Re: End of Pentax 35mm?
Rick Of course I had to take a gander over to KEH to see this, which is sooo dangerous to my wallet, ahem. I should clarify that I did not look at any Manual focus models as I'm a modern kind of guy that way. It really is good to see the Pentax PZ-1 holding it's value so well, but help me here, why is a PZ-1p in the same condition rating as a PZ-1 less money? The PZ-1 is a great camera...have one love it, however I also have the PZ-1p, which kind of has a tendency to overshadow the PZ-1 in a big way. I am curious as to which models you were looking at in the Canon section that were so.cheap? If they started with the word rebel or were from the 6xx series though, I don't count those, heh! I suppose they would be the equivalent to the mz or zx line in Pentax though. Dave Re: End of Pentax 35mm? Rick Womer Sun, 26 Feb 2006 06:08:37 -0800 Dave, Maybe some of these people paying a lot for Canon 35mm on Eekbay should look at KEH, where Canon and Nikon 35mm SLRs are going for considerably less than Pentax ones (except, of course, that Pentax has no competitor to the EOS-1 series or the F4 or F5). Rick
Re: End of Pentax 35mm?
Hi Gang As someone who has already went to Canon digital, and has been hunting for good Canon film bodies to supplement my kit there on Ebay, I can tell you the competition is hot and heavy for used Canon film bodies. The EOS 1 (xx) series cameras are totally hot items to have to bid on and ahem, pricey. This leaves me with the feeling that consumers still want film and find film useful, but it is all about positioning oneself around a system that has a future. Canon's future in the digital world seems secure thus far, and thus of course the following I speak of. I offer this thinking not on a Pentax list to rub anyones nose in it, but in reference to where 35mm film is today. I never sold my Pentax equipment though as it was my first love, besides I have to have keys to get on this list right? I still have some of my Minolta equipment, but now am selling it off slowly piece by piece until it is gone. Konica-Minolta closing up shop sure could be a door open for Pentax Samsung. However to grab this market share they are going to have to hop because Sony taking over Minolta could prove to be big. I really would like to see Pentax keep putting out good cameras and make some money at it. Sure I defected to Canon, but I still love my pz-1p and, ahem. way too many others. Dave Re: End of Pentax 35mm? Paul Stenquist Sat, 25 Feb 2006 14:19:19 -0800 For all practical purposes, SLR 35mm is pretty much the realm of one manufacturer -- Canon. On Feb 25, 2006, at 4:16 PM, Kevin Waterson wrote:
yahoo weird
Yahoo is being weirdI just got this message back from them that I sent to the list on the Dec 25th. I wondered about not seeing it, but I know that several on the list replied. So you guys got it but not me until now! Anyone else having this problem? - Original Message - From: Dave Miers [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2003 12:02 AM Subject: [Minolta] Processing color negative film Hi All this talk of film getting harder and harder to get processing has made me think that maybe I should pursue this idea of mine to process my own. I only need to process the film into negatives and have no need of prints from a lab as I will scan and digitally process from there. I've searched somewhat for info on this and haven't found out what I need to know or what equipment I need to buy. If anyone is selling this equipment I might be very interested also, but first I need to get a handle on what I'm getting myself into and how much it will strain my wallet. I know many of you don't like the time and effort involved with all this scanning etc, but I truly get a much better sense of satisfaction with this process then just picking up my pictures from the lab. I feel that processing the negatives as well would not only make me more independent, but also enhance the satisfaction I get from this. Any advice on this subject would be greatly appreciated. Dave To unsubscribe from this list please send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]. Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Minolta/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: Epson 3200 (was: New Scanner)
I own the Epson 2400 and when I was having difficulties with the film curling too much I took a piece of glass and laid it on top the the negative which was directly on the scanning glass. If I recall correctly the epson software would not work with this as it was dependant on the holder to calibrate itself, but I was able to do it using vuescan from hamrick software. Vuescan enables you to custom set the cropping area. - Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2003 9:09 AM Subject: RE: Epson 3200 (was: New Scanner) Hey, I did find a quirk with the 3200 that I must share with you. I tried scanning a 8x10 negative assuming I would be able to get a 4x9 crop of it because that is the size of the overhead lamp. I did not use any of the film holders, I just laid the negative on the glass. Result? I thought the scanner was broken because all I got was an overly contrasty and badly streaked image. I nearly sent it back for service. On a whim, I tried going back to 4x5 and the scanner came back to life! While I haven't confirmed this completely, it seems that the transparency mode does not work properly without one of the film holders in place. Of course, Epson makes no claims that the scanner can do 8X10 or 4X9 for that matter, so I have no beef with them. I may try to make a holder of my own to hold the 8x10's with a 4x9 crop and see if that works. I may use cardboard as a prototype. JCO -- -- J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -- -- -Original Message- From: Derby Chang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2003 8:42 PM To: Pentax Discuss Subject: Epson 3200 (was: New Scanner) JC, Sorry for the