Re: MZ-S Pentax Function 10

[Taz]

 One thing you could try is to
> cover the popup with red cellophane (couple of layers) to weaken the
> flash even further or put a deflector in front of it to put the light
> upwards.

I know some have reported using a piece of already developed negative with
nothing on it for this purpose with satisfactory results.

Re: MZ-S Pentax Function 10

[Taz]

Hi Leon

My experience with wireless flash is not with Pentax, but rather with
Minolta.  So you will have to decide whether my comments have any bearing on
your situation.  As I understand it the operation of the wireless is
similiar.  The communications involves your onboard flash having to flash at
least twice.  Once to start and another for the all stop with full TTL flash
capability.  The flash is not supposed to be a significant amount as to
affect exposures as your manual also says.  Minolta also has a ratio setting
that allows the onboard flash to provide 1/3 of the required flash and the
other external flash provides the rest.  My gut feeling here is that you
would be able to see a reflection in a mirror or a window even though you
wouldn't see it in the exposure.  I know you can see it with your eyes when
it goes off.  What I mean by this is suppose you plan to do a portrait of a
person with the wireless external flash placed off to the side of a person
with no reflectors to thus create a dark shadow side of the person even
though the onboard flash would be aimed directly at the persons face.  If
the shadows occur in the proper place and exposure is correct your equipment
is working correctly.  I would make some more tests without mirrors or
windows entering into the formula.  If you get satisfactory results I think
there is most likely nothing wrong with your equipment.

Cheers

Taz

> Hi,
>
> I'm after a bit of clarification as to how Pentax Function 10 works on
> the MZ-S, before I send mine off for repair.
>
> PF 10 controls how the popup flash will behave when used in wireless
> mode.  The manual says:
> ++
> During wireless operation you can set the built in flash to function as
> a flash or wireless controller.
> Pentax Function No 10
> Setting No
> [1] Sets the built in flash to operate as a flash.
> [2] Sets the built in flash to operate as a wireless flash controller.
>
> Memo
> If the built in flash is used as a wireless flash controller, the
> preflash emitted by the built in flash unit does not affect the
> exposure, only to transmit the exposure information to the wireless
> flash.
> ++
>
> The problem is that I am getting reflections from the the popup flash
> when I have PF 10 set to 2, and I don't think this should be happening
> (and I know for sure the reflections are from the built in flash
> because I have one slide with a perfect reflection of 3 flashes
> reflected in the glass).  For those who have played with wireless flash
> please let me know what you think.
>
>
>  Leon
>

Re: Digital Shutter lag

[Taz]

- Original Message -
From: "Heiko Hamann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 12:36 AM
Subject: Re: Digital Shutter lag


> Hi zcaballero,
>
> on 04 Apr 03 you wrote in pentax.list:
>
> >Do the pentax gigitals have fast working shutter?  What about the new
> >SLR?  Will it have a fast shutter?
>
>
> I think most DSLRs are very usable for action photography. If you want a
> compact digicam, then try the Optio S. Beside its compactness it is the
> fastest P&S digicam I've seen so far.

Actually that is one of the most common defects of digitals including the
DSLRS.  The newest and most expensive ones on the market SUPPOSEDLY have
worked through this problem, but I wonder to what degree and if your regular
SLR will always have the advantage there.  I heard one of the canons can do
8 frames/sec now.  In order to do that it would seem it would have to be
really fast.

Re: Digital Shutter lag

[Taz]

Ha, get in line for information about that.  Pentax had just better hope
they still have a market by the time they get to it.
-
  What about the new
> SLR?  Will it have a fast shutter?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Z
>
>
>
> --
> Prendi GRATIS l'email universale che... risparmia: http://www.email.it/f
>
> Sponsor:
> Il tuo biglietto aereo da oggi lo prenoti on line e risparmi fino a 20
Euro
> Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=1261&d=4-4
>

List too quiet was( Penny Farthing)

[Taz]

> Oh I really hope so.  (It's been kind of quiet around here lately).
>
Yes really!  All the lists I'm on have done this and I'm feeling left out
because I suspect that's because everyone is outside having fun and burning
film like crazy.  Unfortunately it's not that nice here yet...Central
Wisconsin.

Re: Another Use For Older Pentax Lenses and the Optio S

[Taz]

Ha, that means he got lucky and his cameras distance estimation was fairly
accurate...lol.
> I still have people asking about how I manually focused the camera on
> Saturday night and still got some excellent shots with it.  A,
> photographer's secret (said solemnly while wringing the hands).
>
> César
> Panama City, Florida
>
>

Re: Pentax AF 220T flash question

[Taz]

I don't know if this is aplicable to this discussion but I have had some
experience with 3rd party dedicated flashes for Pentax and the older bodies
that did not support TTL.  My ZX-M doesn't support TTL thus is similiar I
believe in Flash requrements to the older Pentax models.  Most of the Pentax
cameras that had at least a program mode would work with in the "auto" on
the external flash.  Thus my TTL based flash that I have which does not have
an auto mode...just TTL matches your description of firing but only manaully
in full power.Thus I'm assuming as long as you get a flash that has this
auto mode setting on it you will find full compatibility...not sure about
the 220T.  I had a 280AF and sold it...dumb meregretting that as it had
both TTL and Auto modes...but didn't give me an autofocus assist that I
wanted for my more advance models.  Just looked this up in my manual and my
ZX-M manual makes specific mention of the AF220T flash and according to my
manual would be one of the most fully functional flashes for this camera
body and it is a manual focus only unit.  Perhaps looking at some of the
downloadable manuals would help here.


> Hi Caveman,
>
> > I found on Boz's site this mention about the Pentax 220T flash:
> > "Despite featuring a completely analog interface, this flash
> > seems to be incompatible with the manual focus bodies."
> >
> > However, I have a vague remembering that someone on this list
> > used (or at least tried) it with an LX.
>
> I too, would be interested to know.  My recollection was that the at
> least two people had problems usign the "new" flash on "old" bodies.
> The flash woul, of course, fire, but it would always fire with full
> power.  Of it is no TTL flash, but fully manaul with 1/1 power.
>
> Cheers,
> Boz
>

Too much gear

[Taz]

Howdy

I know some of you must have the same problem I do.  Plain and simple I've
got too much gearno I'm not doing the sane thing and selling some.
NopeI just want to know how to carry more effectively and efficiently
without killing my back, shoulder, etc.  So I'm wondering how the rest of
you handle this problem.  The fear of a body going on the fritz, or having
the wrong lens for shot drives me nuts...plus since I've got all this nifty
stuff.I wanna play with it all at once.  Taking the one and leaving the
other at home is just agony sometimes ya know.  So anyways tell me your
stories and solutions to this :)

Auto start on photo cd

[Taz]

 Hi
 
 I'm trying to figure out how do get my slide show to start automatically
 when I put the cd in the drive.  Can anyone help me here?  I've tried to
 make a autorun.inf but it's not working right.all it does is bring up
 windows explorer on the cd.
 
