Re: Goodbye, Cameras
The infamous FA 28-70mm f4.0 had a composite aspheric element made up of a glass component with an optically matched molded plastic. It was the break down of this element that supposedly rendered a number of those lenses into, (very lightweight), paperweights. On 1/6/2014 10:11 AM, Bruce Walker wrote: That's a good question, Boris. Not being a gearhead I don't closely study the fine details of lens construction, but I assumed that only glass was hard and stable enough to be ground or milled into shape with the required tolerances. Does anyone know if plastic, or anything besides glass and coatings is used in the optical path of any K mount lenses? On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: Point taken. However I don't believe that all modern Pentax lenses are devoid of optical plastic. Nor do I think that all the lenses that Pentax marks as having aspherics is made by crafty glass processing techniques, especially the inexpensive ones... On 1/4/2014 9:46 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: Excellent! Let me know when your balsa wood jetliner is ready for its maiden voyage and I shall be there with my K-3 to document it. On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: Bruce, let me suggest to you ever so humbly that the precision of execution has nothing to with material used... On 1/4/2014 9:30 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote: On Sat, Jan 04, 2014, Boris Liberman wrote: My point is that miniaturization is reaching yet another level. And this camera unlike iPhone's and plethora of Android devices is seriously real deal. Yes and no -- real glass requires real weight and bulk. I agree that most people (who don't care about DOF, macro, or large prints) will stick with phone cameras. No surprise, really. Not to mention: sharpness, contrast, colour, and all the other quite significant qualities that precision glass has over plastic lenses. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- A newspaper is a device for making the ignorant more ignorant, and the crazy, crazier. - H.L.Mencken -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Goodbye Cameras
Hi Bruce & Boris Sirs, New Year Greetings. Pentax does not use optical plastic elements in their K- mount lenses including the 18-55 kit lens or the cheaper primes. Yes they do use plastic in the Aspheric lens elements. This plastic is deposited over the glass lens in ridges. Hence aspherical elements do not have a perfectly smooth finish over the lens curvature as in pure glass lenses. But due to manufacturing or material defects, some aspheric lenses have shown separation and damage between the plastic and glass interface in the form of fogging - like if you lightly sandpaper a clear glass sheet. Some very expensive lenses do not use plastic deposits on aspheric lenses at all. Instead each ridge is cut and polished in the glass itself. This explains why such lenses are very costly and why they are so sharp too. Regards. Bipin. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye Cameras
Boris, it's possibly no coincidence that the Pentax kit lenses are actually very good optically (esp. the 18-55) where the Canikon ones are apparently just disposable. On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 11:58 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: > Thanks for heads up, Bipin, but I have a question. It seems rather strange > to me that even the cheaper kit lenses that boast to have aspherical > elements would not use plastic in the composition. I wouldn't presume that > 18-55/3.5-5.6 AL was made all of pure glass... > > Anything I miss here? > > > On 1/7/2014 11:12 AM, Bipin Gupta wrote: >> >> Hello Bruce Sir, some aspheric lens elements are made by depositing >> optical plastic on the glass. >> Unlike a spherical lens element which is perfectly smooth and >> roundish, asperical lenses will have a number >> of jagged edges forming the lens curvature. >> Also Dupleix lenses (two lenses glued together) no longer use Canada >> Balsam due to separation and white >> patches over time. But they use modern and durable man made glue which >> is basically plastic compounds. >> >> I have had this lens separation and white patches (not fungus) on the >> Pentax FA 28-70 f4 and a Tokina 20-35. >> >> Pentax DSLR lenses do not use optical plastic elements in the lenses, >> though some manufacturers do. >> >> The fresnel lens under the penta prism is made from plastic. Its >> purpose is to spread the light so that the corners >> in the viewfinder are not dark. >> >> Some lenses in front of the metering light sensors are also plastic. >> >> Regards. >> Bipin >> > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye Cameras
