Re: 300/5.6 CAT
Tamron makes a pretty good 350/5.6 that's only about 3 inches long. Warren
New wide angle
I feel that a system camera needs to have the capability of at least an 18mm full frame to 400mm+. The + part isn't a problem with digitals but the wide angle part used to be at least. An 18mm-whatever just doesn't cut it for me. See: http://www.sigmaphoto.com/Html/12-24.htm Available for Pentax sometime this year. Warren
Re: Asahi patent for hybrid digital/film SLR
Sounds like a combination pressure plate/CCD sensor to me. Warren From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Asahi patent for hybrid digital/film SLR This is a line from the Patent grant: The CCD 41 of an image sensor has a photodetector 41C consisting of a plurality of photodiodes. An area of the photodetector 41C, shown by diagonal hatching, is a light-receiving area, on which the object image is formed. A size of the light-receiving area coincides with one frame of the photographic film F, namely, the exposure area of the photographic film F. Therefore, the object image obtained by the CCD 41 is identical to the object image recorded on the photographic film F. Excuse me, but doesn't that sound like a 24X36mm CCD??? Cotty - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Subject: Re: Pentax fast glass?
If you are considering switching systems and don't mind a camera whose end has been officially announced, I might suggest Olympus as they excel in fast wide angles. There is the 21/2, 24/2, 28/2, 35/2, 50/1.2, 85/2, 90/2 and 100/2. The 90 is the sharpest but also the priciest. Average prices run as follows 21 $550, 24 $300, 28 $275, 35 $175, 50 $250, 85 $225. The 28, 35, 50, 90 and 100 are wonderfully sharp and are pretty good wide open. Warren - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re:LX Curtains Mistery (at least for me)
By using white spots in a pattern, the meter will not see specular highlights (most of them anyway) and use them in calculating an exposure. An example would be a bush with shiny leaves or city lights at night. If you can ignore some of the brightest highlights, your overall average exposure will be more accurate. Warren From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: den 24 juli 2001 19:45 Subject: LX Curtains Mistery (at least for me) Hi, gang. I was thinking the other day (yes, sometimes I do) about the pattern in the LX front curtain. It's supposed to give a reflectance of a middle gray, right? Then, why to use white and black points pattern instead of a regular uniform gray paint? If somebody has the answer, I'm all ears (in this case, all eyes) Regards Albano - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Right-angle Finder?
In a message dated 7/14/01 12:14:19 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 08:35:57 +0530 From: RK [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Right-angle Finder? Yup; the [Olympus] Varimagni fits perfectly. I suggest you try out a demo before buying one; this finder creates an inverted image which is a little disturbing at first. Or do all right-angled finders do this? RK That is why us Olympus users are out looking for Refconverters which might also account for their rarity. The Refconverters don't reverse the image. Warren - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Teleconvertor suggestion
What you've discovered is the inverse square law. When you do bellows or extension tube work, your exposure has to increase when you extend your bellows or use of tubes. This is not in a linear fashion but increases proportionately with the distance. If (and this is the important if) your flash is attached to the front standard of the bellows or the filter ring of your lens, whenever you extend your bellows the amount of light the flash puts on the subject will increase also. But again it will not increase in a linear amount depending on the extension but in proportion to the square of the distance. Both of these cancel out, as you have found out through experimentation. Congratulations for empirically finding this out. Warren =Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 00:37:05 -0500 =From: Gary J Sibio [EMAIL PROTECTED] =Subject: Re: Teleconvertor suggestion = =At 11:57 AM 4/25/01 +0300, you wrote: = =Certainly not at life-size, when added extension inflicts = corresponding light loss. This stands true even with modern macro lenses = design, that still lose 1/2-1 stop of light despite IF design. = =Even at life size. I remember when the device first appeared that was one =of the selling points. When I use it with a tiny manual flash, I have to =close down the aperture more at 1:1 compared to 1:4 because the flash is =closer to the subject. I even took some pics with it this morning just to =see if I was wrong. There was no change in exposure as I moved in closer. = =I'm not a physicist so this is speculation but perhaps it has something to =do with the fact that there are optics involved, not just extension. OTOH, =I know that the effective aperature on a macro lens also changes as you =move closer in. I don't know why there's no light loss but this has been my =experience in the 15 years I've used the thing. = = =Pax et bonum, =Gary J. Sibio, SFO - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: pentax-discuss-digest V1 #23
In a message dated 1/14/01 10:54:11 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 09:49:56 -0500 From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: P3n macro tips for DJ Doesn't Pentax also make some good (2 element) close up filters? I've been considering that approach to use with my 645, with either the 75mm or 200mm lenses. Mark On Sat, 13 Jan 2001 21:57:19 -0600, "William Robb" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A HREF="http://www.angelfire.com/ca/erker/closeups.html"Currently Available 2 Element (Achromatic) Close-up Lenses/A http://www.angelfire.com/ca/erker/closeups.html Looks like Canon and Pentax have what you want. Warren - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Visit the PUG at http://pug.komkon.org.
Re: Scanner Choice?
In a message dated 1/8/01 8:53:13 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I currently scan prints on my Umax 1220S scanner. I would like to upgrade to a better scanner and the Epson 1640u seems like a good one according to specs, especially as it comes with a built in transparency hood. I'm also interested in the 1640SU and found the following where the 1640 was compared to a drum scanner. If you want to scan 35mm, the concensus was that you need a dedicated scanner for 35mm. Still the posted results for the 1640SU were impressive. It seems to have enough DMax for most regular photos, but not the under/over exposed ones. Check out Craig Yull's attachments toward the bottom of the page. The URL below seems to have wrapped so you'll have to piece it together. http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001Ba4topic_id=23to pic=photo%2enet If the scanner has enough dynamic range and sharpness, it is always better to make a scan directly from the negative/slide rather than from a print. Who know what has been lost when the machine/operator printed your neg? Warren This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, visit http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the PUG at http://pug.komkon.org
