RE: PAW: From my recent trip to Northern AZ, and Southern UT.
Well, if it's of any interest, the four images I shot for my panorama, It took maybe 10 seconds. Since it was handheld, I just hopped out of my car with my *istD, walked over to the edge, snap, snap, snap, snap, with the foreknowledge that I would be stitching them. Then when I got home, and after I had loaded my images, and done some editing, I found those 4. I fired up panavue, and within maybe 10 minutes, I had the stitched image. After a crop, and some image adjustment, voila. Very simple, very easy, and I didn't have to lug around a tripod, or a heavy camera, or wait for film processing, or pay for film or processing. I used to own a Mamiya 6x6. I found myself never using it, and yearning for the *istD. So I sold it, and haven't looked back. Thanks, Jeff Jonsson Marriott Library, University of Utah 801.585.5587 -Original Message- From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 12:46 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: PAW: From my recent trip to Northern AZ, and Southern UT. Methinks you have this backwards from a practicality standpoint. Stitching multiple exposures is hardly a practical substitute For a simple single LF image Well of course it can't offer all the benefits of an LF image but for wide high pixel count images the great works that are popping up here are excellent examples of what can be achieved without investing in any extra kit but a software package (of which there are free packages) and a little post processing. == Just a little post processing? What about all the time and effort to take The photo? That's what I am talking about. I am sure I can setup and Expose one large format photo much faster and easier than taking a whole bunch Of little shots and spending more time stitching together. And with a single LF Image at least you can see entire image for composition and also shoot For the decisive moment, like waiting for perfect sunset or the wind to die down, or the clouds to open up, not so with multiple images and stitching. One nice thing about stitching is you can go wider than you widest lens For extreme wide angle photography. But you can do that with any format, Dslr or LF. JCO
RE: PAW Before the fishermen
Good shot, great technique. Don't you just love photoshop? Of course some may say pictures are becoming hyper-real. They sure are pretty though. -- Of course maybe with photoshop, our pictures are becoming more about what WE perceive, than what the camera perceives... Thanks, Jeff Jonsson Marriott Library, University of Utah 801.585.5587 -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 1:42 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PAW Before the fishermen This PAW is the product of an experiment the focus of which was to preserve the colours of the sun rise and sky in the image without sacrificing all detail in its foreground. To form the image I selectively combined two shots from a +_1 stop bracket in Photoshop. I pasted the darker image over the brightest image, registered the images (set top layer opacity temporarily to 50%) and then set about selectively erasing the areas of the darker image (good sky) with a feathered brush at 25% opacity until I came up this: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2412599size=lg It's not perfect but it gives me a lot of ideas for future images along the same vein particularly given that it was only hand held. Comments and criticisms welcome. 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: PAW: From my recent trip to Northern AZ, and Southern UT.
The FAJ had no problems with vignetting that I could see. There was maybe 1/4 of the image overlap. It was all handheld. If the folks on the list have never looked at or used Panavue ImageAssembler, ($64 from www.panavue.com) let me tell you it's the absolute bomb. I tried lining up the 4 shots using Photomerge in Photoshop CS. It was a joke. I plugged them into Panavue, set my flags to the same points in each photo, and voila, what you see is what you get. Panavue seems to look closely at each photo and warp them just so, to produce one hell of a nice panorama. The original is about 8000 x 2000 pixels. I have printed it at 12 x 47 and I'm gonna have to redo it. I somehow got the color balance all wrong and it just looks green. Ah the joys of print color matching. Thanks, Jeff Jonsson Marriott Library, University of Utah 801.585.5587 -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 6:19 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PAW: From my recent trip to Northern AZ, and Southern UT. On 1 Jun 2004 at 9:24, Jeff Jonsson wrote: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2407474 That's pretty amazing, well done. How did the FAJ hold up WRT vignetting and CA? How much overlap did you allow and did you use a tripod and calibrated pano head? What were the dimensions (in pixels) of the final composite and have you printed it poster sized? :-) 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
18-35 vs. 16-45.
Has anybody compared the optical quality of the two new aperture ring-less lenses? I am going on a week long road trip through the Southwest next month, and want to get a super-wide zoom for my *istD and was wondering if I could get away with buying the far less expensive 18-35. Is there a third party super-wide zoom that anyone would recommend for the *istD? Thanks, Jeff.