Thanks for that, Bipin. On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 4:12 AM, Bipin Gupta wrote: > Hello Bruce Sir, some aspheric lens elements are made by depositing > optical plastic on the glass. > Unlike a spherical lens element which is perfectly smooth and > roundish, asperical lenses will have a number > of jagged edges forming the lens curvature. > Also Dupleix lenses (two lenses glued together) no longer use Canada > Balsam due to separation and white > patches over time. But they use modern and durable man made glue which > is basically plastic compounds. > > I have had this lens separation and white patches (not fungus) on the > Pentax FA 28-70 f4 and a Tokina 20-35. > > Pentax DSLR lenses do not use optical plastic elements in the lenses, > though some manufacturers do. > > The fresnel lens under the penta prism is made from plastic. Its > purpose is to spread the light so that the corners > in the viewfinder are not dark. > > Some lenses in front of the metering light sensors are also plastic. > > Regards. > Bipin > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye Cameras
Thanks for heads up, Bipin, but I have a question. It seems rather strange to me that even the cheaper kit lenses that boast to have aspherical elements would not use plastic in the composition. I wouldn't presume that 18-55/3.5-5.6 AL was made all of pure glass... Anything I miss here? On 1/7/2014 11:12 AM, Bipin Gupta wrote: Hello Bruce Sir, some aspheric lens elements are made by depositing optical plastic on the glass. Unlike a spherical lens element which is perfectly smooth and roundish, asperical lenses will have a number of jagged edges forming the lens curvature. Also Dupleix lenses (two lenses glued together) no longer use Canada Balsam due to separation and white patches over time. But they use modern and durable man made glue which is basically plastic compounds. I have had this lens separation and white patches (not fungus) on the Pentax FA 28-70 f4 and a Tokina 20-35. Pentax DSLR lenses do not use optical plastic elements in the lenses, though some manufacturers do. The fresnel lens under the penta prism is made from plastic. Its purpose is to spread the light so that the corners in the viewfinder are not dark. Some lenses in front of the metering light sensors are also plastic. Regards. Bipin -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye Cameras
Thanks for adding some facts to the debate Bipin, and welcome back! I've been wondering where you disappeared to. Hope all is well. On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 4:12 AM, Bipin Gupta wrote: > Hello Bruce Sir, some aspheric lens elements are made by depositing > optical plastic on the glass. > Unlike a spherical lens element which is perfectly smooth and > roundish, asperical lenses will have a number > of jagged edges forming the lens curvature. > Also Dupleix lenses (two lenses glued together) no longer use Canada > Balsam due to separation and white > patches over time. But they use modern and durable man made glue which > is basically plastic compounds. > > I have had this lens separation and white patches (not fungus) on the > Pentax FA 28-70 f4 and a Tokina 20-35. > > Pentax DSLR lenses do not use optical plastic elements in the lenses, > though some manufacturers do. > > The fresnel lens under the penta prism is made from plastic. Its > purpose is to spread the light so that the corners > in the viewfinder are not dark. > > Some lenses in front of the metering light sensors are also plastic. > > Regards. > Bipin > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye Cameras
Hello Bruce Sir, some aspheric lens elements are made by depositing optical plastic on the glass. Unlike a spherical lens element which is perfectly smooth and roundish, asperical lenses will have a number of jagged edges forming the lens curvature. Also Dupleix lenses (two lenses glued together) no longer use Canada Balsam due to separation and white patches over time. But they use modern and durable man made glue which is basically plastic compounds. I have had this lens separation and white patches (not fungus) on the Pentax FA 28-70 f4 and a Tokina 20-35. Pentax DSLR lenses do not use optical plastic elements in the lenses, though some manufacturers do. The fresnel lens under the penta prism is made from plastic. Its purpose is to spread the light so that the corners in the viewfinder are not dark. Some lenses in front of the metering light sensors are also plastic. Regards. Bipin -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
I don't know about any k-mount lenses, but plastic is used for lenses in some critical applications were high precision and light weight are both desirable. On 1/6/2014 10:11 AM, Bruce Walker wrote: That's a good question, Boris. Not being a gearhead I don't closely study the fine details of lens construction, but I assumed that only glass was hard and stable enough to be ground or milled into shape with the required tolerances. Does anyone know if plastic, or anything besides glass and coatings is used in the optical path of any K mount lenses? On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: Point taken. However I don't believe that all modern Pentax lenses are devoid of optical plastic. Nor do I think that all the lenses that Pentax marks as