere yet). If you need something more real, why not the FA* 24/2.0 AL? Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT: Boz's e-mail address
Recently Steve Cottrell wrote: My dearly-loved Unix accound is going away... No more elm... I must join the world of Microsoft... I too will start sending e-mails with senseless attachments... Boz, for Finagle's sake, it doesn't need to be like that! There *is* an alternative... Well, I am looking for alternatives. I own a Windows-based machine from which until now I used for telnetng to my University account (which should have expired a lng time ago). Now that this account is gone, I have to either: 1. Run my own Linux machine (I don't have time for setting it up and maintaining it) 2. Buy a Macintosh (I don't have the money or place for two machines) 3. Get a payed Unix account (I am willing to do that, but know of noone who offers such a service in Germany). Have I overlooked somehting? Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT: Boz's e-mail address
Recently Chris Brogden wrote: There's always web-based mail. Purpleturtle.com, for example, is structured like hotmail but they donate 20% of their advertising revenue to sea turtle conservation. I'm sure there's other good ones out there, too. Well, at the very minimum I need a way of donloading all received mails with a single action, then work out the answers off-line, and send all replies again with a single action. Basically, an IMAP or POP3 account, like Netscape mail. This I already have with phred.org, the site that hosts the KMP. But if I were to lose that account, I don't think that the web-based mail providers provided IMAP or POP3. Is there such a provider in Germany? I need to catch up on the topic... Anyhow, I mourn the loss of the purdue.edu account. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: SMC-FA 1.4/50 vs. 1.7/50
Hi, Recently Martin Trautmann wrote: what's your recommendation for those two lenses? http://phred.org/pentax/k/lenses/primes/40-55/FA50f1,7.html http://phred.org/pentax/k/lenses/primes/40-55/FA50f1,4.html Well, if you were closer to Hamburg you could try out both... There is an F50/1,7 on eBay.de right now. In general, this is a difficult question. The 1,4 and 1,7 lneses have been tested by different people, and the results are mixed, some say one is better, some say the other. However, they all agree: both lenses are extemely good, with the 1,4 being a bit bigger, a bit heavier, and more expensive. So, the answer is this: if you need f/1,4 then get the 1,4. Otherwise get the 1,7 or the one that you find first for a good price. I'm surprised how expensive the 1.7 is - it costs about 350 DM in Germany (that's about US$ 160), while other lenses from Canon/Nikon/Minolta are about 250 DM (US$ 115). Are those not 1,8 offerings from the other manufacturers? The local info sheets listed the 1.4/50 with 6 groups and 7 lenses, the 1.7 with 6 groups and 5 lenses!? But after raeding the link above, I guess this was a typo. 5 groups and 6 lenses. Not the only typo from Pentax. However, there are mistakes on my page too... Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Re: SMC-FA 1.4/50 vs. 1.7/50
Recently Martin Trautmann wrote: Unfortunately, I found out yesterday that my old 1.7/50 (A) is blocked - I can move between aperture 1.7 and 11, but not smaller and not A. I might have interest in bying it. Please contact me off the list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) if you are interested in selling it. BTW: is this a common problem, that the aperture lever of the lenses gets worn out? It's this small platic block within the gap of the mount that transfers the chosen aperture to the body (correct English terms?) No, not really. Common is that the aperture blades get dirty or oily, bit that the mechanics break, this is a vey rare occurence. Canon EF 1.8/50 II (ø52) 249.- Nikon AF 1.8/50 (ø 52)249.- Minolta AF 1.7/50 (ø49) 249.- Pentax AF 1.7/50 (ø49)359.- Hm, interesting! C cas no USM; N is not a D lens. I am not familiar with M. Pentax has the D functionality but no USM. It is also faster than the Nikon, so maybe the price is justfied. Canon EF 1.4/50 USM (ø58) 969.- Nikon AF 1/4/50 D (ø52) 749.- Minolta AF 1.4/50 (ø49) 559.- Pentax AF 1.4/50 (ø49) 549.- Wow, the Pentax is a steal! It has no USM like the C, but the P is much smaller. Nikon now has D, and Pentax too, so 200 DM saved. So every 0.1 aperture is about 100 DM more? ;-) You wish! Check the prices of the A 50/1,2. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: abreviations used on this list
Hi Cyril, LOL = laughing out loud BTW = by the way IMO = in my opinion IIRC = if I remember correctly HAR = ? KEH = www.keh.com HTH = hope this helps The ones that I use: TIA = thanks in advance KMP = K-mount page KLD = KMP lens discussion Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: M42 lens to Z1-P (more question)
Recently [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is it possible that the object in infinite distance cannot be focused due to the thickness of adapter? No problems here. The adapter does not add any thickness, so the distance markings on the lens will coincide with reality. Are there any 'bee bee' sound for correct focusing? No, here you must scratch the black paint on the lens so that the body thinks that it has a K-mount lens mounted. In general not advised, but others might want to give you more details about this. Which function will be lost? -Marix, spot or central average metering Matrix metering is not possible. -exposure compensation remains possible -TTL flash also remain possible. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: M42 lens to Z1-P