Re: 18-35 vs. 16-45.
Hmm, the lightness will seem different when I take my Tokina ATX Pro-II 28-70 off there. I think I may just go for the 18-35, because it's probably all I can afford right now. I just wanted to see if anybody hated it. Thanks, Jeff. - Original Message - From: Tanya Mayer Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2004 2:19 PM Subject: Re: 18-35 vs. 16-45. Jeff, I see in a magazine today that Tamron has just released a 17-35mm DI (i think!) f2.8-4 lens. The DI stands for Digitally Integrated, I think. I could be mistaken though and have this confused with another lens as I had a lazy night on the sofa reading lots of photography mags last night! lol. Anyways, the Tamron lens looks great, not sure how it is priced though. I have the FAJ 18-35mm. I really like this lens. I have been achieving some great results with it, and it really does offer bang for the buck. The only thing I believe that lets it down is that it feels so light, it makes me think that I am shooting with a toy! lol. The results speak for themselves though, and this is obviously not the case. Also, it is a bit slow - f5.6 at 35mm. At GFM, I will be able to compare the two, and I'll keep you posted. Hope this helps some. tan. - Original Message - From: Jeff Jonsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 2:59 AM Subject: 18-35 vs. 16-45. Has anybody compared the optical quality of the two new aperture ring-less lenses? I am going on a week long road trip through the Southwest next month, and want to get a super-wide zoom for my *istD and was wondering if I could get away with buying the far less expensive 18-35. Is there a third party super-wide zoom that anyone would recommend for the *istD? Thanks, Jeff.
RE: *ist D sensor noise survey
Ok, what about actual dead pixels? Mine seems to have a couple. Does anybody else see them, or should I be considering sending it back? Jeff. -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 8:37 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: *ist D sensor noise survey Hey it's a while since we had a survey... I'm interested in making an informal survey of the noise performance of our *ist D cameras. Anyone with access to a PC who has permission to run the little test app at http://www.starzen.com/imaging/deadpixeltest.htm can participate. One exposure is all that's required for the test however in order to achieve consistency we need to make sure that each camera is set up the same. I propose that the test shot should be made as follows: 10 seconds manual exposure (lens capped) 200ISO Daylight WB NR off Saturation setting (middle) Sharpness setting (left most) Contrast setting (left most) sRGB CS TIFF L file The tiff file can then be opened and tested under the default settings of the DeadPixelTest application and the information file saved. I ran the procedure above and the results were as follows: [DeadPixelText] Version=1.0 Description= FileType=TIFF NumBadPixels=15 0=Hot,2798,135,69 1=Hot,1954,339,113 2=Hot,1809,585,64 3=Hot,726,610,112 4=Hot,726,611,192 5=Hot,726,612,112 6=Hot,2312,753,121 7=Hot,323,766,94 8=Hot,572,1365,116 9=Hot,1627,1400,64 10=Hot,2163,1958,96 11=Hot,2162,1959,113 12=Hot,2163,1959,145 13=Hot,2164,1959,112 14=Hot,2163,1960,98 The first two numbers is the pixel location and the last number is the heat, 0 being off and 255 being full on. So I have one pixel that's 3/4 on at 10 seconds. If anyone would like to mail me their results I'll collate and publish the data later down the track (I'll keep data sources anonymous if requested). 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: *ist D sensor noise survey
I haven't done the test, I can actually see the two pixels in my images. They're stuck on, and appear as bright dots. The same two pixels in every image, at least those with dark enough subject matter that they can be seen. I have dead pixels in my Canon Powershot G1, but the canon manual actually says that a certain few pixels will always die on the chips they used. They show up larger in those 3MP images, than the two pixels in the 6MP images from the *istD. The easiest way to spot dead pixels is to take an exposure with your lens cap ON. I encourage list members to try this, and let's see how many of you have them. If they are to be expected, then we can all just accept them, if not, then those of us that have them can send our cameras back to pentax for warranty repair. Thanks, Jeff. -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 4:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: *ist D sensor noise survey On 10 Feb 2004 at 15:22, Jeff Jonsson wrote: Ok, what about actual dead pixels? Mine seems to have a couple. Does anybody else see them, or should I be considering sending it back? Doesn't sound so good, none of the six test results I've seen so far show dead pixels. 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: D - Not Pentax but an interesting digital save...