having aspherics is made by crafty glass processing techniques, especially the inexpensive ones... On 1/4/2014 9:46 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: Excellent! Let me know when your balsa wood jetliner is ready for its maiden voyage and I shall be there with my K-3 to document it. On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: Bruce, let me suggest to you ever so humbly that the precision of execution has nothing to with material used... On 1/4/2014 9:30 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote: On Sat, Jan 04, 2014, Boris Liberman wrote: My point is that miniaturization is reaching yet another level. And this camera unlike iPhone's and plethora of Android devices is seriously real deal. Yes and no -- real glass requires real weight and bulk. I agree that most people (who don't care about DOF, macro, or large prints) will stick with phone cameras. No surprise, really. Not to mention: sharpness, contrast, colour, and all the other quite significant qualities that precision glass has over plastic lenses. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
My recollection is that virtually all modern wide-to-normal camera lenses contain aspherical elements, and that most of those are hybrid--a glass spherical lens with a plastic element cemented on to give it a complex aspheric shape. The most notorious of these in Pentax land is the FA 28-70/4, whose aspheric element has had a tendency to separate over time. Rick On Jan 6, 2014, at 10:38 , Matthew Hunt wrote: > On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Bruce Walker wrote: > >> That's a good question, Boris. Not being a gearhead I don't closely >> study the fine details of lens construction, but I assumed that only >> glass was hard and stable enough to be ground or milled into shape >> with the required tolerances. >> >> Does anyone know if plastic, or anything besides glass and coatings is >> used in the optical path of any K mount lenses? > > My understanding is that plastic elements are normally molded, not > ground. For aspherical elements, it's cheap to mold plastic, since you > only have to machine the aspheric shape in the mold, rather than each > element you produce. I think this is common for things like cell phone > camera optics. > > I don't know for sure whether plastic elements are used in Pentax > lenses or not. Someone on PentaxForums states (without proof) that the > 18-55 has plastic elements, and that wouldn't surprise me, given that > it's cheap and has "AL" (aspherical) in its name. > > Matt > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Bruce Walker wrote: > That's a good question, Boris. Not being a gearhead I don't closely > study the fine details of lens construction, but I assumed that only > glass was hard and stable enough to be ground or milled into shape > with the required tolerances. > > Does anyone know if plastic, or anything besides glass and coatings is > used in the optical path of any K mount lenses? My understanding is that plastic elements are normally molded, not ground. For aspherical elements, it's cheap to mold plastic, since you only have to machine the aspheric shape in the mold, rather than each element you produce. I think this is common for things like cell phone camera optics. I don't know for sure whether plastic elements are used in Pentax lenses or not. Someone on PentaxForums states (without proof) that the 18-55 has plastic elements, and that wouldn't surprise me, given that it's cheap and has "AL" (aspherical) in its name. Matt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
That's a good question, Boris. Not being a gearhead I don't closely study the fine details of lens construction, but I assumed that only glass was hard and stable enough to be ground or milled into shape with the required tolerances. Does anyone know if plastic, or anything besides glass and coatings is used in the optical path of any K mount lenses? On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: > Point taken. However I don't believe that all modern Pentax lenses are > devoid of optical plastic. Nor do I think that all the lenses that Pentax > marks as having aspherics is made by crafty glass processing techniques, > especially the inexpensive ones... > > > > > On 1/4/2014 9:46 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: >> >> Excellent! Let me know when your balsa wood jetliner is ready for its >> maiden voyage and I shall be there with my K-3 to document it. >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: >>> >>> Bruce, let me suggest to you ever so humbly that the precision of >>> execution >>> has nothing to with material used... >>> >>> >>> On 1/4/2014 9:30 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote: > > > On Sat, Jan 04, 2014, Boris Liberman wrote: >> >> >> >> My point is that miniaturization is reaching yet another level. And >> this camera unlike iPhone's and plethora of Android devices is >> seriously real deal. > > > > Yes and no -- real glass requires real weight and bulk. I agree that > most people (who don't care about DOF, macro, or large prints) will > stick with phone cameras. No surprise, really. Not to mention: sharpness, contrast, colour, and all the other quite significant qualities that precision glass has over plastic lenses. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>> follow the directions. >> >> >> >> > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