Hi Chris, I was thinking of an M42 lens set to M. Then turning the aperture ring changes the position of the aperture blades in all cases (when the lens is not mounted or mounted on a K-mount body). The body does not know the aperture setting, so it uses what is sees. The lens does not close down further when the shot is taken, so the picture is exposed properly, at the selected aperture. You are writing about the same setup but with the Auto seting engaged. I guess that we are both correct, but we are talking about different things. Sorry. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
AF macros
Hi, Can owners of AF-capable Pentax-brand macro lenses help me? IIRC, some of these lenses offer a clamp that tightens the focusing ring and a dial that limits the focusing range. But which lenses feature which? The lenses in question are: F 50/2.8 Macro FA 50/2.8 Macro F 100/2.8 Macro FA 100/2.8 Macro FA* 200/4 Macro TIA, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Good bye LX...
Recently Shel Belinkoff wrote: A pity indeed. I am deeply saddened by this, although it was inevitable. Think of it this way (optimistically): now Pentax has some highly-qualified resources for producing some other neat things, maybe the real flagship... Cheers, Bot - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
lens of the week: F 50/2.8 Macro
Hi, I had forgotten the existance of the F lens, sorry. SMC-F 50/2.8 Macro What is your opinion of this lens? Is it any good? What do you use it for? What do you like about it? How well built is it? How is the lens handling (weight, size, etc.)? How about optical qualities: resolution, contrast, color, distortion, bokeh, light fall-off, etc.? Can you make a better picture of it than the one that I already have on the KMP? Is there any piece of information about the lens that I am missing that you can provide? Please post your answers to the PDML. TIA, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phred.org/pentax/k/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Lens of the week (3)
Hi, I am very pleased with how this Lens of the Week idea is progressing. Thanks to all those who have provided their subjective evaluations. I would like to make a few changes to what I said in my earlier mails. 0. Married people are allowed to participate too. :-) 1. Discussions will not necessarily start on Friday and last one week. Whenever I feel that the current lens(es) have been covered in enough detail, I will suggest another lens. Because of this, Lens of the Week is not really an appropriate title. 2. At all times I will try to have 2-3 lens discussions open. One of those will usually be dedicated to a rare or obscure lens where I do not relly expect many answers. This is the second reason why Lens of the Week is not really an appropriate title. 3. Instead of Lens of the Week I will call this thing KMP Lens Discussion, and will usually abbreviate it as KLD in my message subjects. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Teleconvertor suggestion
Recently Alin Flaider wrote: The problem with the macro teleconverters is the additional 1/2-1 stop of light loss, that reduces a f/2.8 lens to f/8 instead of f/5.6 - as do normal 2X teleconverters. I suspect this is due to the additional extension required by the helicoid mechanism. Hi Alin, You are right. The light loss is due to the extension -- it simply moves the lens further away from the film = the image circle increases = the image brightness decreases. However, a Macro converter set at 0 additional extension (if that is possible) would only cost you the normal amount of light loss, so a Macro converter is not an evil thing. In fact, it can be as good as a standard teleconverter but with the additional advantage of a helicoid ext. tube (with all positive and negative consequences). Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: teleconverter question
Recently Kevin Thornsberry wrote: I was wanting to put a 2x-L on my A*300/2.8 until I checked Boz's site which says the L converters are for focal lengths greater than 300 mm. Can I or can I not use the 1.4x-L and 2.0x-L on my A*300/2.8? Hi Kevin, I use the exact Pentax wording: S = to be used with lenses up to 300 mm. L = to be used with lenses over 300 mm. This of course leaves the 300 mm lenses without suitable teleconverters. My understanding is that both the S and L ones can be used with the 300 mm lenses (except the 300/4.5). Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
15/3,5 - A15/3,5: number of aperture blades
Hi, In my pages I have listed the 15/3,5 lens to have 6 aperture blades and the A 15/3,5 having 5. Is this correct? Thanks, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: lens of the week: 2000/13.5 and M 2000/13.5