Works for me. Jeff. -Original Message- From: Tanya Mayer Photography [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 2:36 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: D - Not Pentax but an interesting digital save... Ok, so you all know that I'm not shooting digital with Pentax, but this is particularly relevant to all digital users. Just wanted to show you something that I have just worked on from the wedding I did on Monday. This was a GROSSLY underexposed image. Definitely one for the reject pile, but something about the expressions on their faces wouldn't let me ditch it. So, thanks to digital, I was able to save it... What do you all think of the results? The full res. file has some grain, as you would expect being underexposed, so I just added a bit more for effect... http://www.tanyamayer.com/experiment.jpg I have made a lrvly 8x10 inch print from it! Not bad for something that would have been in the trash if it had been shot on film! Also, thanks to you guys who advised me when I asked about using a 135mm lens with flash that only zooms to 105mm, I have been using a flash in manual with the Oly, and have been leaving it set at 28mm, through all focal lengths. This shot was taken at around 80mm, after a day of stormy, humid weather and believe me the bride and groom were SHINY. In fact, the bride barely had any makeup left on at all, and the groom's forehead, well, it actually had beads of perspiration along it. You can see, I was directly in front of them, and the shadow on the background is really quite soft. AND, there are NO hotspots on their faces!! (There were a couple of tiny ones on their teeth that I PS'd) Very little shine is present - the flash almost looks bounced, but it wasn't - it was direct... S, I have ditched my lumiquest stuff, and my stofen's and I am now shooting everything with my flash set at 28mm, the results are so much better. It just means that the flash range isn't quite as high (distance) and I simply move in a bit closer to accommodate... This was at first, a risky way to go about things, and again, it was only due to shooting digital and being able to immediately check the results that I am now confident enough to use flash this way... Any thoughts to add to this? tan.
RE: OT: Notebook Problems :(! Operating System Not Found
I completely agree. The clicking is likely the read head arm wildly moving back and forth between its stops, trying to align itself. Your HD is giving up the ghost, and if you have data you want to save, save it now! Jeff. -Original Message- From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 3:10 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Notebook Problems :(! Operating System Not Found Ryan Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Completely off-topic but I was wondering if anyone's had this problem before on a laptop. Mine's being difficult lately and since yesterday I've turned it on several times only to have a black screen with the words 'Operating System Not Found' after the Compaq boot screen. This symptom's accompanied by a clicking noise from the harddrive. After about a million tries, its finally restarted this morning but I dare not say how long it'll be up for. Sounds like major hard drive trouble brewing. Back up everything NOW! Some research on the net suggests something like a loose IDE connection, which makes the comp not recognise a fixed drive. Not very likely on a laptop but you never know. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
RE: *ist D A24/2.8 vs FA24/2 comparision?