Taz

Re: 35mm SUCKS! Try 4X5

[Taz]

I agree wth your disagree... ;)  All cameras serve a purpose and if they do
that , they have done well.  Even point and shoots have their place where
it's not pratical to take a SLR.


> jco,
> the subject states "35mm SUCKS!". i disagree.
> 4x5 is a *special purpose* tool, and as such it is wonderful. it's like
> saying that 50mm lens sucks since 1000mm allows for better quality of far
> away detail, or that honda civic sucks since any formula-1 car is faster.
> btw, 4x5 definitely sucks since 10x12 blows it away quality-wise, doesn't
> it?

Re: Low Light AF Performance (was: Complaints)

[Taz]

It varies a lot from lens to lens as well.
- Original Message -
From: "Bruce Rubenstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 11:45 AM
Subject: Low Light AF Performance (was: Complaints)


> This is another factoid specification that can bite you in the ass.
> Manufacturers give a range that has a low light level and this looks
> like a complete spec, but it isn't. It doesn't tell you how long it
> takes to aquire and achieve focus, or what the contrast of the target
> is. The only way to know which camera really works better is to try the
> cameras out in the same light levels, with the same subjects and the
> same speed & focal length lenses.
> Spec sheets are marketing tools. You have to know what they aren't
> telling you as much as what they are.
>
> BR
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >>
> >>
> >So you have wrong data. AF in MZ-5N and MZ-6 works from -1 EV without any
> >assist and it is much better than +1EV in EOS models you have mentioned.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

Re: Did anyone notice this one?

[Taz]

I'll bet I know why too, look at that shipping price, totally outragous
shipping costs as well as only 4 feedbacks.  Folks on ebay get a real burr
under their saddle when you charge any more then actual shipping costs.  You
well might come out better to include free shipping in the long run.


>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Steve Pearson"
> Subject: Did anyone notice this one?
>
>
> >
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=29971&item=2919002548
> &rd=1
>
> Thats why we don't like putting running auctions on the list. That guy got
> an incredible deal, which he most likely wouldn't have if that one had
been
> advertised here.
>
> William Robb
>
>

Re: Little Pentax quiz

[Taz]

Whoopsmeant to say I have NEVER has a canon or nikon.


> Well me thinks it must either be the hyper adjustment button from manual
> modes or the ability to change the EV adjustment to different rates of
> adjustment(ie .3 or .5)  But then I have had a canon or nikon so I'm
> probably wrong.
>
>
> > Here's a little one-question quiz -
> >
> > What is the one feature that a couple of Pentax cameras have that, as
far
> as I know, no other brand of film SLR has?
> >
> > Hint: It has to do with exposure
> >
> > Hope this isn't too easy! :)
> >
> > ---
> > David Spaulding
> > Photographer
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _
> > Get 25MB, POP3, Spam Filtering with LYCOS MAIL PLUS for $19.95/year.
> > http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus&ref=lmtplus
> >
> >
>
>
>

Re: Little Pentax quiz

[Taz]

Well me thinks it must either be the hyper adjustment button from manual
modes or the ability to change the EV adjustment to different rates of
adjustment(ie .3 or .5)  But then I have had a canon or nikon so I'm
probably wrong.


> Here's a little one-question quiz -
>
> What is the one feature that a couple of Pentax cameras have that, as far
as I know, no other brand of film SLR has?
>
> Hint: It has to do with exposure
>
> Hope this isn't too easy! :)
>
> ---
> David Spaulding
> Photographer
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _
> Get 25MB, POP3, Spam Filtering with LYCOS MAIL PLUS for $19.95/year.
> http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus&ref=lmtplus
>
>

Re: Film Scanner

[Taz]

Hey I'm getting really good at using my new Minolta Dual scan III film
holder, practise makes perfect.  (Hint: koday max film works the best in
this film holder by the way and fugi/agfa film works better in epson
negative holders)
- Original Message -
From: "Brendan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2003 11:07 PM
Subject: Re: Film Scanner


> Whinner, manually loading film is for real men. (
> slapping his fingers with the stupid clam shell
> holders )
>
>  --- Doug Franklin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sat, 22 Mar 2003 13:00:40 -0500, Mark Roberts
> > wrote:
> >
> > > After having owned a scanner that will do a whole
> > roll of negs in one
> > > batch, I don't want ever to go back to the old,
> > manual, "3-6 at a time"
> > > method. I just load up the film and let the
> > scanner do the work while I
> > > attend to other matters.
> >
> > I wish the Canon 4000 would do it with 35mm film.
> > Alas, it only does
> > "whole roll" scanning with APS film.
> >
> > TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
> >
> >
>
> __
> Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
>
>

Re: Re: Suitable body for FA24mm lens?

[Taz]

I don't have a severe problem with the ZX-M and in fact would recommend to
anyone looking for a low cost manual focus solution.  I don't care for the
plastic lens mount but it seems ok and the lack of TTL compatibility.  As to
the ZX-L and ZX-30 never had them.  My complaint is specific to models like
the ZX-50 that do not support M & K mount lenses.

The ZX-M is much like the older styled manual focus models in function and
appearance...other then the plastic and low weight.  But it also sports
several modern electronic functions including DOF.