The RX100II is Wifi enabled and has a companion app for smart phones :) On 6 January 2014 16:16, Boris Liberman wrote: > That's right. Especially that nowadays being connected (aka being able to > upload your next selfie to facebook or whatever) matters more than being > photographically endowed, so to speak. > > > On 1/5/2014 12:57 AM, Rob Studdert wrote: >> >> My Sony RX100II is truly pocket-able and has an integrated 28/1.8 >> equivalent lens, the Panasonic is very small but you still need to add >> a lens but in both cases neither are even close to replacing an SLR >> for so many types of photography that I do. I use the camera in my >> Android phone exensively too but again only within its limitations. >> You have to know what the gear can do in order to use it effectively, >> for most people a P&S is sufficient and for an increasing many the >> camera in their phone has proved to be more than adequate but that's >> not going to make top end DSLRs any less relevant. >> >> On 5 January 2014 06:32, Boris Liberman wrote: >>> >>> Aahz, I have to very respectfully disagree. Have a look on Voigtlander >>> Nokton 40/1.4. Given its speed, it is positively very small. And to boot >>> it >>> naturally covers the so called full frame. The Pentax 40/2.8 pancake is >>> also >>> very small. >>> >>> So you can have small (not iPhone small though) lenses and cameras... >>> >>> >>> On 1/4/2014 9:22 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote: On Sat, Jan 04, 2014, Boris Liberman wrote: > > > > My point is that miniaturization is reaching yet another level. And > this camera unlike iPhone's and plethora of Android devices is > seriously real deal. Yes and no -- real glass requires real weight and bulk. I agree that most people (who don't care about DOF, macro, or large prints) will stick with phone cameras. No surprise, really. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>> follow the directions. >> >> >> >> > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
That's right. Especially that nowadays being connected (aka being able to upload your next selfie to facebook or whatever) matters more than being photographically endowed, so to speak. On 1/5/2014 12:57 AM, Rob Studdert wrote: My Sony RX100II is truly pocket-able and has an integrated 28/1.8 equivalent lens, the Panasonic is very small but you still need to add a lens but in both cases neither are even close to replacing an SLR for so many types of photography that I do. I use the camera in my Android phone exensively too but again only within its limitations. You have to know what the gear can do in order to use it effectively, for most people a P&S is sufficient and for an increasing many the camera in their phone has proved to be more than adequate but that's not going to make top end DSLRs any less relevant. On 5 January 2014 06:32, Boris Liberman wrote: Aahz, I have to very respectfully disagree. Have a look on Voigtlander Nokton 40/1.4. Given its speed, it is positively very small. And to boot it naturally covers the so called full frame. The Pentax 40/2.8 pancake is also very small. So you can have small (not iPhone small though) lenses and cameras... On 1/4/2014 9:22 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote: On Sat, Jan 04, 2014, Boris Liberman wrote: My point is that miniaturization is reaching yet another level. And this camera unlike iPhone's and plethora of Android devices is seriously real deal. Yes and no -- real glass requires real weight and bulk. I agree that most people (who don't care about DOF, macro, or large prints) will stick with phone cameras. No surprise, really. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
On 1/5/2014 12:07 AM, Aahz Maruch wrote: The Nokton's far too big for someone to just carry around. You can't stick that in your pocket. The Pentax barely fits (once you add the required camera), and it's not full-frame. Again, only people who care about DOF, macro, or large prints want anything more than a phone camera these days. (Okay, low-light, too.) If you carry a small bag (which as I observe many people of both sexes do), you can easily put your camera in there, unless it is a big one, such as DSLR that would require bigger dedicated bag. That friend of mine who bought Pana GM1 with its relatively smallish kit zoom bought himself a small (now, really! small) camera bag and voila - he's carrying his camera with him everywhere. Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