Hi, a question to the optical-formula gurus. Pentax describes the optics of this mirror lens as 6 elements in 4 groups. Looking at the diagram that they provide us, I see 8 elements. I will number them 1 through 8 when looking from left to right. 1 and 2 as well as 5 and 6 seem to be forming the two two-element groups (like the optical formula suggests), but what about the rest? I am thinking like this: - elements 2 and 3 must be mirrors, so they might not be counted towards the number of optical elements. Now we are down to 6 elements which agrees with Pentax. But the number of groups is now 5. - alternatively, element 8 is the screw-on filter, so that might not be counted. Then we are left with 7-5. Still doesn's fit. Your ideas are welcome. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
KMP lens of the week
Hi all, "The time has come for all good men..." Ooops, sorry. The time has come to start filling up the lens descriptions and optical properties for the lenses listed in the KMP (www.phred.org/pentax/k/lenses/primes/). For now only the primes, but also coming up are the zooms. So, the idea is like this. I've prepared a page dedicated to each lens, with space left for a short description and for optical performance evaluation. I call upon your knowledge and experience in helping me write these descriptions and evaluations. I propose that each week I/we feature 2-3 "lenses of the week." During that week we will discuss the lenses proposed (by me probably) from the previous Friday. At the end of that week I will sum up the opinions and will write up the lens description and optical evaluation. I will also clean up the lens image and optical diagram as much as I can, and we will have 2-3 additional "complete" lens pages per week. Of course, at that tempo it will take us 2 years to do all lenses, but that's the best that I can do. How do you all like the idea? Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
lens of the week: 15/3.5 and A 15/3.5
Hi, This is the first attempt to start a lens of the week discussion. Let's see how well it goes. SMC 15/3.5 SMC-A 15/3.5 What is your opinion of this lens? Is it any good? What do you use it for? What do you like about it? How well built is it? How is the lens handling (weight, size, etc.)? How about optical qualities: resolution, contrast, color, distortion, bokeh, light fall-off, etc.? Can you make a better picture of it than I already have on the KMP? Is there any piece of information about the lens that I am missing that you can provide? Please post your answers to the PDML. TIA, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phred.org/pentax/k/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
lens of the week: 2000/13.5 and M 2000/13.5
Hi, SMC 2000/13.5 SMC-M 2000/13.5 What is your opinion of these lenses? Are they any good? What do you use them for? What do you like about them? How well built are they? How is the handling (weight, size, etc.)? How about optical qualities: resolution, contrast, color, distortion, bokeh, light fall-off, etc.? Can you make a better picture of it than the ones that I already have on the KMP? Is there any piece of information about these lenses that I am missing that you can provide? Please post your answers to the PDML. TIA, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phred.org/pentax/k/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
lens of the week: FA 50/2.8 Macro
Hi, SMC-FA 50/2.8 Macro What is your opinion of this lens? Is it any good? What do you use it for? What do you like about it? How well built is it? How is the lens handling (weight, size, etc.)? How about optical qualities: resolution, contrast, color, distortion, bokeh, light fall-off, etc.? Can you make a better picture of it than the one that I already have on the KMP? Is there any piece of information about the lens that I am missing that you can provide? Please post your answers to the PDML. TIA, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phred.org/pentax/k/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
KMP lens of the week [2]
Hi, Just a few additions. My intention is to gather comments by single people and write a summary, something similar to the pages that Arnold Stark and I have done for the M40/2.8 and the FA 43/1.9 Limited. I am aware that Stan Halpin has already collected and made available most of the past PDML lens discussions. I am also aware that Alex Nemerovsky (BOA) has done work similar to what I propose. The difference with the KMP will be that all the info will be all together (lens description, specs, image, optical evaluation, discussion of accessories, etc.) and that I will be the "editor" (for good or for bad). Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Question on RARE Lens
In the package with my recent LX, I also got a very strange lens. It's marked "ULTRA-MICRO-TAKUMAR 1:1.3 30mm". "ASAHI OPT. CO. JAPAN" has a screw mount on the rear of the lens that is smaller than 42mm . . . maybe 37 or 39 Recently William Robb wrote: It sounds like a bellows lens for the pre spotmatic era cameras. I think they had a smaller thread mount than M-42. It might make a pretty good enlarger lens for big enlargments from 35mm if the thread size is correct. I wonder how much it would cost to have an adaptor cut so it could go onto an M-42 bellows... This all sounds right. 37 mm should be the correct value, and adapters can even be bought (ask Fred Wasti about it). Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Error in Lens Resolution Tests!