late response, but I've only just been catching up on PDML mails since Nov. Love the 3200. No big issues with it, scans beautifully. Only minor quibbles: * Wish the 120 film holder could do strips instead of one frame at a time. * The Epson photoshop driver could be better. Can't scan at an arbitrary resolution - I would like to do 2400dpi for small proof prints from neg scans, but it only lets you do 1200 or 3200 (I can downsample in photoshop, but then thats double much more work). On the plus side, the 12-frames a scan is very useful for proofing. I've downloaded v1.25 of the driver and there doesn't seem to be that much of a change. The software dust removal now seems to work sort of, but is more trouble than it's worth IMHO - some nasty artifacts pop up with detailed areas like hair and specular highlights. *Silverfast LE is pretty handy for serious scans, although it only seems to do one scan at a time (but moving the marquee each scan is not _that_ much of a hass). Don't use the dust removal much in this either. The big plus is that it has profiles for different neg types. Saves mucho time colour balancing. Wish it could do 48-bit scans' tho. * Wish it scanned to the edge of the glass, only because that would make it easier to align things against the bezel. I think I've saved its cost already just from not having to develop all the mucking around rolls I've been shooting lately, as well as the weekly 8x12s that I print at home instead of handing over to the labs. I can't compare to a proper 4000dpi film scan, but it looks pretty good to me compared to the wet prints I used to spend a fortune on. D -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~derbyc
Re: more questions from fairygirl....
I'd still be concerned that even if the prongs were made to line up via an adaptor that the voltages and impedances might not match. I'd need a heck of a guaranty that this adapter was going to match that as well. Considering the value of a DSLR I would be very hesitant. A flash I might risk, but a DSLR I wouldn't. Not to mention all the intended flash functions of this unknown DSLR would not fully function most likely. I'd definitely pop for the right flash if I were you Tania so as to be safe and enjoy the full use of the camera as intended. For example focus assist in dark areas can be invaluable and most likely wouldn't work in the adapter situation. Loss of full TTL compatibility would be dismal as well. Just my 2 cents worth Dave I wouldn't think the contacts of the 360 would match up with another company's camera. Crossed-up electronics can be lovely, for a few seconds. Just what I thought when I read the first post. I'm pretty sure, though, that you can buy little accessory adapters that just have the central hot-shoe contact, and none of the others. Here's a fairly fancy one, including a bounce adjustment: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlistA=detailsQ=s ku=89976is=REG
Re: New Pentax DSLR next year
The assumption is that with a 24 x 36mm sensor, that the same quality could be achieved as the current film medium. That would unfortuanately result in the same lens focal length problems as the current APS sized sensor in 35mm sized DSLR's. I've wondered though if the sensor sized/focal length issues couldn't be resolved by simply changing the distance to the sensor from the lens. Would this be doable, or would this result in massive focus problems outside of the lens intended focus range? Rather then make the body thicker a bushing spacer adapter could be inserted in front of the lens or something. - Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 2:09 PM Subject: RE: New Pentax DSLR next year even dumber, why carry around all the excess bulk and weight of 645 body/lenses if the sensor is only 24x36? -- -- J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -- -- -Original Message- From: Christian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 2:06 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: New Pentax DSLR next year Perhaps cotty was saying that it will be a 24x36 sensor on a 645-style chassis? Christian - Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 1:58 PM Subject: RE: New Pentax DSLR next year dumb idea. You have to crawl before you can run. No point in 645 DSLR unless it were full frame and it would be much more likely that they would develop and sell full frame 35mm DSLR, before tackling FF 645DSLR. jco -- -- J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -- -- -Original Message- From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 12:46 PM To: pentax list Subject: Re: New Pentax DSLR next year On 12/12/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: Add to that the bit about two series of lenses by Pentax and it looks like the full frame nay-sayers may be forced to think again!?! the lenses to be introduced in parallel, perhaps five a year. If they manage to do this together with capable Pro DSLR, they have a chance to shake professional photography as they did once with LX! This will take the form of a D645-type camera, IMO. Pentax has no aspirations to re-enter the 35mm-style DSLR professional market. There's no point, Nikon and Canon have it sewn up. Pentax have a big chance with the D645 if they can make it happen - Pentax medium format is respected and used by many professional photographers. If they can unfurl a new sail and ride on the same wind, they'll go the distance. .02, Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: New Pentax DSLR next year