> Now guys, cool down a tad.  My wife uses a ZX-30,
> ZX-L, and ZX-M.  She loves them.  She knows I follow
> this group,

Re: Film Scanner

[Taz]

Walmart was doing this for about $3.50 including processing if you didn't
want prints.  However I think locally they raised that price by about the
$1.76 they still charge to process your negatives only.  If you want good
quality thoughforget walmart cd.  I've only had one problem with just
getting the processing done there though.  Recently I had a roll of film
with streaks in the last 2 pictures.  I think it was due to the film not
being properly rinsed at some point
>
> Or get your film scanned and put on CD when it gets processed.
>
> --
> Frits Wüthrich
> Pentaxianado
>
>

Re: Pentax <--> Canon

[Taz]

- Original Message -
From: "Keith Whaley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2003 3:21 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax <--> Canon


>
>
> Bojidar Dimitrov wrote:
> >
> > Hi Keith,
> >
> > >   + 50% of the entire EOS system is available on eBay at any time;
> > > 90% can be seen within a month
> > >
> > > What this means to me is, there are a lot of people selling a lot of
> > > EOS gear! Why is that, do you suppose?
> >
> > Because there are at least a 20-fold of Canon users compared to Pentax
> > users.  Not because they are getting rid of their Canon gear to go to
> > Pentax, at least not all at once...

You know it's good to see Boz still here at least, kinda thought he had
deserted us ..  :)

Re: Complaints

[Taz]

I think Pentax's autofocus systems do a good job.  I had occasion to compare
a PZ-1 to a Minolta 700si, both discontinued cameras but from similiar years
I think.  This was at a wedding reception with dim lighting.  I had my
Minolta 700si there as my main camera with a dedicated flash that supported
AF assist.  I noted it was just hunting too much on the autofocus.  I wasn't
getting the shots.  I went out to the car to retrieve my PZ-1 and to my
dismay I found I'd forgotten the dedicated flash for it.  I brought it in
anyways and proceeded to try with the on camera flash.  Even with out the
assistance of a dedicated flash AF assist unit the PZ-1 outperformed the
Minolta in the Autofocus catagorie.  The Pentax AF under such conditions
just sort of nudges it into place carefully taking a sec but does get the
lock.  The Minolta still tries to find the lock going at full bore autofocus
speeds.  There was no question as it wasn't even close, the Pentax was not
just a little, but way superior under the conditions I found myself in and I
did get the shots.  The bad part was if the AF hadn't handled it, I find the
PZ-1 viewfinder a bit dark for manual focusing in lowlight conditions.  The
darker viewfinders can be an asset though when in bright sunlight or
sunset/sunrise photos though.

I realise the previous comments were about Canon, but the Minoltas have
placed fairly decent in the AF race.

You might find this link interesting



> >Not as good autofocus.
>
> A strange statement. The swedish magazine FOTO has found, ever since the
> launch of the MZ-5 in 1996, that Pentax leads the pack in terms of AF
speed
> and sensitivity. Canon has bad low light sensitivity, and are quite slow.
> Nikon has never been a sucess story with it's AF in the low-end market.
> Minolta used to be as slow as Canon, but with the Dynax 5 - they changed
> this so they're not market leader in terms of AF speed.
>
>

Re: Film Scanner

[Taz]

Not sure what you mean by a whole roll scanning.  None of the scanners I've
used support scanning whole roll all at once.  The ones I've used have a max
of 6 and most photoplaces cut them in groups of 4.
>
> >I can get a TWAIN driver to work with Linux so that's no problem...  I
> >have software too.  I am worried about scanning a whole roll feature not
> >working under Linux.  Or is that independent of OS/Driver and done
> >completely by hardware?
> >
> >L
>
> _
> Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
>
>

Re: opinions on A 24-50/4 needed quick!!!

[Taz]

Anything less then 28mm in a zoom is going to cost you the big
bucks.better buy it before I do...and if you don't email me the link off
list ok?
- Original Message -
From: "Łukasz Kacperczyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 6:19 PM
Subject: Re: opinions on A 24-50/4 needed quick!!!


> Also, does the price of $90 seem fair/bairgain or not that good (I don't
> think so)?
>
> Łukasz
> ===
> www.fotopolis.pl
>   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ===
>  internetowy magazyn o fotografii
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Łukasz Kacperczyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 1:06 AM
> Subject: opinions on A 24-50/4 needed quick!!!
>
>
> > The subject says it all. I really need this info quick - I found only
one
> > opinion on Stan's site.
> >
> > TIA.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Łukasz
> >
> > ===
> > www.fotopolis.pl
> >   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > ===
> >  internetowy magazyn o fotografii
> >
>
>

Re: Good-bye Pentax

[Taz]

The need for quiet is one of the reasons I occasionally dig out my ZX-M.
Since it's manual focus no issue there, and the shutter auto advance are
very low noise level in comparison from what I've seen.


> > > The question is: how much quieter is it? I find
> > that I can't use AF on
> > > my PZ1p in a concert hall because it's too noisy.
> > Well, so's the
> > > shutter mechanism but if I could get a quiet
> > shutter mechanism and
> > > quiet AF on a *ist-D, that would make it very
> > attractive for me. It
> > > could even be a quiet motor in the camera body.
> >
> > The Canon regular lenses are very quiet, the USM
> > lenses are almost silent,
> > unless you are a Rottweiler, in which case they seem
> > to sound like
> > fingernails scraping on a chalkboard.
> >
> > William Robb
> >
> __
> A Canona A2 with a USM lens is a stealth machine.
>
> =
>
>  I get it done with YAHOO! DSL!
>
>

Re: New Toy

[Taz]

Ha, it's too early in the year.  I don't think you can do it...lol
> Anyway, I promised my wife it was the last photo buy this year ;-)
> 
> -- 
> Best Regards
> Sylwek
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: Good-bye Pentax

[Taz]

Are you saying there are tooth marks in your lens...lol.
> The Canon regular lenses are very quiet, the USM lenses are almost silent,
> unless you are a Rottweiler, in which case they seem to sound like
> fingernails scraping on a chalkboard.
>
> William Robb
>
>

Re: THE FRENCH

[Taz]

I could go into this much deeper but I felt that this is not the proper
forum nor is it wanted here.  My original statement was intended to be
somewhat neutral and noninflamatory.  Governments in general throughout
history have not reflected the peoples wishes or ideas, but rather that of a
select few, and in most cases the rich and powerful.  I do not feel the USA
is an exception to this and will be regarded in the history books as such.
Governments declare wars, people have to fight them and die.  When it comes
to the media being your source for polls and information, be very careful
what you believe.  Probably before this, but since 911 the radio stations
have been given approved play lists.  They don't necessarily have to follow
them, but I think there is a hidden threat of red tape and license problems
in the future for a radio station that doesn't.  I can't prove the threat
issue, that is my opinion, the play lists however is a fact. Talk radio
proves nothing but what the moderator and the radio station chooses to
promote.  All calls are screened for subject matter and many times may not
even be live, but have a lag for editing purposes.  As to polls it was my
impression that Bush's support has been steadily declining.  I don't trust
that data either though.  Every one of us is the target of a propaganda war.