To my eye, the FA* 24 is actually displaying more chromatic abberation than the A/24. Am I wrong? Jeff. -Original Message- From: Dario Bonazza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 5:30 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: *ist D A24/2.8 vs FA24/2 comparision? Rob, a sample (center and edge) is published in my *ist D test: http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p11e.htm Browsing is slow now, maybe the web's got some problems today (or is it just my ADSL provider?). Dario - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 2:11 PM Subject: *ist D A24/2.8 vs FA24/2 comparision? Has anyone compared the performance of the A24/2.8 and the FA24/2 on the *ist D? I'm not all that fussed with the size and the chromatic aberrations (toward the image the edges) when it's used on the *ist D. 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: Scanning Question
Actually being a scanning expert for my job I will try a response... The Imacon Flextight is essentially a drum scanner, and as such has a pretty good DMAX, 4.6 for the 646 to be precise. And, I'm not sure (because it doesn't say in the BH big book) but I think it can do up to 16-bit grayscale. Of course TIFF only supports 8-bit grayscale, so if you're scanning with TIFF files as your format of choice for the end-result file, I wouldn't scan in RGB. You'll end up with a file that's more than 3 times as large, and won't really gain any tonality you won't get with a 16, or even 12 bit grayscale image. Obviously you can only work with the 12 or 16 bit in Photoshop, and save as PSD, but if you're down-converting to 8-bit grayscale for your TIFF, then scanning in RGB is overkill by an order of magnitude. The Nikon Coolscan 8000 scans at 4000dpi, and again, can produce a 12-bit grayscale image. Also, it has a DMAX of 4.2, it should pull out quite a bit of shadow detail. My opinion, as someone who has overseen the scanning of over 20,000 grayscale images at high resolution, RGB is just not useful, and you won't get a better tonal range by doing it. In fact, if anything, you'll just get a muddier image, and waste disk space. Shel, please contact me directly if you need any more advice. I work at the Marriott Library, at the University of Utah in the Digital Technologies division. One of my primary job duties is managing workflow of large-scale scanning operations. If you want to see some of our output visit this website: http://www.lib.utah.edu/digital/digcol.html Here at my shop, we use the Nikon Coolscan 8000, a Coolscan LS-2000, two CreoScitex Eversmart Jazz+ flatbeds (true 2900 dpi across a 16x20 bed), a Leica S1 Digital scanning camera (effective 25MP) a Zeutschel 1 A1 bookscanner, and some other assorted scanning devices, so I have some pretty good experience with high end equipment. Thanks, Jeff Jonsson Digitization Systems Analyst, Marriott Library 801.585.5587 -Original Message- From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 12:01 PM To: PDML Subject: Scanning Question Hi gang ... Over the next few weeks I'm going to attempt scanning a lot of conventional BW negs. I have heard a number of conflicting opinions on the best way to do this. Most comments center around whether to scan in RGB or greyscale. Greyscale would be nice as I could save some space, but if RBG will give higher quality results, I'll bite the bullet. I have scanned using both methods before, although with the help of a friend who did most of the work and setup, so I'm still pretty much uneducated and inexperienced wrt the subtleties. Scanners used will be an Imacon Flextight 626 (I believe that's the number) and the Nikon Coolscan IV 4000dpi unit, if that makes any difference. Thanks for any help, shel
RE: Scanning Question
Paul's advice works well if your scanner is only capable of scanning grayscale at 8 bits. Also it helps if the DMAX of your scanner is below 4. However, with a 16-bit grayscale image, you'd have 65536 shades of gray to play around with. And again, downconverting to a TIFF is gonna strip out 65280 of those shades, however you will get the widest gamut on your remaining 256 shades. Don't underestimate the power of your high-end equipment to produce a better looking grayscale than a $100 flatbed scanner. And you can always add sepia or selenium by using making a Pantone Duotone of your grayscale image. Jeff. -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 2:46 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Scanning Question I scan BW negs in RGB. That way I can control the look of the gray or tone them a bit toward a sepia or a selenium look if I wish. Plus, I think I get better gradations of grayscale in RGB. When I want small files I convert the scans to grayscale in PhotoShop after they've been scanned, cleaned and adjusted. Paul Shel Belinkoff wrote: Hi gang ... Over the next few weeks I'm going to attempt scanning a lot of conventional BW negs. I have heard a number of conflicting opinions on the best way to do this. Most comments center around whether to scan in RGB or greyscale. Greyscale would be nice as I could save some space, but if RBG will give higher quality results, I'll bite the bullet. I have scanned using both methods before, although with the help of a friend who did most of the work and setup, so I'm still pretty much uneducated and inexperienced wrt the subtleties. Scanners used will be an Imacon Flextight 626 (I believe that's the number) and the Nikon Coolscan IV 4000dpi unit, if that makes any difference. Thanks for any help, shel
RE: AF 400T and *ist D?