An affordable digital back makes more sense to me since they could include in their market all the existing cameras already sold. If they could produce one significantly cheaper then polaroid does it would upset the medium format world. I don't even think a LCD preview screen would be necessary if the option to immediately download the image in a computer was there. - Original Message - From: Matt Bevers [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 2:20 PM Subject: Re: New Pentax DSLR next year I see the 645 digital solution as being a removable back for a new 645 camera that takes the existing lenses. It gives current users an upgrade path to the new camera (maybe with the new AF from the *ist?) and then the option to add a digital back later if they can't pay for it all at once. But then, what do I know? Well, I do know that by the time I can afford any of this none of this discussion will matter. -Matt On Dec 12, 2003, at 2:09 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: even dumber, why carry around all the excess bulk and weight of 645 body/lenses if the sensor is only 24x36? --- - J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com --- - -Original Message- From: Christian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 2:06 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: New Pentax DSLR next year Perhaps cotty was saying that it will be a 24x36 sensor on a 645-style chassis? Christian - Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 1:58 PM Subject: RE: New Pentax DSLR next year dumb idea. You have to crawl before you can run. No point in 645 DSLR unless it were full frame and it would be much more likely that they would develop and sell full frame 35mm DSLR, before tackling FF 645DSLR. jco -- -- J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -- -- -Original Message- From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 12:46 PM To: pentax list Subject: Re: New Pentax DSLR next year On 12/12/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: Add to that the bit about two series of lenses by Pentax and it looks like the full frame nay-sayers may be forced to think again!?! the lenses to be introduced in parallel, perhaps five a year. If they manage to do this together with capable Pro DSLR, they have a chance to shake professional photography as they did once with LX! This will take the form of a D645-type camera, IMO. Pentax has no aspirations to re-enter the 35mm-style DSLR professional market. There's no point, Nikon and Canon have it sewn up. Pentax have a big chance with the D645 if they can make it happen - Pentax medium format is respected and used by many professional photographers. If they can unfurl a new sail and ride on the same wind, they'll go the distance. .02, Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Neat Image
IMO, the home edition is easily worth $30.00. I've only been using it a couple of days, so I'm still learning. Doing one image at a time, it's no speed demon, but I'm not terribly interested in speed any way and the results look fine to me. I've uploaded a 100% istD crop of one of the photos from last night's concert shot with IS0 3200 showing before and after. http://groups.msn.com/BillOwensPhotos/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhotoPhotoID= 56 Bill I dunno about the rest of you, but I note a considerable loss of detail in the altered image. Dave
Re: new toy
Nah, not the lastI still don't have oneI have the FA f1.7 50mmif you feel really bad about it...I've been really good and Christmas is a great time to share the joy :) - Original Message - From: Francis Alviar [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax Discuss List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:05 PM Subject: new toy No not an *istD but rather just a plain and simple FA 50mm f/1.4 lens. I think I'm the only remaining person on this list who hasn't own or has owned one of these. Excellent build quality and super smooth focusing ring. Can't wait to see the photos. This will come in handy for taking holiday photos. Take care everyone and Happy Holidays. Francis __ Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing. http://photos.yahoo.com/
Re: Luddite posting.
I suppose the biggest thing you should take into consideration is that when people look at your picture, they're not looking at your darn camera. No-one will give a stuff about the camera that took the picture except the photographer. I assume you were not counting the people on this list because if you were to post a really good image with out including the equipment and settings used..that would be most of these characters first question I'd bet...lol
Re: Re: down in the darkroom
Well actually the labs have already dealt with this to a point. You can simply take in your CF Memory card to the lab and they will download and print the pictures from it. However there is of course no negative, although you can get them to put the pics on cd, but of course for a non computer user this seems kind of useless and whether on not you'd get the full resolution copies is questionable from what I've seen of cd's made from film at labs. The quality without doing some prelab editing wouild be an issue, although possibly the quality of the camera's direct output would be good enough for many. Although I still don't see many older people especially wanting to deal with the complexity of a digital camera. Dave Until the labs can truly make it convenient to deal with digital--and it will have to be the labs-- I don't see film dying. Here is a question. If somebody doesn't have a computer, what will he use as a negative? I mean, a print is nice, but most people want the negatives--at least most people I know, and sometimes they actually _use_ those negatives. :-) As I see it, far more people use cameras than use computers. (Although, please correct me if I'm wrong.) :-) But as long as people want a simple, non-computerized interface for dealing with photos/snapshots, etc., film will not go away. It may not be the highest quality, but I believe it will hang around, and even be lucrative for quite some time. Of course, if the labs did find a way for dealing with the computer aspect of digital, then I could see film going the way of the dinosaur very quickly, but without that crucial element, I don't see film going away...