Recently Yoshihiko Takinami wrote: Oops! I am very sorry. I found out from my doctor that I have a rare eye condition that throws my vision off by an infinitesimal amount. So all of my lens tests are wrong and should be ignored. Sorry for any problems. I hope no one ever read them. Hi Yoshihiko, I am sorry to hear about the probolem with your eyes! Is it appropriate to tell us a bit more? In which way are the resolution results affected? My first take on this problem is that as long as the results are CONSISTENTLY wrong, they are CORRECT. In other words, we are not interested in absolute results but in the RELATIVE resolution of one lens compared to another. With that in mind, I would encourage you to not give up on lens testing. Best wishes, Boz PS: I am writing from home and have not yet read my e-mail at work. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP update
Recently David A. Mann wrote: The previous release was just fine. I am not sure why my old browser OK, I know the problem then. I will fix it in the next release (I have made the background of the orange-black image transparent; but the background of the frame black; your browser understands the transaparency of the GIF but not the background color of the frame). Although I do think the FA*24/2.0 looks naked without its hood :) I am alsways enthusiastic to receive better images than what I already have. Hint, hint, hint... Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP update
Hi David, Recently David A. Mann wrote: My old web browser (IE3.0) doesn't understand the background colours in your frames. It renders the text in your top and bottom frames as orange on a grey background which is just about impossible to read :( :( The problem here must be the style-sheets that I use. In general, I try to use only constructs that are available on all/most web prowsers, and am reluctant to adopt "new and better technologies". But I feel that frames improve the navigability of the KMP, so I fully intend to staw with them. The problem that you are having, with style-sheets, is a slightly different one. There I could achieve the exact appearance without style-sheets, but it would make the job of maintaining the KMP unmanageable (at least for me, alone and unpayed). Or did I misunderstand you, and this is a new problem only with this KMP release? Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: ZX-30 Questions
Hi, Recently T Caleb Fauver wrote: In the archives someone refered to the ZX-30 as crippled. What exactally does this mean? How is the camera crippled? Does this refer to the fact that only certain lenses can be used with this model? See http://www.phred.org/pentax/k/extras/K-mount/crippled.html for a detailed discussion. Basically, Pentax has built a long-going reputation for compatibility between bodies and lenses of diferent ages, and we are all a bit disappointed when two bodies come along (30 and 50) that throw all that away... just for the sake of saving a few pennies in production costs. Can I use any A, F, or FA lense as long as it has the 'A' setting on the lense? Like others have already pointed out, this is correct. As long as you know and respect this limitation, you have a perfectly good camera. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: TTL flash
Hi David, Within the Z-1p I believe the TTL flash sensor is centre-weighted. This is the case with all Pentax bodies with TTL flash. So if you're trying to flash a small object close to the lens, where the background is comparatively much further away, the flash ends up overpowering the subject to try and achieve an acceptable average over both foreground and background, within the coverage of the sensor. This is a common problem with center-weighted metering, not just with TTL flash with a center-weighted sensor. Common solutions are (I am sure not new to you) matrix metering and manualy setting an exposure compensation value. I figure that a better way of doing this would be to control the flash by making the lens communicate its focus distance back to the body, and the flash communicate its GN. The body can then figure out exactly how much flash power to apply for a correct exposure at that distance, as a fraction of what the flash can actually provide. For consistent results the flash power would have to be controlled by the flash itself, perhaps using a sensor behind the tube used in a similar fashion to the old auto-flash sensors (I wouldn't want a totally open-loop system). What you just described is "modern" auto-flash operation. The only difference is that by "body" you mean "camera body," and by "body" I mean "the photographer's body." In this setup you completely lose the advantages of TTL flash: correct metering with filters, tilting and swiveling flash, etc. Has anyone actually implemented such a system? I'd totally love it for my macro work, and any portraiture where the subject doesn't totally dominate the frame. I guess that what you really trying to describe is a TTL flash with a matrix meter controlling the flash burst. Of course, for such a thing one needs to compose the photo, then fire the flash once without opening the shutter, determine the matrix of constants to use for each metering segment, and then change the shot (flash once again and shutter also). There are two problems that I see with this, and both are bad but not enough to spoil the idea completely. First, your subject needs to sit still between the pre-flash and the actual flash. Second, you need a very powerful flash in order to be able to fire it twice within a very short time. One simplification can be done, however: use a TTL-flash matrix meter and couple it to the active AF point. Then you will at least have the subject that is in focus exposed the same as 18% gray. In this case there will be no need for a pre-flash. Just my "random" thoughts... Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Flash sync of SF10/SF7