My apologies to the list, but I couldn't help myself from answering this.
Honest, I did hold back much of what was on my mind.  I promise to be good
now :)


> I've stayed out of this until I came across this ridiculous statement. The
> polls in the US do NOT bear out what you say concerning our government not
> expressing the feelings and convictions of it's people. Birds of a feather
> tend to flock together and so I suppose it's likely that you are
surrounded
> by those who think as you do in this matter. Perhaps this is why you
believe
> that your views concerning the American people's feelings or convictions
the
> are, more or less, universal here. If so, your view actually insular,
> provincial and you need to get out and about more - to places devoid of
the
> folks that you naturally tend to hobnob with. If not, you've had your head
> in the sand. Start by turning on talk radio. You may wish to stay at least
> 10 feet from the speaker though - to prevent discomforting enlightenment.
>
> Regards,
> Bob...
> --
--
> --
> "Do not suppose that abuses are eliminated by destroying
> the object which is abused.  Men can go wrong with wine
> and women.  Shall we then prohibit and abolish women?"
> -Martin Luther
>
> From: "Taz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> > Good show Levente, and I can personally vouch for the fact that the USA
> > government does not express the feelings or convictions of it's people.
>
>

Re: THE FRENCH

[Taz]

Good show Levente, and I can personally vouch for the fact that the USA
government does not express the feelings or convictions of it's people.


> NEVER judge people by their government's actions.  (if you want to go
> down that path, it's probably better for you, Americans, not to travel
> nowadays)  Every person is entiteled to have an opinion about others...
> but don't base it on someone's government's behavior.
>
> I know lots of French people who are open, freindly and I call many of
> them my friends...  They might not like the Bush dinasty but they have
> nothing against the American people.  As far as the snobish ones are
> concerned, I judged them based on a set of rules that are the same for
> everyone... (regardless of their nationality)
>
> God (all Gods) bless all open minded people... and God bless French
> Pentax users :))
>
> Levente Littvay
>
>

Re: K/M lens compatibility really needed? (Re: KAF3 lens mount already here?)

[Taz]

Pål

Consider a previous recent discussion on this list about the inaccuracy of
some lenses in the "A" position.  Consider for a moment that fact that
bodies that do NOT support the older K lense also will not have the
invaluable tool(IMHO) of switching to the old reliable manual aperature
settings for a better exposure error range in centerweighted & spot
metering.  Unless Pentax can come up with a fix for this in to be released
bodies there is an inherent problem.  I believe one member commented that
Pentax is aware of this problem.  I believe our on list tests confirmed it
was not just a couple of bodies affected as was originally acknowledged(PZ-1
& PZ-1p) but others as well bringing one to the conclusion that the defect
is not in the bodies but rather in the lenses themselves.  This proved to be
hit and miss with 3rd party lenses and Pentax lenses with no set pattern of
an average of 1/2 stop off on lenses in the "A" mode.  The accuracy of the
test performed by the various member of this list including myself could of
course be questioned.

If our test are accurate it would seem that lenses in the FA(not sure on
this one with out looking back, F , & KA catagories are afflicted making the
decision not to support K & screw mount lenses an extremely limiting thing
since compatibility with these lenses could also be questioned.


Taz



> I think you're overestimating the "value" of K and M lens compatibility.
Although the marketing value of compatibility of lenses dating back to the
sixties may be significant; like "we make the only DSLR that can use 40 year
old lenses", I think the value is mostly symbolic. Being around PDML for
awhile now I cannot but notice that those who "collect" K and maybe M lenses
are mostly those who haven't bought a new Pentax product in 20 years, if
ever. They are happy with photo gear from that particular era and prefer it
to modern gear. Very few of them will ever buy a DSLR. Among those who are
indeed present Pentax customers and own and use K and M lenses (probably
very few), few will actually want to use these lenses with their K and M
lenses. I believe that many when buying their first DSLR will buy a
camera/system that fit their needs and preferences before a camera that fits
their lenses. I simply believe that many with old lenses will use digital as
an opportunity to buy !
> new lenses.
> I'm sure many disagree with this but I'm certain that the numbers of
owners of K and M lenses that are going to buy a new DSLR is limited indeed.
>
> Pål
>
>
>
>
>

Re: Re[6]: Diaphragm actuator precision survey

[Taz]

I'm sitting here wondering about using the "A" mode with multiple segment
metering etc, and also realising we can analize this issue to death.  The
bottom line of course here is how accurately are your photos exposed in real
life.  The whole thing was designed to work together and to the best of my
knowledge usually does unless the operator goofs.  The range of the possible
existing error is not big enough to be an issue for the most part for print
type film from what I've seen.  I've not shot slide film yet.  Considering
doing so in the near future.  I'd like to here from others shooting slide
film and their opinion of when using the "A" mode on the lense.  What
percentage of the time is the metering/exposure spot on for your slides?
And which model of camera are you using for slides.  I happen to have a keen
interest in results from PZ-1 & PZ-1p as they are the top end pentax's I
have in my stable.

Re: Re[2]: Diaphragm actuator precision survey

[Taz]

Alin

How are they running the tests on the PZ-1 and PZ-1p's, which were the
cameras that were specifically mentioned as having this problem originally.
They have depth of field preview, but it is a manual function rather then
electronic, that only works with the aperature ring actually turned to the
manual settings according to the manual.  It appears to work in the "A"
setting but it actually  always goes to the smallest aperature setting of
the lense when in the "A" mode, thus making it useless there.  I have noted
that the aperature setting noted in the display does not always seem to
match the numbers on the dial while in the middle, but rather somewhere
close.  However the high and low limits are the same.