Re: Photo printers that support CF card direct printing(was down in the darkroom)
Yep, the now old and currently being clearanced Epson 785EPX for less then a $100 has a slot to insert an adaptor with a CF card. There is even a small monitor to view the pictures your working with also available for like $40 that plugs in the back of the printer. For a cheap printer it does a good job as well with full 6 ink color quality and borderless 8.5 X 11 prints. I think it supports 1440 dpi if I remember right. I'm still currently using it, but considering upgrading. Any thoughts on the best photo printer available for under $300 today? Standard 8.5 x 11 is large enough for me, although it would be nice to have the capability to do larger. Cost of ink and head maintenance is a big issue for me as well. Dave Some of the newer inkjets up to letter size have this capability, too. That's part of what the new Print Image Management system is for.
Re: Step Away From The Film!
I like your reasoning. If film works for you keep using it. If you need digital go for it. If you really want it and can afford it, go for it. If you can spend your money better on something else you want or need go for that. I am seriously considering getting a good digital point and shoot for snaps and keeping my expensive film cameras for more serious work... Vic That is exactly where I'm at now. I have a 4MP PS that takes pretty good pictures actually if you time the shutter lag right. I really don't use it much though as somehow the better SLR's just sorta call meIf I do anything I'm considering selling out of my Minolta SLR equipment to buy a 645N. Between the Minolta and Pentax equipment I've got way more then one man can possibly use anyhow. I'm not sure why but it doesn't seem to be the medium format camera of choice on this list however. You know I realise more and more every day I contemplate this that my current equipment suits my usage just fine and my biggest reason to convert is to avoid waiting till too late to sell out when my current equipment has little value. Maybe we should threaten the camera, film, and developement companies if they fail to make sure we have film and developement of that film available for the products we currently own with a class action lawsuit for damages. STEP AWAY FROM THE FILM.LEAVE IT ALONEIF SOMETHING WORKS THIS GOOD, DON'T FIX IT!!!
Re: WEBSITE freak out - HELP!!!!!
On my 19 display at 1600 x 1200, a 10 pixel font requires a magnifying glass. Some jerks specify six and eight pixel fonts. I assume they don't want my custom and move on. I've tried running my monitor on that setting as it is much better for photoediting, but wind up having to go back to low res settings for normal work. I tried playing with all the text size settings and nothing really works out to be very useful. Things get distorted and you can't even see all your text in many info and configoration boxes.
Re: BW digital printing
I've found that this works extremely well printing from photoshop with the epsons on color prints as well. It seems the 2 programs fight with each other if you don't. - Original Message - From: Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PDML [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2003 4:58 PM Subject: BW digital printing I've found a way of getting what I consider good BW prints with Photoshop and Epson printers. ImageAdjustmentsChannel MixerMonochrome FilePrint With PreviewShow More OptionsOutputPrint When the printer software opens; PropertiesAdvancedNo Color Adjustment Hope some of you try this and give your opinions. Bill
Re: *istD Pixels Per Inch
Well just as a comparison to scanned images, a 16 bit tiff from a 2800 dpi scanner creates from 50 to 60 meg files, 8 bit is like 23 to 30 meg. I'm not sure off the top of my head what the *istD is generating. I'm also wondering about the quality of the *istD's 12 bit format that supposedly is seen in windows as a 16 bit as compared to a true 16 bit output. I've heard people say that you can't really tell the difference between 8 bit and 16 bit on your monitor, but I can on mine if I view at full res especially. The improvement at 16 bit is considerable. - Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 8:51 PM Subject: Re: *istD Pixels Per Inch What size TIFF is large?