Hi all, I have received an e-mail in which a user of an SF7 body claims tat the flash sync is 1/60 (and not 1/100 as indicated in the KMP). Can anyone confirm or disconfirm this? Is "disconfirm" a real word? :-) TIA, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Panoramic Mode
Recently Paul wrote: I have an MZ-5n which as most of you know has a panoramic format. My = question is how exactly does this work bearing in mind the standard 35mm = frame size. Does the image spread over two frames or is the effect = created during the processing stage? =20 The top and bottom of a single 35 mm frame are covered, so the elongated image is recorded only on the middle 1/2 of the frame (full width, 1/2 height). Also I have read in magazines that the same effect can be acheived by = taking the usual image then cropping top and bottom followed by an = enlargement of the remaining elongated image. Is one way better than = the other? In the USA you normally get 4x6 prints. A panoramic negative gives you a 4x12 print, and you pay the same as two 4x6 prints. The machines handle this "automatically". You can achieve the same result by making an 8x12 print then cropping off the top and bottom portions. The end result is the same, but the money you spend is different. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Re[2]: TTL flash
Recently Alin Flaider wrote: To me it doesn't matter much as long as I still have to compensate to avoid getting 16% grays out of deep blacks tuxedos or pure white petals. And, as long as I have to think about colour reflectivity, why not take the time and do the compensation trick for too eccentric or too small subjects, or too prominent foregrounds. I agree with that. My only pet-peeve is that flash comp on the Pentax bodies is not as easy or as intuitive as is it can be. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
KMP update (2)
Hi all, I am a bit surprised that there have been no comments on the latest KMP release. I consider this particular update to be a major one, and I would like to have some feedback. For those who have time and interest, take a look at the page dedicated to prime lenses. Pay special attention to those dedicated to the M40/2,8 and the FA 43/1,9 Limited. These two I consider finished. All others are under construction. Cheers, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phred.org/pentax/k/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP update (2)
Recently [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My only critique is the resolution test numbers. These seem a bit ambitious. As Mike pointed out, there is more to lens quality than resolution. In addition, I find it a bit confusing to see Yoshihiko's and Fred's numbers together as they are so different. I'm afraid the casual user will be confused. Two good points, Bob. Like I said, only the M40/2,8 and the FA43/1,9 Limited pages are ready. In there you see resolution numbers as well as the deserved discussion of other optical lens qualities. The remaining pages feature only resolution numbers simply because these number I already had, whereas I will have to write the comments (with everyone's help) some time in the future. As to the different resolution numbers from Fred and from Yoshihiko, I agree that newcomers may be confused. For that I will add a "readme.first" link that explains the differences. In fact, this page already exists, I will simply have to make it more obvious: http://www.phred.org/pentax/k/lenses/resolution.html Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP update (2)
Recently Mark Roberts wrote: Oh, and as long as I'm whining: It'd be nice to have text navigation options. It's a personal thing, I admit, but I *hate* imagemaps (and the lack of individual ALT or TITLE tags for the links makes navigation difficult for people with visual disabilities--not that I'd expect too many of them to be visiting a photography web page) Hm, I *DO* have ALT tags. I use image maps because I have no good way of implementing the top and bottom frames in a text-based fashion and still achieving a fixed size frames. And *I* hate "navigation" frames with scroll-bars. The alternative is to add a text navigation menu to each one of the two-hundred-something KMP pages. THis one I am not prepared to do, although, I too do not think that an image-map is the perfect-most solution. OK, I'll stop whining now. The K-Mount page is one of the best Pentax resources on the net. It's clearly taken a *lot* of work and I refer to it often. :-) No offense taken, Mark. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMP update?