My biggest question in all this is the metering in Program modes going to
wind up being off because of this, or is it just the manual modes using an
external lightmeter that are messed up.  This whole thing is getting a bit
confusing the more I think about it.  Is the metering even going to be
accurate in the manual aperature modes?  Which one is the camera going to
use for this metering...the actual position of the adjustment lever...or the
information the lens is feeding the camera electronically..ugh what a
mess


>   You can bet they would be the same, always. The whole problem lies
>   not in what aperture/speed the camera displays, but in what aperture
>   is effectively used when closing down the lens. You can't figure this
>   without actually looking through the lens...
>
>   Servus,Alin
>
>

Re: Diaphragm actuator precision survey

[Taz]

Align

I hate to be the one to toss a rock in your gears but I see an inherent
problem with your theory.  On most zoom lenses the f stop changes as you
change the zoom setting.  Thus one reason why your testing proved better on
a 50 mm prime.  You also list that your test was done successfully on
another zoom however.  If the zoom is set on the shortest focal length then,
and only then with the exception of some lenses that claim f stop stays the
same, the cameras shown f-stop will equal what it says on the aperture ring.
I guess I would question the accuracy of doing this type of test in this
manner on any zoom lenses.

I've done some testing by setting the rig up on a tripod aimed at a steady
unchanging scene with a constant midtone color for a large area.  I would
use aperture priority to select an aperture with the ring set on "A", making
sure it was not in between stops but at a full stop setting corresponding to
one available on the dial.  If it's a zoom use again only the shortest focal
length, primes again work better.  Note the corresponding shutter speed
selected by the camera.  Change the aperture ring setting to the same one
shown in the camera, and again note the shutter speed settings for any
change.  I would think theoretically they would be the same if all is well.


>
>   Hi everybody,
>
>   Startled by a recent mention of bodies unable to precisely set the
>   diaphragm aperture, I conducted a small test to see for myself. Not
>   that I care much as I set the aperture from the lens most of the
>   time, but I wanted to know how reliable exposure is for those rare
>   situations when I recourse to program or shutter speed priority.
>
>   Here's what I found: the MZ-5N consistently sets the aperture on
>   FA 28-70/4 half of stop higher across the entire range, from 4 to 19
>   (that is 4.5 instead of 4, ...22 instead of 19).
>   On the contrary, it is very accurate with the FA 50/1.4 and FA
>   80-320/4.5-5.6, where the size of the aperture set by the body
>   matches exactly the one set on the lens. So it seems it depends on
>   the lens, and not surprisingly in this case the poorer built lens
>   performed the worst.
>
>   If you're willing to test your lenses and report back on the list to
>   see if we can find a pattern, here is how to do it.  Note that this
>   works only with bodies capable of electronic depth of field preview.
>   On the bright side, the error is easy to detect.
>
>   - set the aperture ring on the lens to A;
>   - set the aperture value on the body (with bodies like 5N lacking
> this feature just set the shutter speed to some value, measure the
> light and record the aperture selected by the body);
>   - press the DOF button to close the diaphragm;
>   - while keeping the DOF pressed, disengage the aperture ring from A
> and rotate it towards the target aperture value while looking
> through the lens at the size of the physical aperture; the blades
> should maintain their position all the way down from A to and
> including the target aperture; the true aperture set by the body
> is the one before the aperture shape has changed.
>
>   Servus,   Alin
>
>

Re: wrong iso choosen

[Taz]

William

Rather then rant, why not just tell me what film and process can be pushed
in a color print type film.  I just want to know how to push film and get it
properly processed when I only have a 800 ISO film with me and am told after
I'm already there that using my flash is not allowed so that I have other
options.  Not to mention the fact that I can't even find a 1600 ISO film in
the town I live in.  The bigger city about 50 miles away has one store that
has it some of the time.  I scan my own negatives so I very rarely worry
about prints from a lab.  If this has already been discussed to death and
gone over and over...point me to where I can read about it.  I don't know
how to access the achieves from this group yet.

Honestly I'm finding it sad that a simple question is met with so much
sarcasm.  I wasn't aware that this group is only for advanced amatuers and
pros.  Now you've got me being sarcastic....jeeeessh!!!

Taz

>
> This is becoming dangerously close to my starting to rant about how C-41
> film cannot be push processed.
>
> William Robb
>
>

Re: KAF3 lens mount already here?

[Taz]

Part of that possibility is further fostered by the existing DSLR's in both
camps stables.  However the *ist D appearance on the horizon has changed
that idea to a point.  However my buying any DSLR at this time is not going
to happen, I'm rather trying to position myself in the best possible place
for when the prices come down, or if they hold up well enough they come on
the the used market in the next year or so.  I'm also concerned that my
existing investment dollar wise doesn't suddenly become next to worthless
because of the newly released technology and possible compatibility in
different camps.

I may currently make statements that are not yet well researched, but thanks
to those on this group for helping me research it.

I love it when a plan comes together...lol.


> From a compatability standpoint, Nikon and Canon have amoung the worst
> record in the industry.
> Pentax has managed to maintain full backwards compatability with every
lens
> they have made for 4 decades on all but their recent bottom feeder camera
> bodies.
> Nikon requires you to buy top of the heap, and Canon and Minolta just
plain
> abandoned their entire customer base and started fresh in the mid 80s.
> Even if Pentax loses backwards compatability with a new model, they have
> done an extraordinary job of supporting older equipment for a heck of a
long
> time.
> Jumping ship based on the above reasoning is not logical.
>
> William Robb
>
>

Re: Hypothetical question: Cost of a new K1000

[Taz]

Or take the features of the ZX-M and put it in the K1000 metal body, now
that would be a very attractive camera to me.  The ZX-M has been compared as
the K1000 replacement.

> Here's an interesting question.  Suppose that Pentax made a brand new
> K1000, metal body and all>  What would they have to charge for such a
> beast?  Could it be made much cheaper than the Nikon FMA3?
>
>
> Steven Desjardins
> Department of Chemistry
> Washington and Lee University
> Lexington, VA 24450
> (540) 458-8873
> FAX: (540) 458-8878
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>

Re: KAF3 lens mount already here?

[Taz]

> On March 10, 2003 12:38 pm, Taz wrote:
> > Surely not even Pentax can ignore the impact that Ebay has on the camera
> > industry.  Old lenses as long as they are clean are like little gold
mines.
> >
>
> It's a gold mine for you and me. It can't be a postive for the camera
makers.
>
> Nick

True, but to ignore their existance would be foolhardy for pentax when that
is one of the things they have always based "most" of their camera bodies on
in the past.