Point taken. However I don't believe that all modern Pentax lenses are devoid of optical plastic. Nor do I think that all the lenses that Pentax marks as having aspherics is made by crafty glass processing techniques, especially the inexpensive ones... On 1/4/2014 9:46 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: Excellent! Let me know when your balsa wood jetliner is ready for its maiden voyage and I shall be there with my K-3 to document it. On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: Bruce, let me suggest to you ever so humbly that the precision of execution has nothing to with material used... On 1/4/2014 9:30 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote: On Sat, Jan 04, 2014, Boris Liberman wrote: My point is that miniaturization is reaching yet another level. And this camera unlike iPhone's and plethora of Android devices is seriously real deal. Yes and no -- real glass requires real weight and bulk. I agree that most people (who don't care about DOF, macro, or large prints) will stick with phone cameras. No surprise, really. Not to mention: sharpness, contrast, colour, and all the other quite significant qualities that precision glass has over plastic lenses. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 4:12 PM, Bill wrote: > > > Most people don't care enough about photography to spend the money on a 77mm > LTD anyway. And that why i have one Dave > > bill > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
My Sony RX100II is truly pocket-able and has an integrated 28/1.8 equivalent lens, the Panasonic is very small but you still need to add a lens but in both cases neither are even close to replacing an SLR for so many types of photography that I do. I use the camera in my Android phone exensively too but again only within its limitations. You have to know what the gear can do in order to use it effectively, for most people a P&S is sufficient and for an increasing many the camera in their phone has proved to be more than adequate but that's not going to make top end DSLRs any less relevant. On 5 January 2014 06:32, Boris Liberman wrote: > Aahz, I have to very respectfully disagree. Have a look on Voigtlander > Nokton 40/1.4. Given its speed, it is positively very small. And to boot it > naturally covers the so called full frame. The Pentax 40/2.8 pancake is also > very small. > > So you can have small (not iPhone small though) lenses and cameras... > > > On 1/4/2014 9:22 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote: >> >> On Sat, Jan 04, 2014, Boris Liberman wrote: >>> >>> >>> My point is that miniaturization is reaching yet another level. And >>> this camera unlike iPhone's and plethora of Android devices is >>> seriously real deal. >> >> >> Yes and no -- real glass requires real weight and bulk. I agree that >> most people (who don't care about DOF, macro, or large prints) will >> stick with phone cameras. No surprise, really. >> > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
On Sat, Jan 04, 2014, Boris Liberman wrote: > On 1/4/2014 9:22 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote: >>On Sat, Jan 04, 2014, Boris Liberman wrote: >>> >>>My point is that miniaturization is reaching yet another level. And >>>this camera unlike iPhone's and plethora of Android devices is >>>seriously real deal. >> >>Yes and no -- real glass requires real weight and bulk. I agree that >>most people (who don't care about DOF, macro, or large prints) will >>stick with phone cameras. No surprise, really. > > Aahz, I have to very respectfully disagree. Have a look on > Voigtlander Nokton 40/1.4. Given its speed, it is positively very > small. And to boot it naturally covers the so called full frame. The > Pentax 40/2.8 pancake is also very small. > > So you can have small (not iPhone small though) lenses and cameras... The Nokton's far too big for someone to just carry around. You can't stick that in your pocket. The Pentax barely fits (once you add the required camera), and it's not full-frame. Again, only people who care about DOF, macro, or large prints want anything more than a phone camera these days. (Okay, low-light, too.) -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ <*> <*> <*> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
On Sat, Jan 04, 2014, Bruce Walker wrote: > On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 04, 2014, Boris Liberman wrote: >>> >>> My point is that miniaturization is reaching yet another level. And >>> this camera unlike iPhone's and plethora of Android devices is >>> seriously real deal. >> >> Yes and no -- real glass requires real weight and bulk. I agree that >> most people (who don't care about DOF, macro, or large prints) will >> stick with phone cameras. No surprise, really. > > Not to mention: sharpness, contrast, colour, and all the other quite > significant qualities that precision glass has over plastic lenses. No reason a phone can't have nice glass, cost of materials keeps going down over time. -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ <*> <*> <*> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