Recently =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=E5l_Jensen?= wrote: Are you sure that the 100/4 Bellows, A* 200/2.8, A* 200/4 Macro, K 500/4.5, A* 1200/8 are no longer available? They are still present in Pentax latest price list (January 2001) and present on various Pentax web pages (I guess. I haven't cheked them for awhile but see Pentax Scandinavia, Japan and maybe Germany). Hi Paal, I have changed the eading of the columns now. It says: "Still in production?" I think we are all reasonably sure that the production of these lenses has stopped, even though here and there there are new items still to be sold. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: New LX Screens
Recently Rob Studdert wrote: On 22 Mar 2001, at 20:08, Shel Belinkoff wrote: For those who have used the new screens, are they brighter than the comparable older screen? If so, by about how much? -stop? 1-stop? I just measured the SE-20 vs the SE-60 though the finder (no lens attached, body on a Pilot light table), the SE-60 tested 2/10ths to 3/10ths of a stop faster, damn it looks brighter than that. :-) It's all in the fineness of the matte field, I think. The older screens have a rather coarse matte surface, and therefore the image is very grainy and due to the larger grains, it looks darker. I find the microprism of the SC-69 immeasurably better than the microprism of the SC-21. Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Boz's Website
Hi Tanya, Boz, this site is a credit to you and I personally want to thank you for all of the hard work you must have put in to developing this site. Thank you for the nice words! While it is largely me who does the maintenance and improvements (I call myself "author and editor of the KMP"), it is mostly the PDML members who should be thanked for providing me with info, images, and support. You have saved me from unwise purchases more than once, and also informed me of wise purchases that I could have missed out on if it weren't for your information being available! This I am glad to hear! Best wishes and good luck with replacing your "lost baby"... Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
KMP update
Hi all, I have just made a new release of the KMP. I hope you enjoy it... Cheers, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phred.org/pentax/k/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Sorta OT. Perusing previous photographs
Recently Provencher, Paul M. wrote: Jon wrote Is there a good system to utilise to catelogue and file my photographs that anyone would care to recommend? ... Basically start with the date noted as YYMMDD, then add on the roll number for that day in the format NN where NN is a two digit number using leading zeros, and finally the frame number, again in the NN format. A typical number would look like this: 010321-01-05 - The fifth frame of the first roll shot on March 21, 2001. Since the number of digits should not change (if you routinely shoot more than 99 rolls of film or more than 99 frames on a roll you may want to add a digit to these components) Just by reading the number of the image, I can immediately determine when it was shot and which roll etc. This would, of course, not work for those of us who do not manage to shoot an entire film on a single day. But the system can be adjusted for that. I too have been thinking of developing a system, and my first take would be something like this: - shoot slides, - when a new film is picked up from the developer: - throw away all that are not at least very good, - record a running number on each "keeper". Let the numbers run continuously, regarless of topic/subject/occasion. Continue increasing the running numbers with the next film that you get developed. - file the keepers in transparent slide pages. - for each "keeper" enter all vital info in a computer database. Things that might go in the DB are: slide number, image category or categories, date, film, lens, exposure info, etc. The lens and film will be identified only by a single number that is a key in a table dedicated to films and another one to lens details. In this way I can easily find out all images shot with lens #8 or on film type #3. I can also get more fancy and find all images that were shot on a particular date with a given lens but not with film type #3, etc. If I need to take these images out of their storage, I will have to pull images from various slide filing sheets, and will then need to file them back in. Both of these operations are not a problem because the slides a numbered sequentially, and I know that there are 20 slides on a page. What do you all think? Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: ZX-5n - Good price at BH photo
Recently Eric Lawton wrote: Now what do I do? MZ-S, PZ-1p, ZX-5n ? I can only afford to buy one camera. If the MZ-S comes in at a street price of ~US$900 I doubt I'd purchase one. If I could get a MZ-S for US$700 I might go for it. But I could get a ZX-5n and a nice limited lens for the same money. I bet that the 5n with a limited lens on it will take much better pictures than an MZ-S without a lens. Wouldn't you think so too? :-) Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Ghostless coating: which lenses have it?
Hi all, I need to know which lenses have ghostless coating. Please only reply if you are absolutely sure! I think that it is better to send replies to the list so that I do not receive many mails with the same information. TIA, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phred.org/pentax/k/ = __ __ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
A* 200/4 Macro: exact name
Hi all, I need to know the exact name that appears on the barrel of the A* 200/2.8 Macro ED lens. TIA, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Ghostless coating: which lenses have it?
Hi, Recently Alin Flaider wrote: It was mentioned on the FA 35/2 press release and possibly for the FA 20-45/4 too. For sure ghostless coatings is associated with the new 24-90/3.5-4.5. It was also mentioned in the press release of the 28-105/3,2-4,5. Can anyone confirm for the 20-35/4? Thanks, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