Re: KAF3 lens mount already here?

[Taz]

Thanks for that update Michael, that would have really erked me to have
fallen into that trap again(remembers trying very hard not to use a zx-50
for a throwing object.)


> Taz,
>
> The Nikon N80 will not meter with nearly all Nikkor manual focus lenses.
>
> Michael Cross
>

Re: KAF3 lens mount already here?

[Taz]

Sigh, this whole thing has caused me to eye up a Nikon N80 for sale that I
know ofgrr


> Are you saying that K & M lenses will not work with
> the *ist D?
>
> If so, I can start selling now and make the switch to
> another brand for digital.
>
>
> --- Pål_Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Boz wrote:
> >
> > > Conclusion: K and M equipment is obsolete.  K and
> > M buyers should buy
> > > Limited equipment (these people want good
> > mechanical build, and nowadays
> > > that costs money).  :-(
> >
> > Very likely scenario. Maybe we can hope for a
> > high-end KAF3 lens series in the fall that maintain
> > the aperture ring? After all, the FA J lenses are
> > strictly entry level with plastic lens mounts.
> >
> > Pål
> >
> >
>
>
> __
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/
>
>

Re: Sinking flagships

[Taz]

Well that or figure out how to get the WINE function for linux working...or
maybe Lindows


> > Rumors has it that Microsoft will shortly publish a new game in the
> > Tycoon series: "Photo Tycoon". I definitely recommend it. It will allow
> > you to spend endless hours of fun, managing your own camera companies,
> > and using your wisdom to design, manufacture and market photo equipment,
> > exactly as it should be done, and not like all these C/N/M/P idiots are
> > actually doing it. It is internet enabled, so you could even challenge
> > Paal at a "who gets the most market share" game.
>
> CRAP!  So this means that this new program will not run on my Linux
> powered laptop...  I am a brand loyal person but if this is true I might
> have to reinstall Windows :)))  I doubt Microsoft will release a Linux
> version.  (It hasn't happend before with any of their crap)
>
> L
>
>

Re: Sinking flagships

[Taz]

But what good would it do me?  My shutter finger doesn't work when it's that
cold..brrr


> See, I told you. All you serious Pentax users should seek camera asylum
> in Norway. No one would make fun of you, or show disrespect for your
> beloved brand of camera, which will be taken care of forever. You'll
> even get your own pet reindeer with flashing red nose.
>
>
> BR
>
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >I expect Pentax Scandinavia to repair LX bodies basically forever.
> >
>
>
>

Re: Sinking flagships

[Taz]

This is where a little planning and looking ahead might be profitable.  From
time to time you see used older cameras sold for parts or "as is" because
the seller doesn't know about cameras or because it's part of an estate sale
etc.  At any rate any camera on ebay that is not given the sellers bill of
health goes for cheap.  Walking into your local repair place or even by mail
with the parts camera on hand may well save you big dollars I would think.


> I believe that camera manufacturers try to keep a 10-year supply of spare
> parts for cameras after they have been discontinued.  If that is the case,
> Pentax should have parts (I hope) for the LX until 2007 or so...  That
means
> that I will probably have my LX CLA'd again around 2006.
>
> However, I suspect that some independent repair facilities may be able to
> CLA/repair LXs for some time after 2007, since the keep broken cameras for
> parts.
>

Re: Help in Canada

[Taz]

I know it's easy to jump the panic button, but truly with international
mail, customs, terrorists etc assuming he got it is a bit much to assume.
Furthermore he might be on a couple of days holiday.  I had that recently
happen with an Ebay purchase myself and I couldn't ask for a better person
to deal with although he doesn't email much.  He happens to be a pro that is
just super busy.  I'd at least give it till Monday evening and then hit the
panic button
- Original Message -
From: "Gary L. Murphy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Pentax Users Group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 11:18 PM
Subject: Help in Canada


> Is there someone on the list that lives in or near, Vaughan, Ontario?
>
> I used BIN on an eBay auction for a AF-500FTZ flash and sent him a
> $240.00 USPS International Money Order. I mailed it last Saturday but
> what is bothering me is the guy has not answered any of the several
> emails I have sent him. He only has 31 feedbacks on eBay, all but one
> are perfect, and the negative was when he was a buyer. (It looks like a
> retalitory strike)  I'm hoping he might be out of pocket, but  needless
> to say, since he has not or will not answer, I'm a bit concerned.
>
>
> --
> Later,
> Gary
>
>

Pros....and do you use Pentax...35mm or larger format

[Taz]

Hi

I'm just curious to see how many pros we have on this list and if they
actually use Pentax equipment in their business?  35mm or larger format,
which models etc.  I guess for a pro how does the pentax stable stack up
against the competition.  I sorta got the impression that most pros use
either canon or nikon, but in answer to another question regarding
professional opinions...several pros are answering which sorta caused me to
raise an eyebrow.

Cheers

Taz

Re: Question For You "Professional" photogs out there

[Taz]

Herb

Could you please expound on this statement?  And does that include
processing service such as I locally available for a premium price of about
$12.00 roll of 24 that includes custom editing before doing the prints?

Thanks

Taz


> so long as they are technically acceptable (only focus and exposure),
never edit unless you own the photos. you will get yourself into far more
trouble.
>
> Herb

ZX-M and classes

[Taz]

I have a ZX-M that mostly sits here and is not being used, I've been
considering selling it, but taking some classes in photography sounds like
fun to me.   I'm wondering about the typical requirements of the schools for
cameras.  I'm taking a wild guess the ZX-M would meet their qualifications.
I've went back a series and am quite taken with the PZ line myself.  Are the
PZ (PZ-1, PZ-1p)cameras going to meet those requirements as well or should I
hang on to the ZX-M?  I do have one other reservation with letting it go
because of the quietness of the ZX-M camera for my wildlife photography.

Opinions?

Re: Flash for LX was MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n

[Taz]

Under this thread comments about the relationship of the flash to position
of the lens if on camera mounted hotshoe flashor bracket attached have
been touched on..  Could you address this issue more thouroughly especially
with the problems of Portrait vs Landscape modes of orientation.  Consider
the mounting of most flashes on the top center of the camera and the
mounting in the PZ line on the right hand side of the camera.  I've heard it
said that that was a good thing being mounted far right.  I would assume
distance is a key factor here with the further away the subject is the less
affect this would have.  If you use the soft box is the lens/flash alignment
issue less critical?

Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series)

[Taz]

It's been my experience on Pentaxs that the speeds on the dial are all that
is available for shutter priority.  However in aperature priority there is a
larger range of shutter speeds available.
- Original Message -
From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Levente -Levi- Littvay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 12:05 AM
Subject: Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series)


> Levente,
>
> One thing to remember about the ZX-5n/3 bodies.  Because they have a
> physical shutter speed dial, they can only represent a certain number
> of shutter speeds.  So the MZ-3 loses one slow speed setting to gain
> the 1/4000 on the top end.
>
> Also, the faster shutter usually has a higher flash synch.  My guess
> is the MZ-3 has a slightly faster shutter synch.  You may be able to
> order one out of Canada if you really want one.
>
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
> Wednesday, March 5, 2003, 8:47:35 PM, you wrote:
>
> >> My hunch is that the camera that handles most like the MX is the ZX-5n.
>
> LLL> This brings up another Q I had for a long time but I never got around
> LLL> asking...  Beyod the 1/4000 exposure versus the 1/2000, is there any
> LLL> difference between these two?
>
> LLL> Is the MZ-3 not available in the US?  (that SUCKS)
>
> LLL> L
>
> LLL> PS: Again... the intention was not to kill the old thread... :))
Keep
> LLL> 'em commin' :))
>
>

Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series)

[Taz]

I'm not familiar with the MX so I can't accurately compare, but the ZX-M has
been compared as the modern K1000.  It is a nice little camera, emphasis on
little, but does not support autofocus or onboard flash if that is where you
want to go.  It does have DOF preview though.  Retail is very reasonable
with new prices $149 or less.  I think in one of your posts you wanted to
learn on professional equipment though if I remember correctly.  I would
imagine that would be the MS-Z.  There are some good values available in
some very capable PZ-1 and PZ-1P camera available out there now as well on
the used market.  $300 to $400 for a pro/serious amatuer body.  Can't say
about the ZX-5n, however the ratings seem excellent.  I personally have 2
complaints about the ZX series, they are TOO LIGHT and certajn models do not
support the K(m) mount lenses(namely ZX-50 for one).  I shake too much with
them, but they are good cameras.

In bright sunlight the high shutter speeds can be wonderful assets.  I have
speeds up to 1/8000 in pentax and even a 1/12000 in a minolta body.  If you
want to blur your background in a portrait type image in bright sunlight
you'll need the fast speeds to run f2 range aperatures.


> > My hunch is that the camera that handles most like the MX is the ZX-5n.
>
> This brings up another Q I had for a long time but I never got around
> asking...  Beyod the 1/4000 exposure versus the 1/2000, is there any
> difference between these two?
>
> Is the MZ-3 not available in the US?  (that SUCKS)
>
> L
>
> PS: Again... the intention was not to kill the old thread... :))  Keep
> 'em commin' :))
>
>

Re: High Speed Flash (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series.)

[Taz]

High speed flash sync gives you further sharpness and clairity to your fill
flash action photos, at least that's my understanding of it

- Original Message -
From: "Levente -Levi- Littvay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 10:44 PM
Subject: High Speed Flash (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series.)


> > What, exactly, is high speed flash sync?
> >
> > Sorry for the dumbness again :(
>
> I know what it is...  (I think)  The feature that lets you use faster
> exposure then my good old 1/60...  BUT?  What is it good for? :))
>
> PS: Sorry, I never used a flash... yet :))  The f1.4 50mm and my rock
> steady hand usually does a good enough job :))
>
> L
>
> PS: Not to kill the old thread... :))  Keep 'em commin.
>
>

Re: Unsubscribing

[Taz]

All work and no play makes a dull boy Paul...see ya soon
- Original Message - 
From: "Lukasz Kacperczyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 7:24 PM
Subject: Re: Unsubscribing


> Come back soon, Paul.
> 
> Lukasz
> ===
> www.fotopolis.pl
>   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ===
>  internetowy magazyn o fotografii
> - Original Message -
> From: "Paul Franklin Stregevsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'Pentax-Discuss'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 2:12 AM
> Subject: Unsubscribing
> 
> 
> > I have a rare chance to earn some overtime pay in the weeks ahead. That
> will
> > leave no time, I'm afraid, for PDML. So farewell, until ... ?
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> 
> --r-e-k-l-a-m-a-
> 
> Szukasz banku bez prowizji ? 
> mBank - zaloz konto
> http://epieniadze.onet.pl/mbank
> 
> 

PZ-1p

[Taz]

Hi all

I just picked up a PZ-1p on ebay and wondered what range of dates was this
camera originally retailed by Pentax.  This one is supposed to be never used
except one roll to make sure it workedso it should be like new.  But
wondering how long it's likely been sitting around.  Also wondering about
High Speed flash...does this camera support that, and if so which flash unit
would everyone recommend for this camera.  I know it syncs at 250, but
unsure about HS support.  Actually I don't know if Pentaxes do that.

Cheers

Taz

Re: Epson Printers

[Taz]

I bought an epson 785epx mainly for 3 reasons.  One it has 6 color ink, two
it does full page photos without borders, and three last fall it did the
best job I've ever seen on photos.  The epson ink and their process makes
the photos come out dry right out of the printer.  I believe it's resolution
is only 1440dpi though.  Some of the other more expensive epsons that were
highly rated didn't do as good in my opinion.  Go somewhere where they will
demo the one your interested in.  Take your own digital photo on cd in with
you and have them print it.  If the store is worth anything they will be
glad to do this.  They did it for me at Officemax.   I find HP to be a
better all around printer for other jobs, but for photos epson rules so far.
I don't think the perfect all in one printer exists.
- Original Message -
From: "Stephen Hoffman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 3:47 AM
Subject: Epson Printers


> I'm wondering what is the general take on Epson printers?  Because I
really
> do need an all in one multifunction printer, I am thinking about the Epson
> CX3200 which advertises up to 5760x720 dpi.  Thanks in advance for all
> feedback.
>
> Stephen Hoffman
>
>
>
>

Re: The Hundred Percenters

[Taz]

Wow...that's big!  But it would seem unusable for anything else.  Everything
else would be so tiny.  So they must run dual monitors and just use that one
for images?
- Original Message -
From: "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 12:19 PM
Subject: Re: The Hundred Percenters


> you have a monitor that does 4K x 3K. they exist.
>
> Herb
> ----- Original Message -
> From: "Taz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 13:05
> Subject: Re: The Hundred Percenters
>
>
> > Please explain this a bit further.  Somewhere I'm in the dark here.  If
my
> > file is 3400 x 2200 approximately how can I truly see the quality when
my
> > monitors top res is 1600 x 1200 and usually it's set on 1024 x 768.  The
> > previously mentioned file size prints out at approximately 300dpi on a
11.5
> > x 8 full page if I remember correctly.  From the tests I've done on my
> > monitor I can tell very little difference from a high res photo to a res
> > approximately at my monitor res.
> >
> >
>
>
>
>

Re: How does Pentax fit into the Japanese market?