Excellent! Let me know when your balsa wood jetliner is ready for its maiden voyage and I shall be there with my K-3 to document it. On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: > Bruce, let me suggest to you ever so humbly that the precision of execution > has nothing to with material used... > > > On 1/4/2014 9:30 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: >> >> On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, Jan 04, 2014, Boris Liberman wrote: My point is that miniaturization is reaching yet another level. And this camera unlike iPhone's and plethora of Android devices is seriously real deal. >>> >>> >>> Yes and no -- real glass requires real weight and bulk. I agree that >>> most people (who don't care about DOF, macro, or large prints) will >>> stick with phone cameras. No surprise, really. >> >> >> Not to mention: sharpness, contrast, colour, and all the other quite >> significant qualities that precision glass has over plastic lenses. >> > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
Bruce, let me suggest to you ever so humbly that the precision of execution has nothing to with material used... On 1/4/2014 9:30 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote: On Sat, Jan 04, 2014, Boris Liberman wrote: My point is that miniaturization is reaching yet another level. And this camera unlike iPhone's and plethora of Android devices is seriously real deal. Yes and no -- real glass requires real weight and bulk. I agree that most people (who don't care about DOF, macro, or large prints) will stick with phone cameras. No surprise, really. Not to mention: sharpness, contrast, colour, and all the other quite significant qualities that precision glass has over plastic lenses. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
Aahz, I have to very respectfully disagree. Have a look on Voigtlander Nokton 40/1.4. Given its speed, it is positively very small. And to boot it naturally covers the so called full frame. The Pentax 40/2.8 pancake is also very small. So you can have small (not iPhone small though) lenses and cameras... On 1/4/2014 9:22 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote: On Sat, Jan 04, 2014, Boris Liberman wrote: My point is that miniaturization is reaching yet another level. And this camera unlike iPhone's and plethora of Android devices is seriously real deal. Yes and no -- real glass requires real weight and bulk. I agree that most people (who don't care about DOF, macro, or large prints) will stick with phone cameras. No surprise, really. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote: > On Sat, Jan 04, 2014, Boris Liberman wrote: >> >> My point is that miniaturization is reaching yet another level. And >> this camera unlike iPhone's and plethora of Android devices is >> seriously real deal. > > Yes and no -- real glass requires real weight and bulk. I agree that > most people (who don't care about DOF, macro, or large prints) will > stick with phone cameras. No surprise, really. Not to mention: sharpness, contrast, colour, and all the other quite significant qualities that precision glass has over plastic lenses. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
On Sat, Jan 04, 2014, Boris Liberman wrote: > > My point is that miniaturization is reaching yet another level. And > this camera unlike iPhone's and plethora of Android devices is > seriously real deal. Yes and no -- real glass requires real weight and bulk. I agree that most people (who don't care about DOF, macro, or large prints) will stick with phone cameras. No surprise, really. -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ <*> <*> <*> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
My point is that miniaturization is reaching yet another level. And this camera unlike iPhone's and plethora of Android devices is seriously real deal. On 1/4/2014 8:54 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote: On Sat, Jan 04, 2014, Boris Liberman wrote: On 1/2/2014 6:27 PM, Darren Addy wrote: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/12/goodbye-cameras.html Darren, have you held in your hands Panasonic GM1 and the pancake kit zoom lens? Yeah, I have (renting one right now from lensrentals.com along with a buttload of other bodies and lenses to test out the m43 line), not sure what your point is. Nice camera (usable, unlike the other m43 midgets because it has a dial in back), but in some ways not as good as my Canon G1X (less zoom, smaller aperture wide). I would almost buy the G2X sight unseen if it has an F2 lens, usable macro, and a slightly better sensor. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
On Sat, Jan 04, 2014, Boris Liberman wrote: > On 1/2/2014 6:27 PM, Darren Addy wrote: >> >>http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/12/goodbye-cameras.html > > Darren, have you held in your hands Panasonic GM1 and the pancake > kit zoom lens? Yeah, I have (renting one right now from lensrentals.com along with a buttload of other bodies and lenses to test out the m43 line), not sure what your point is. Nice camera (usable, unlike the other m43 midgets because it has a dial in back), but in some ways not as good as my Canon G1X (less zoom, smaller aperture wide). I would almost buy the G2X sight unseen if it has an F2 lens, usable macro, and a slightly better sensor. -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ <*> <*> <*> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