Got slightly bad news for you, The *istD has a problem with TTL flash metering. It tends to be off about 1 or more stops with any TTL flash. To minimize the problem, set the ISO to 400 as there has been some speculation on the board that it works best there. Also, I've been using an auto-flash (Vivitar 285HV) with the camera set manually, and I get a very good exposure. It is also speculated on that the AF360FGZ with P-TTL works better than any other TTL flash. We're waiting for a TTL bug fix in the next firmware update from Pentax. Jeff. -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 23, 2004 7:10 AM To: pentax discuss Subject: AF 400T and *ist D? Can the AF 400T flash be used with the *ist D. Can it be used in TTL mode? Can it be used in TTL mode with K or M lenses? Paul
RE: Tokina 28-70 f/2.6-2.8 Pro II
I have the Pro II, and I like it very much. I don't know if I have any examples I can show right now, but I have been very pleased with the results with my film bodies. I haven't used it much with my *istD. In general, I'm not real thrilled with what I'm getting from my *istD in general... Regardless of lens :( Jeff -Original Message- From: Rothman, Aric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 11:42 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: Tokina 28-70 f/2.6-2.8 Pro II Anyone use this lens? If so, comments on, or links to web images made with this lens would be much appreciated. In particular, anyone use it with the *ist D? Aric -Original Message- From: Fred [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 1:31 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Q: SMC-A 50mm f:2.8 Macro It's a good lens that might go for $150 if you were patient. A 50mm Macro means you will get quite close to your subjects. You can use it as a walking-around-lens, but you will notice the slower f2.8. Ditto, dito, and ditto. It has the reputation of being an excellent macro lens. Seems like the 50mm macro is a sharp little beast! It is a very nice 50mm macro lens. It is just a tad less sharp than the F/FA 50/2.8 Macro lens design, but it's s-o-o-o much nicer to use (focus feel, etc.). I use an A 100/2.8 Macro lens for most of my macro shooting, but I still keep an A 50/2.8 Macro lens around for occasional use (especially for traveling light) - it's just too nice a little lens to let go of... Fred
RE: A bizarre ebay experience.
You can relist, but you're still gonna owe them the listing fee and their cut on the purchase price. I'd send an two emails a day, and then 4 emails a day, and then an email an hour, etc. until I got a response. They need to clear it up for you. Jeff. -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 5:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: A bizarre ebay experience. Yes, I filed a complaint with Safe Harbor. But thus far I haven't heard from anyone. I may just relist. The alleged buyer has not contacted me. Perhaps he only meant to place a first bid in order to track the auction. On Jan 14, 2004, at 6:42 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: Bruce Dayton wrote: Did anyone notice a recent change in the look of ebay - specifically on the feedback page. More usable and sortable for the feedback. I'm not quite sure when it went in to effect, but, changes like that could perhaps account for some odd problems elsewhere. Obviously, programming changes have occurred. Maybe Paul is a victim of Ebay bugs. Bruce YUp - feedback page change caused some errors getting on and loading today - very annoying... everytime they make things better they get worse. Paul, gosh - that sucks. but could be a hacker as someone said. Did you try contacting SAFE HARBOR? annsan Wednesday, January 14, 2004, 2:11:25 PM, you wrote: MWMK My question may be: Is there a hack in the ebay system that allows MWMK buyers to trick ebay into thinking they won a BIN when it wasn't BIN? MWMK Second question: Did you examine the headers of the email to be sure MWMK they came from ebay? MWMK IL Bill MWMK On Wednesday, January 14, 2004, at 04:00 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: I'm the seller. And I'm scrupulous :-). My complaint is that ebay accepted a buy it now bid, and this was not a buy it now auction. Rothman, Aric wrote: If you get no satisfaction, would you share the eBay ID of the seller? It's good to know from who to say away. There is a serious flaw in the feedback system at eBay. Unscrupulous sellers can hold you as a feedback hostage. That is to say, they will not supply feedback to a completed transaction until you do. That way, they can retaliate with negative feedback if they swindle you and you leave negative feedback for them. One eBay seller (and sizeable brick and mortar dealer) is Zeff Photo. Last time I checked, they have 100% positive feedback. They shouldn't. I purchased a Bronica EC with lens from them, and paid immediately using a method they would accept. That should equate to immediate positive feedback for me. I held up my end of the transaction. The camera and lens has several immediately obvious defects not disclosed, and it locked up after a few shutter triggers. I obtained return authorization and had it shipped back via FedEx. I was contacted a few days later and was informed the damage was due to RETURN trip to Zeff, and I would have to make a claim. Since I am not aware of any temporal anomalies in the vicinity which would cause damage manifest a few days earlier to have a cause several days later, I was skeptical, to say the least. Long story short, I got a refund, but not for the significant shipping charges accumulated during the whole ordeal. Their eBay guy told me I was lucky and he was doing me a favor. Some favor, to the tune of $45 lost to unnecessary shipping expense Zeff Photo has a good reputation, but the guy who managed the eBay department did not give me a square deal, and he engages in this feedback withholding strategy I describe. I am in feedback limbo with them. Aric -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 3:45 PM To: pentax discuss Subject: OT: A bizarre ebay experience. I'm very POed at ebay. Among other items, I listed a Spotmatic Motor Drive camera and 50mm lens on ebay the other night. I set a first bid of $375 and did not specifiy a buy it now price or a reserve. Last night I received a notice that the camera had been purchased on a buy it now bid by someone in Japan. I have tried replying to the ebay message to indicate that there is some kind of mistake. I've filed a report with their mediation service, and I've written the purported buyer. All to no avail. I've heard from no one, and my auction has been down for almost 20 hours. What's more, a list member had hoped to purchase the camera and had planned to bid on the last day. I don't know how to resolve this.