Re: Pentax 28-105mm FA powerzoom
Um, in general I think it's ok to use a flash that's convering a wider angle then the lens, it's the other way around that would cause a visible defect such as vignetting - Original Message - From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 9:16 PM Subject: RE: Pentax 28-105mm FA powerzoom -Original Message- From: Tanya Mayer Photography [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Only problem is that being 135mm, I am unable to use any of my flash guns with it in TTL mode (they all only zoom to 105mm), ???! If you're saying what I think you're saying you're wrong. tv
Re: was*istD Pixels Per Inch:now raw file format at 12 bit
If I remember correctly from the StarkistD's specs the raw file format can be saved in the 12 bit mode. I'm familiar with 8 and 16, but not 12. I know 8 gives you 24ppg and 16 gives you 48ppg with some functions in photoshop disabled. Anyone that can enlighten me as to what you wind up with for specs on this format after processing? 36ppg? Does photoshop handle this well? or are you stuck using some proprietary software that pentax provides to process/convert? Dave - Original Message - From: Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2003 3:26 AM Subject: Re: *istD Pixels Per Inch This one time, at band camp, John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A 6-megapixel image from a *ist-D, printed as a 4x6 image, is around 500 pixels per inch. If you print it at 8x12, then it will be around 250 pixels per inch. OK, the *istD has several options for saving JPEG (Large Medium, Small) TIFF RAW When saving a TIFF as a jpeg in photoshop, it reduces the image from a 17Meg file to about 2.6Meg. How much loss is there in the printing of the jpeg file? Kind regards Kevin -- __ (_ \ _) ) | / / _ ) / _ | / ___) / _ ) | | ( (/ / ( ( | |( (___ ( (/ / |_| \) \_||_| \) \) Kevin Waterson Port Macquarie, Australia
Re: Laptop suggestions
Nope, and now everyone buying a digital camera is entering the same rat race. All the stability of our 35mm will not apply there for sure! - Original Message - From: Tanya Mayer Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 6:01 PM Subject: Re: Laptop suggestions Bill - 2.66ghz!! I thought I was good having 1.7ghz on my home pc!! h, i feel another upgrade coming on, gosh it just never ends does it... tan. - Original Message - From: Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 8:11 AM Subject: Re: Laptop suggestions Back in September we picked up a Toshiba Satellite A25. Pentium 4 @ 2.66GHz, 512Mb Ram and 40GHz HD. After rebate it was ~$1300.00 IIRC. I got it for the very reasons you mentioned. Use in the field for downloading and editing. Something else to keep in mind is an inverter for A/C power and battery charging in the field. Bill - Original Message --- From: Paul Eriksson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 4:47 PM Subject: Laptop suggestions In January I'm going on a extended phototrip and need som memory storage. My first thought was a portable harddrive but I've come to the conclussion that a laptop is a better choise. Now to my question what do you guys/gals suggest/use? The computer will be used both as storage and editing. What about memory, harddrive size, processor, connections(USB, Firewire, etc) the screen? Any suggestions are very wellcome. By the way, my target price would be in the $1200-1500 range, cheaper if possible. Am I asking for to much for that price? thanks Paul _ Shop online for kids' toys by age group, price range, and toy category at MSN Shopping. No waiting for a clerk to help you! http://shopping.msn.com
Re: ZX-7, Tamron 28~200 lens
I'd be interested in the lens, but not the body. Any chance he would separate them? And where might all this be shipped from? - Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PDML [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 4:23 PM Subject: FS: ZX-7, Tamron 28~200 lens Hi Gang ... Selling this for a friend who has moved to a digi. Camera and lens are almost like new. Lens is a Tamron AF 28-200f/3.8-5.6 LD Aspherical (IF) Phew! The kit's been used only on a couple of vacation trips, and both the lens and camera have recently been checked. Both camera and lens have all manuals and paperwork, boxes, caps, hood, Pentax strap, and so on. Nothing is missing from this outfit. $175.00 or ? Might make a nice holiday gift for someone, or you can use it yourself. See pic of outfit at: http://home.earthlink.net/~scbelinkoff/PDMLzx7.html kind regards ... shel
Re: Silly Digital Survey
-- 1) How many have totally given up shooting film and have moved -- completely to digital (That means no film and film cameras in your -- equipment cabinet)? Nope, not me! I've still got loads of film and SLR Camera equipment and normally only shoot film. -- 2) How many are in the process of doing so (like Bruce, who -- is actually -- selling equipment) as opposed to thinking about it, which doesn't -- count in this survey. Well I guess I don't count since I'm still tossing the idea around. -- 3) How many have made the switch to digital, but keep a film camera -- around for one reason or another, although you do not use, -- and have not -- used, the film camera since acquiring your digital camera? Well I own a 4 MP digital PS, but have basically been totally disgusted with it's focusing, shutter lag, lack of decent flash power and no hot shoe, lack of contrast, color, and sharpness, eating of batteries, lack of raw file output, icky viewfinder and the LCD is totally useless outside in the daytime. Did I miss anything? GRRR! So again I leave the digital at home and only use it for selling stuff on ebay for the most part. Thus far I've only found digital aggravating in performance and don't enjoy my experience with this camera (Minolta Dimage s404). I have a hard time being creative with it as I am with 35mm SLR's. I'm really unsure at this point if I would be happy even with a digital SLR and since to finance such a move I would have to sell my existing equipment it doesn't seem logical at this point to me. My biggest concern here I guess is getting taken for the value of my existing equipment in the future if prices continue to drop. If I go digital at this point I would also have to switch to either Nikon or Canon since I've not been impressed with the reports or results of the *istD thus far and it is only a first generation camera as well. The pros seem to think 6MP is enough, but considering the ppi's I get from scanning with only 2830dpi scanner generate a larger image you gotta wonder. If the canon 10D price only had 10 true MP I'd bite I think. For right now I'm considering switching to all canon or nikon though to get in line for it though. That's gonna be tough though as selling my pentax equipment is going to be almost like selling part of myself. Lots of memories there! -- 4) To put the numbers in perspective, how many list members -- are there. -- -- shel -- Well I'm here :) Dave
Re: The morality of taking a photograph
So, if y'want to publish a photo from years before, and y'can't find the subject, and a release is required, whadday do? Fake the release? If you publish and get sued it's bad enough! If you fake the release, you may well have committed fraud and wind up behing bars even!