On 1/2/2014 6:27 PM, Darren Addy wrote: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/12/goodbye-cameras.html Darren, have you held in your hands Panasonic GM1 and the pancake kit zoom lens? Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
On 02/01/2014 3:36 PM, Walt wrote: On 1/2/2014 3:12 PM, Bill wrote: On 02/01/2014 2:23 PM, Walt wrote: What gets me about this story, and the many others in the same vein, is that they all seem to completely ignore the importance of optics in photography. It's only important to certain snobby types who have an inflated ego and derive their self worth from how big a collection of expensive toys they have. I can't imagine anyone who cares about photography enough to spend money on a 77/1.8 Ltd. suddenly saying to themselves, "You know what? Screw that. I'm getting an iPhone. That'll be good enough." Most people don't care enough about photography to spend the money on a 77mm LTD anyway. bill It's a small wonder the SLR and concomitant lenses ever existed, isn't it? -- Walt The hue and cry is because they are apparently under threat of becoming less main stream. Except they were never main stream. bill -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
On 1/2/2014 3:12 PM, Bill wrote: On 02/01/2014 2:23 PM, Walt wrote: What gets me about this story, and the many others in the same vein, is that they all seem to completely ignore the importance of optics in photography. It's only important to certain snobby types who have an inflated ego and derive their self worth from how big a collection of expensive toys they have. I can't imagine anyone who cares about photography enough to spend money on a 77/1.8 Ltd. suddenly saying to themselves, "You know what? Screw that. I'm getting an iPhone. That'll be good enough." Most people don't care enough about photography to spend the money on a 77mm LTD anyway. bill It's a small wonder the SLR and concomitant lenses ever existed, isn't it? -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
On 1/2/2014 11:27 AM, Darren Addy wrote: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/12/goodbye-cameras.html Alright, I managed to post my first thought when I tried to delete and start over. This is the same reasoning that proclaims the end of the PC (Mac or Microsoft doesn't matter), and it's replacement with tablets, or smart phones or whatever. The PC will be replaced with only as the primary information consumption device. Content producers, (and software producers as well), will still need the power and other capabilities of the PC. Just because the majority of individuals don't need one doesn't mean that they will disappear, only that they won't be so ubiquitous. Then again if most P&S digital cameras simply disapeared to be replaced by smart phones and tablets would most people miss them. Almost every one of them have been almost painful to use compared to a [D]SLR or high end mirrorless camera. -- A newspaper is a device for making the ignorant more ignorant, and the crazy, crazier. - H.L.Mencken -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
On 02/01/2014 2:23 PM, Walt wrote: What gets me about this story, and the many others in the same vein, is that they all seem to completely ignore the importance of optics in photography. It's only important to certain snobby types who have an inflated ego and derive their self worth from how big a collection of expensive toys they have. I can't imagine anyone who cares about photography enough to spend money on a 77/1.8 Ltd. suddenly saying to themselves, "You know what? Screw that. I'm getting an iPhone. That'll be good enough." Most people don't care enough about photography to spend the money on a 77mm LTD anyway. bill -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
People like that have always been in a minority. The people who are using their iPads and phones to take pictures are the people who used the cheapest p&s cameras, and they're the cameras that will disappear. There will continue to be a small market for enthusiasts and the few professionals that remain, but my guess is that using a high-end camera will become as rare as using a medium format camera used to be. When the Leica first came out professionals dismissed it on the grounds of image quality, but they hadn't learned to exploit it's unique properties. Same thing will happen again. B > On 2 Jan 2014, at 20:23, Walt wrote: > > What gets me about this story, and the many others in the same vein, is that > they all seem to completely ignore the importance of optics in photography. > > I can't imagine anyone who cares about photography enough to spend money on a > 77/1.8 Ltd. suddenly saying to themselves, "You know what? Screw that. I'm > getting an iPhone. That'll be good enough." > > -- Walt > > >> On 1/2/2014 10:27 AM, Darren Addy wrote: >> http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/12/goodbye-cameras.html > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