RE: OT: Kodak APS cameras
Nitrate film stock is responsible for the fire in the crowded theater saying. Movie theaters would routinely catch fire while they were using nitrate film. You know how movie films sometimes stick in the gate during projection and you see a frame burn? Well with nitrate stock, that would produce an explosion. Jeff. -Original Message- From: Keith Whaley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 12:43 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Kodak APS cameras Okay, but what does the fact that silver negatives that last hundreds of years have to do with a nitrate based film not being made anymore? It's the nitrate that decomposes and becomes dangerous over time, not the silver. It's the nitrate content that made the film industry abandon it for use in movie film, and I'd guess later in home consumption films. keith whaley Herb Chong wrote: yeah, but people talk about silver negatives lasting hundreds of years. Herb - Original Message - From: Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 3:47 AM Subject: Re: OT: Kodak APS cameras I don't think anyone has used a nitrate based film for dozens of years, maybe 30!
RE: For sale Friday - oops.
Oops, Meant to reply about Joe Wilensky's post. He's the one selling the PZ-1p kit. Same thing. Joe, don't do it! Jeff Jonsson -Original Message- From: Jeff Jonsson Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 8:13 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: For sale Friday I wouldn't sell my PZ-1p for an *ist D. No way, no how. As far as I am concerned, the PZ is still the best camera Pentax has ever produced. (Not having ever played with an MZ-S.) I absolutely love my PZ-1p. I am still in the infatuation stage with my *ist D. Jeff Jonsson -Original Message- From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 8:07 AM To: pentax list Subject: Re: For sale Friday On 9/1/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: Folks I have few bits available on ebay and so should promote them here, I believe. ME2 Winder Mint- 100mm F4 Dental macro 'A' series Some new 6x7 body caps An LX box! Some other bits A couple of interesting flashes: Cokin Creative Flash Sunpak 120J Bare Bulb kit http://www.stores.ebay.co.uk/cameradirectbrightonest1998/plistings/list / all/de pt4/index.html?dir=1col=4sotimedisplay=2 Kind regards from sunny Brighton Looks like the latest firmware has pushed Peter into a decision - looking for an *ist D mate? ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
RE: FS Friday: 50mm f/1.4
Aha, that's what BH is for! Jeff Jonsson -Original Message- From: Rothman, Aric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 8:59 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: FS Friday: 50mm f/1.4 William, Thanks for the info. I wended my way back through recent messages and found the details. The ist-D keeps looking better and better. I really enjoyed working with it at the store. The problem is, Pentax lenses seem hard to come by, at least here in the US. Does Pentax have a greater presence elsewhere? I am planning a trip to Europe this year, and would love to go on a Pentax glass shopping spree. Local camera store/shows don't often have Pentax-made lenses, just the third party stuff. Aric -Original Message- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 10:45 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: FS Friday: 50mm f/1.4 - Original Message - From: Rothman, Aric Subject: RE: FS Friday: 50mm f/1.4 Mark, What modification had to be made to make the M series lens work on the ist-D? I tried to use the very same lens on an ist-D at the local shoppe, but could only use it at full aperture. Camera software update. It was released yesterday. William Robb
RE: Question or better yet, idea
I say that since the *ist is not a digital camera per se, there would be no way to upgrade the firmware, without sending it back to Pentax to have whatever ROM chip that holds the operating information, upgraded or replaced. Jeff. -Original Message- From: Boris Liberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 10:26 AM To: PDML Subject: Question or better yet, idea Hi! Pentax has proved by giving an example that a camera with crippled mount is not really so crippled. I wonder, whether they can produce an firmware upgrade for *ist, MZ-30 and similar cameras... Especially, with compatibility with M and K lenses, *ist may become quite attractive camera, right? What do you say? Boris
RE: My Meager wedding experience (Was: Cheap bastards? -was: Down off my high-horse... with a thump.)