Re: Nikon to stop selling film cameras in Japan...
I'm having a hard time swallowing the fact that film will be disappearing any time soon. I'm also having a hard time understanding that even film PS will disappear either. Throw away cameras that probably require the same processing are also very hot items for the occasional family photoshoot. My reasoning is based on plain old dollars and cents. I'm not sure the majority of any public is ready for shelling out the dinero for digital cameras at today's prices. Consider that you can buy a 35mm PS for $35 and a pretty decent one for under a $100. Also consider someone can break into SLR market for under $200 or less. In the case of PS which is the real mass producer, I'm guessing that would be 5 to 6 times as much. Going on the Canon Rebel price about 4 times as much for SLR. I'm thinking the purchasers of digital cameras in general are a lot more serious about photography then the average person. What percentage of the total market does this cover? I realize prices will keep coming down, but will they ever really compete with film-based equipment on this level. Does or will the AVERAGE user actually even take enough photos to justify the price. Whether you print in your home or have prints made, processing still costs about the same. Based on this line of thought it might also be feasible to easily saturate your market if it does not really include a wide population base. I can't remember where, but I have seen it in print that others think the digital market may be overrated and easily saturated. The one thing they have going for them is I would bet the digital cameras won't last nearly as long and will have to soon be replaced. If not for that because they are soon be outdated. You would think these manufacturers would have done their homework in statistics, but you never know. If any line would be discontinued I would expect it to be prolevel film SLR equipment as this market probably will switch to all digital very soon. This line of thinking would lean towards more film SLRs, but expect them to be of the *ist variety. Fortunately they will still all burn the same film that we also use in our better cameras. Although probased film lines may well disappear...ugh! A plus for film is the amount of RD that is still going into film scanners as well. I'm actually surprised at the amount of enthusiasm on this list for this modern equipment. For some reason I always pictured the average Pentax user as a more conservative type of photographer that enjoyed the manual cameras without autofocus even. One last point, I've been considering going to the New England School of Photography in Boston, and according to the agenda on their website an awful lot of work is still being emphasized in the old fashioned darkroom. Why would they continue to teach this if it was obvious that digital is the future? Dave - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 1:08 PM Subject: Re: Nikon to stop selling film cameras in Japan... On the Leica forum, someone reported that Nikon has denied the rumor. On Friday, November 14, 2003, at 09:17 AM, Rob Studdert wrote: On 14 Nov 2003 at 12:11, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: Well, it just happened: Is anyone really that surprised? Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Tamron
I've never done a lot of sports photo work, but my first reaction is that that sounds like kind of a slow lens for what might be low light conditions. I've also always heard that rule of thumb is usually a max of 200mm for hand held. - Original Message - From: Gary L. Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax Discuss Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 3:41 PM Subject: Tamron Does anyone have any hands-on with the Tamron 90-300 f/4.5~5.6 AF lens? Looking at one for my grand daughter so I'm not looking to spend a ton but do want something that's decent enough to use for sports photography that may end up being used in her school annual since she is on the Annual Photo Team. All comments, thoughts, and help will be appreciated. Thanks! -- Gary
Re: Tamron
IS ??? I might be having a blond moment here, but I'll bite...what or who is that..lol. - Original Message - From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 6:52 PM Subject: Re: Tamron On 12/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: I've never done a lot of sports photo work, but my first reaction is that that sounds like kind of a slow lens for what might be low light conditions. I've also always heard that rule of thumb is usually a max of 200mm for hand held. Dave Miers, say hello to IS. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Publishing and digital photos
Is it possible that the publishers experience was with downloaded low resolution jpeg images? The kind that you can usually click on and download to your computer. These would be a no brainer not to use. But if you had availibility to the original tiff file I really doubt they would know the difference. One other possibility is the question of copyright issues. If you provided the editor with the original negative or slide they might feel more comfortable. However slides can be made from digital images so go figure. - Original Message - From: wendy beard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pdml [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 3:27 PM Subject: Publishing and digital photos Someone on one of the mailing lists I'm on needed photographs for one of the chapters in her soon to be published book. One of the stipulations from the publisher was that they were not to be digital photographs as they didn't reproduce well. Anyone heard of such a thing? It certainly surprised me to hear it. Is it ~that~ obvious if a photograph is digital? If I took a file down to my local photolab and got them to print up an 8x10, is anyone going to know that it wasn't from film? Hot Air, misinformation or what? wendy beard ottawa, canada http://www.beard-redfern.com