[Taz]

Well as you may well know the 9xi is a pro body.  I don't think it's so much
the lenses but rather the bodies them selves and I do really like the way
the minolta bodies fit into my hands.  I say serious as when doing a wedding
and the procession is coming down the axile, and I've got but one chance to
get each shot.  I suppose a landscape is also serious though, but for that I
would choose some old pentax manual focus glass.  Part of it is just being
more familiar with that camera.  Bear in mind that I've only recently
acquired some PZ autofocus bodies and as I become more familiar with them my
thoughts in regard to this may change.  However thus far I'd have to say the
focusing systems seem much slower then the minolta.  That could also be due
to the fact that I have yet to acquire some really good quality pentax
lenses where as my minolta collection isn't just too bad.
>
> What is it about the Minolta lenses that make you choose Minolta over
Pentax
> for "serious" images?
>
> William Robb
>
>

Re: The Hundred Percenters

[Taz]

> i disagree with WR. a monitor's contrast range exceeds that of any printed
medium and can easily achieve just as good color
> fidelity. 200dpi color monitors have been with us now for a couple of
years and they are able to reproduce everything that can be
> captured from a color slide. these monitors cost on par with what 17" and
19" monitors used to cost 10 years ago. that is why
> programs like Photoshop have gamut tools to tell you what parts of your
image can't be reproduced in print. you use.


Please explain this a bit further.  Somewhere I'm in the dark here.  If my
file is 3400 x 2200 approximately how can I truly see the quality when my
monitors top res is 1600 x 1200 and usually it's set on 1024 x 768.  The
previously mentioned file size prints out at approximately 300dpi on a 11.5
x 8 full page if I remember correctly.  From the tests I've done on my
monitor I can tell very little difference from a high res photo to a res
approximately at my monitor res.

Re: How does Pentax fit into the Japanese market?

[Taz]

I think the Pentax smaller size may well appeal to the P&S crowd if they can
make them auto and light enough.  The ZX line seems to have accomplished
this.  For just everyday beating around I like to carry either my ZX-M or
even a PZ-10 with a small light beater lens because of their small size,
light weight, and if something happens to them I won't cry too much.  When I
get serious with a have to get the shot I choose my biggest camera, minolta
9xi, before anything else.  With the MZ-S and to come *ist series I think
they've kind of goofed because these could be classified as semi pro or
extremely serious amatuer cameras.  With the latter market, I would agree
that bigger and heavier is often very desireable.

> The sense I have here in the U.S.A. is that photographers don't really
care
> much about small size in SLRs.  As has been pointed out, the opposite may
> actually be true.

Re: Dedicated lenses for DSLR

[Taz]

> The fact is that the third party Sigma DSLR achieved more interest at
announcement than the *ist D, but does it sell? I agree that Pentax has
become a cheap brand but they cannot survive in the DSLR market by being
cheap as I fear both Nikon and Caon have the market share giving them the
power to be even cheaper.

Just for the sake of competition, from which we, the consumer, would
benefit, wouldn't it be nice if the 3rd parties like sigma built their
digitals to fit more then one lens system?  The same way they build one
lense and make it work on all the most popular brand SLR's.  Oh well it's
nice to dream anyways.

Re: Good news for Pentax: Bad for Minolta

[Taz]

Hi Paul

Yep my Minolta gear is autofocus2 700si's and one 9xi(currently sent
into minolta for repairs..ouch!!!).

But as your comment about what your seeing on the street, I think I've been
seeing mostly digital P&S and a few 35mm P&S.  My friends were all digital
P&S as was I for a while, but the other day we were going for a ride on a
back road and we came up on a field with a bunch of wild turkeys in it with
a deer grazing in the middle of the flock.  Of course we all wanted a pic so
we bailed out and I figured I'd be pretty well SOL because they would scare
them all away before I was ready.  But they stayed and I was able to get my
tripod set up with a 300mm lens with a doubler on my PZ-1.  We had good
light and even with the large f-stop loss I was able to get some great
shots.  My friends always tease me about my "old" film based equipment and
how great their digital is.  But when I got the film developed and scanned
they were the ones eating turkey!  In fact one of them even dumped his
digital and is now currently trying to acquire some 35mm slr gear.  They may
start as P&S, but if they hang around me very long they will likely be
forced to switch to SLR.

I have one older pentax, an A3000 in totally mint condition, but even that's
not one of the classics you mention.  Nor was it every very popular for
valid reasons, but that model was my very first SLR and thus it holds a
place in my stable.  Other then that I guess I like my gadgets too much.  I
tried a K1000, but never saw what folks see in that camera and peddled it a
month later.

Cheers

Taz


> From what I've seen, people may be buying SLRs, but they aren't using them
> on a regular basis. I seldom see another SLR at public events. I don't see
> them out on the street. When I shoot a school event, I'll see maybe three
or
> four other SLRs. One will be autofocus; the rest are vintage models like
the
> Canon AE-1. Ditto for my town's annual parade day: The numbers may grow,
but
> the percentages remain strongly in favor of classic models.
>
> A month ago, I was taking my lunchtime walk and was delighted to see a
> high-school-age young man walking with a Cosina-made Nikon FM10 and its
> bundled 35-70 (I think) zoom lens. It turns out he was doing his homework
> assignment for a photography course.
>
> The only other SLR that I've spotted in seven months of walking was a
PZ-1P
> and 70-300 zoom.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]