I've read the books, I also warn people about the risks. I'm an amateur, not inexperienced. ;) Thanks, Jeff Jonsson -Original Message- From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 8:16 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: My Meager wedding experience (Was: Cheap bastards? -was: Down off my high-horse... with a thump.) For those about to venture into wedding photography, be careful and buy a few books on it. My wedding photos and planning was much better after some good reading. I also felt compelled to warn the client up front that photography processes are not 100% reliable and there is always a small chance of something going wrong. That way if something did go wrong they would be more willing to accept it. Also, when things went right ( they always did thank God ) they might tend to be a little more thankful for the photos they did get.. JCO J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com
RE: wedding photography...ugh!
Well, I know for sure it's not To Ride the open steppe, feel the wind in your face, and have a falcon at your wrist. -Original Message- From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 10:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: wedding photography...ugh! Leonard Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the best life lies in being able to do something you enjoy, and make a living at it, then I think Monte is doing pretty well. Whether we approve of his approach and style or not. It's just so easy to criticize successful people, when we know we can shoot better than they can. Oh, but I *couldn't* shoot better than him... within his particular specialty. I just detest his photos :) If I were going to go into business doing that kind of work I'd probably study his stuff intently because it's clearly successful. BTW, I thought the best in life was To crush your enemies. To see them driven before you. To hear the lamentation of their women. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
RE: Cheap bastards? -was: Down off my high-horse... with a thump.
Wow, must not be in Utah. Around here they literally check your Temple Recommend card at the door. You can only get one of those from your local ward bishop. I've been inside a Mormon temple too, right after they build them, they do publc open houses. Then they dedicate them, and forevermore bar non-members and even non temple-worthy members. I'm only talking about Temple Weddings. Once in a rare while, they will do a wedding in a Ward house (chapel) with the local bishop presiding. Mainly when one of the parties to the wedding isn't temple worthy. Case in point, my brother (athiest) married a Mormon and they had a short but sweet marriage in a Ward house. Jeff Jonsson -Original Message- From: Bob W [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 1:08 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Cheap bastards? -was: Down off my high-horse... with a thump. Hi, I've been to Mormon weddings and inside Mormon temples, and I'm an atheist. -- Cheers, Bob Wednesday, January 7, 2004, 7:53:12 PM, you wrote: Hey, around these parts (Utah) there are no photogs allowed in the LDS (Mormon) Temples. So all the pics the couple gets are portraits outside the Temples with temple as backdrop, and pictures at the receptions. Oh, and non-Mormons are not allowed inside the temples at any time, so as is sometimes the case with converts, one half of the family is not allowed to even GO to the wedding ceremony! Not being Mormon myself, I refuse to call Mormon Weddings Weddings I refer only to them as receptions because that's the only part I'm ever invited to. Jeff Jonsson
Getting way OT, Was: RE: Cheap bastards? -was: Down off my high-horse... with a thump.