Re: Hot pixels
I'm liking the idea all of the sudden more and more that I get a new sensor with each new roll of film. HAR! - Original Message - From: alex wetmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 1:55 PM Subject: Re: Hot pixels On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Uh, what are hot pixels? Defects in the sensor? Yes, they are pixels which always report that they have seen more light than they have really seen. If you look at the picture that I posted from my defective *ist D you'll see plenty of examples. alex
Re: Hot pixels
I just tested my s404 PS and if I put it on 64 iso...I have one hot pixel showing. If I put it on the highest sensitivity...400 iso...ughI got all kinds8-10 second exposures. I'm wondering on the high sensitivity about the relationship to digital noise and hot spots. I ran the program from the link previously listed and it found a couple of dead pixels and about 25 hot pixels. I'm only noticing the one in the pictures I looked at though. [EMAIL PROTECTED]@#$% piece of crap! Film...I think I LOVE YOU! Dave Ok, so the first test ( a 10-second exposure) didn't show anything. I tested again, this time 2 minutes, and got a bunch. Luckily they don't show up except for very long exposures Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 11:02 PM Subject: Re: Hot pixels On 10 Nov 2003 at 21:23, Christian Skofteland wrote: H, my first ist-D had one hot pixel almost dead-center. The new one doesn't seem to have any. I've never seen a sensor that had no defects. Have a peek at the page listed below, it contain preliminary details of a camera for telescope imaging based on the same sensor as used in the *ist D. Of interest is the following passage in the preliminary specs: CCD quality: Grade 1 or better - No bad columns, no dead pixels, no more than 50 'hot' pixels (saturated in 10 seconds). http://www.starlight-xpress.co.uk/SXV-M25.htm Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Published
Congrats! That really is a great shot! What were these difficulties you mentioned with the PZ-1 for this shot? True story: The first night, I took the PZ-1 and found a number of logistical difficulties in using it for this shot. So I chose the WR-90 the next night, largely because of the Bulb Timer mode, but also because it's water-resistant and not an SLR.
Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update
Herb How do you get a 5000 pixel image on one side from the *istD? According to the review in Dpreview the max resolution of the 6.1megpixel sensor is 3008 x 2008 which seems about right since my 4 megpixel PS puts out a 2400 x 1600 pixel image. I can believe you can get to the 5000 pixel mark with 4000 dpi scanner as my Minolta Scan Dual III at 2820 dpi gives me a 3808 x 2576 image on max resolution which is still higher then the *istD. If I use hamricks software I can even get raw files from my scans. I just don't think the 6.1 megpixel standard is high enough for landscape photography work. However digital is wonderful for portraits as they are already softened I would think. David - Original Message - From: Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] i usually rez up my digital camera images to be about the same resolution as my 4000dpi scanner, so that means i end up with digital image files of about 5000 pixels along the longest dimension no matter what my source.
Re: Digital issues
The Epson C80 and other printers makes nice prints from 4 or 6 color inks, due to the small nozzle sizes. The problem is the cleaning cycles. We have central air heat, which drys things out, and at the moment the printer cannot spray a single drip of ink. My own fault; I should have printed a test block of colors once per week just to keep the ink flowing. The same thing happened with the color on the HP printer, but at least you can get a new print head when you get more ink. Too bad HP's older inks turn colors. I've had fairly good luck cleaning my Epson heads with a high grade of isopropyl alcohol. I simply pull out the print cartridges and take a cue tip loaded with alcohol and place a drop in the opening of each print head. I then take a clean dry one and soak up the excess. Replace the cartridges and run a couple of cleaning cycles. So far so good with this procedure. Whether or not there are any negative consequences to this I don't know yet. But what else to do? David
Re: Re[2]: Wireless flash and off camera clips, grips, pips, tips, salsa dips
I also am very interested in this use of slave flash. I would have expected the TTL functions to operate normally on the camera for not only the onboard or external mounted flash but also for the slave flash. If you set the slave for less then you expect to need 1/16 etc, then the on camera flash would make up the difference wouldn't it? It would read the total provided light from both flashes via TTL and provide the necessary amount on the on camera flash to provide correct exposure. I'm not saying I know this to be true, but rather pose this as a question. Dave No TTL that way. You must manually set flash output and probably meter manually. Also need to take into account the popup flash on the MZ-5n. If you want off camera flash and TTL, you are going to need cords and connectors from Pentax.