The official LDS church based in Salt Lake City does not practice or condone Polygamy. Those who practice it are excommunicated from the LDS Church. However those who practice it do believe in the prophecy of Joseph Smith, and use The Book of Mormon as their holy text. So I guess you could call them fundamentalist Mormons. And no, Polygamy is not legal even in Utah. Believe it or not, with the official Church's blessing the State of Utah is trying to crack down on Polygamists. In fact, a Polygamy summit was held by a bunch of county and state attorney's this summer to formulate a plan to go after them. A big famous Polygamist, Tom Green, was just sent to prison on a sex with a minor conviction for sleeping with and impregnating his 14 year old umpteenth wife. What pisses me off is that his legal team is now appealing on the grounds of the Supreme Court's ruling on the Texas Sodomy case. I'm sorry, but having sex with minors doesn't come under that ruling to my way of thinking. One of the major major problems with Polygamists, is that they are a huge drain on the welfare system. Because they don't allow the wives to work outside the home, and can never hope to support their gigantic families on one Man's salary, they take gobs and gobs of welfare handouts to support their illegal lifestyle. I hope the State does come down on them and come down hard. Jeff Jonsson -Original Message- From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 1:15 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Cheap bastards? -was: Down off my high-horse... with a thump. Aren't the mormons the ones that engage in legal polygamy? jco J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -Original Message- From: Bob W [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 3:08 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Cheap bastards? -was: Down off my high-horse... with a thump. Hi, I've been to Mormon weddings and inside Mormon temples, and I'm an atheist. -- Cheers, Bob Wednesday, January 7, 2004, 7:53:12 PM, you wrote: Hey, around these parts (Utah) there are no photogs allowed in the LDS (Mormon) Temples. So all the pics the couple gets are portraits outside the Temples with temple as backdrop, and pictures at the receptions. Oh, and non-Mormons are not allowed inside the temples at any time, so as is sometimes the case with converts, one half of the family is not allowed to even GO to the wedding ceremony! Not being Mormon myself, I refuse to call Mormon Weddings Weddings I refer only to them as receptions because that's the only part I'm ever invited to. Jeff Jonsson
RE: Cheap bastards? -was: Down off my high-horse... with a thump.
Judging by what you've said, and I don't want to pee in your cornflakes here, but I'd say you went to the Ward, not a temple. They don't have sacrament meetings in Temples. Only Ward houses. Also your non-mormon friend marrying a Mormon would not have been married in the temple. (Temples weddings are actually 'sealings' where the couple is sealed together in this world, and the next, through a vaguely Masonic ritual, wholly unlike any wedding you've ever seen.) Weddings in Ward houses have almost no more significance to Mormons than a Civil marriage. Ask my brother. Temple weddings are what all of the faithful aspire to. Jeff Jonsson -Original Message- From: Bob W [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 1:52 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Cheap bastards? -was: Down off my high-horse... with a thump. Hi, Wow, must not be in Utah. France and England. When I was 14 I went with a school friend to stay with our pen-friends in Reims. We were looking forward to 2 weeks of binge-drinking and chasing French girls. Turned out our pen-friends' family was Mormon. We were very disappointed. They dragged us along to the temple on Sundays and we took communion. We were quite excited at first, but they turned the wine into water. Even then I was an atheist. Luckily they were not too strict on other dietary matters. They had bought a teapot and some tea especially for us. They brewed up and served it to us at 5 o'clock precisely every day, and watched while we drank it. Later one of my friends - not a Mormon - married into a Mormon family. The wedding took place in the temple in Leeds, UK. As far as I know, nobody was excluded for not being a Mormon. Certainly all her family and friends were there. The reception was in a different place. Very strange, a wedding reception with no booze. -- Cheers, Bob
Flash Photography and *istD revisited.
I have also noticed that my Sunpak MZ-440AF just completely overexposes everything when attached to my *istD. I was beginning to think something was wrong with it. I've used it with my PZ-1p, and ZX-5n with no problems, in fact been very happy with it. Shot a couple of weddings with it in fact... I only have one other TTL flash for Pentax, the AF220T and that seems to do a slightly better job, but it isn't very spanky. I want to get the AF360FGZ, but I'll hold off if people think there's a real firmware issue that needs to be solved. Of course Pentax has never been speedy at anything, so I wouldn't count on a firmware upgrade any time soon... Unless we all begin flooding their mailboxes with complaints about TTL flash exposures... I think tonight I'll try out my 285HV and see how that does. Does anybody think that's a bad idea? I know they've had some voltage issues in the past, particularly with the 283, but mine is a fairly new 285, and I've used it successfully on my PZ. Thanks, Jeff Jonsson Marriott Library, University of Utah 801.585.5587