Re: Digital issues
Not really. You can get decent results from a dedicated film scanner at around half the price of a *ist-D/D100/10D (or something quite close to the price of a 300D), but the cheaper units are usually just flatbed scanners with transparency adapters, which don't work as well. You might consider the Minolta Scan Dual III for under $300 new. Check the reviews on this scanner and I think you'll find it is rated quite highly. No, it's not a perfect solution, but does offer the digital world to many of us at an affordable price. Since I own this scanner I am finding it quite hard to justify a DSLR at this point, since a good share of my motivation is controlled by my Wallet! Dave
Re: Re[4]: Wireless flash and off camera clips, grips, pips, tips, salsa dips
Bruce Could you please explain this further. I had actually planned on the slave providing most of the light and the popup or hotshoe mounted flash providing the minority of the light. I'm afraid I'm still a bit lost here. I have the PZ-1p and PZ-1 cameras at this point and have no wireless to play with as yet in my Pentax equipment. I also have acquired a professional stand type modeling flash with 3 variing outputs from a local photographer that retired, only $40, and of course would like to implement it. Unfortunately I do not possess any metering equipment other then on camera metering. I have the AF360FGZ and a couple of other off brand flashes for pentax. one of which supports TTL and AF. I had planned to use a minisoftbox on my hotshoe on camera flash with the slaves. Dave You are basically correct if the popup flash is stronger than the slave and ambient isn't too strong. The problem is, that the reason to move the flash off camera is to make the main light not be direct. In your proposed approach, the popup becomes the main and the AF360FGZ becomes the fill. The desired lighting effect is probably not really what you are looking for. You either need something to control TTL on all flashes, including ratios or run all the lights manually and flash meter for correct exposure.
Re: *ist D shutter delay?
If memory serves me correct the D60 Canon had problems with shutter lag and the next one in the series after that. I'm not that up on Canon equipment however. My source was a photojournalist at a local newspaper in the town I lived in. Dave Miers Which earlier Canons would this be? I've never heard any complaints of shutter lag from Canon DSLR users, and I hang out with a lot of them. All the DSLR designs I know of use the auto-focus and metering logic of comparable film-based bodies (and, in fact, often share more than that).
Re: *ist D shutter delay?
Har! That does it! It's now a wanna be Pentax G. Dave Miers If it makes you feel better, they moved the lens release and took the registration dit off the 18-35mm lens. I don't like that so much. William Robb
*ist D shutter delay?
Hi All The previous posts regarding LCD delay reminded me of one of my major concerns wth Digital Cameras. Both digitals I've owned so far have a very aggravating shutter delay. Timing your shot and getting the moment can be a very aggravating problem. Anticipating the moment is difficult enough without having to factor in shutter lag. Can some of you that own the *ist D comment on this camera's performance in regard to shutter lag? Thanks David C Miers
Re: *ist D shutter delay?
Thanks everyone that replied to this post so quickly! They were very positive answers since I had heard that the earlier Canons also suffered from shutter lag. Now all that I have for an excuse is lack of full frame sensor and most importantly MONEY! It would really be better for my wallet if this camera had more malfunctions. OH the pain of it all! David C Miers It is no worse than the ZX-5n that I own or other modern film SLRs. One thing which make shutter lag bad on PS cameras is that the CCD in them is always live, updating the LCD. When it is time to take the picture they need to turn off the CCD for a short amount of time to let it clear it's registers and go completely black. The picture is then taken. The *ist D has no live preview CCD so there is not this source of lag. The AF is also faster than most PS digital cameras. You can usually see why the CCD needs to be cleared on a pS digital camera if you point it at a bright light while using live preview. Often you'll get streaking around the light where the CCD is overloaded. When you snap the final picture the streaking is gone. alex
Re: Scanning 6x7's
Did you clean under the glass yet? My 2400 was dirty right from the start. As I recall it's just a couple of screws to take it apart enough to clean inside the glass. Dave - Original Message - From: David Madsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 9:56 AM Subject: RE: Scanning 6x7's I use an Epson 2450 as well. Mine seems to be getting a little fog on the glass. I have tried to clean it but with not much success. Any ideas? Dave Madsen
Re: Old lenses, *istD, and the Pentax Mad Scientists
One really nice thing about digital photography as far as the educator is concerned is that the camera records all the settings along with the image. With a conventional film camera there's no way that anyone can tell whether I was using an auto-exposure mode or doing things manually. (That's why many photography courses ban the use of automatic cameras). With a digital system the evidence is stamped into the image. If memory cards are collected in the field at the end of the exercise it's going There is at least one 35mm camera that does imprint the film negative with a number and keeps a record of all the settings used for each negative corresponding to that image. I'm not sure if it records whether or not the mode the camera was in or not. Unfortunately it's not a pentax, but rather a Minolta Maxxum 7. However getting the same record out of the camera in print for a couse instructor would be impossible I fear unless there is more to that function then I realise. Just a bit of trivia and possibly something Pentax might consider for their future film cameras. David