What gets me about this story, and the many others in the same vein, is that they all seem to completely ignore the importance of optics in photography. I can't imagine anyone who cares about photography enough to spend money on a 77/1.8 Ltd. suddenly saying to themselves, "You know what? Screw that. I'm getting an iPhone. That'll be good enough." -- Walt On 1/2/2014 10:27 AM, Darren Addy wrote: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/12/goodbye-cameras.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
I think he is confusing things. What defines a "camera" looks like a problem. It seems that we view a real camera as one with image controls, any of tilt/shift/aperture/shutter speed. So, did the real camera, the view camera as we know it, disappear when Kodak introduced the Brownie as the point-and-shoot with little or no image control? Didn't happen then. But the miniature formats matured. Once 135 became too expensive for the average shooter we got 126, then disc and 110. Digital is going through the same process -- some things mature and some deconstruct. But it is all just a way to get things to the masses. It would not surprise me if a forthcoming p&s digital will not only include exposure controls (that was done long ago) but at the same time being reduced in size to something like a phone with all the amenities like Bluetooth and WiFi. What's next? Who knows. It all depends on the times and the pocketbooks. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
His conclusion may make sense in his essential worldview of journalism and social networking. "transform[s] an otherwise innocuous photo of an empty field near Fukushima into an entirely different object." But as someone who enjoys seeing his work printed, and especially printed large, and captures images of things that no camera phone can capture, I reject his conclusion that standalone cameras have reached their evolutionary end. The path has forked: with the tools of deliberate craftsmen and artisans going one way and social networkers the other. What camera phones really do is separate networking snapshooters from the much smaller group of folks like us. And t'aint nothin' wrong with that. On the rare occasion that I'm in snapshot mode I'd rather have a simple device with the simplicity of a Brownie box than my complex and bulky DSLR. On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 11:27 AM, Darren Addy wrote: > http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/12/goodbye-cameras.html > > > -- > I don't have a problem with idiots. > I have a problem with the fact that they have an internet connection. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
OTOH, my son is doing very nice things with my old K10D, and loves having control over shutter speed and DOF. His iPhone 5 gets a lot of use for casual snaps, but other photography is done on the DSLR. Rick On Jan 2, 2014, at 11:51 , Daniel J. Matyola wrote: > My wife has completely abandoned her Nikon for the iPhone 5s, and my > son uses his for almost everything now. I am stubborn, and cling to > my old-fashioned DSLR, probably because I understand how to use it a > bit better than I do the phone camera. > > Dan Matyola > http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola > > > On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 11:27 AM, Darren Addy wrote: >> http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/12/goodbye-cameras.html >> >> >> -- >> I don't have a problem with idiots. >> I have a problem with the fact that they have an internet connection. >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
2013's 43% decline in sales of ALL cameras across the board has even more of the manufacturers attention. Godfrey > On Jan 2, 2014, at 8:52 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: > > The 20% decline in sales of mirror-less cameras has all the > manufacturer's attention. > >> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Darren Addy wrote: >> http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/12/goodbye-cameras.html >> >> >> -- >> I don't have a problem with idiots. >> I have a problem with the fact that they have an internet connection. >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
The 20% decline in sales of mirror-less cameras has all the manufacturer's attention. On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Darren Addy wrote: > http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/12/goodbye-cameras.html > > > -- > I don't have a problem with idiots. > I have a problem with the fact that they have an internet connection. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Goodbye, Cameras
My wife has completely abandoned her Nikon for the iPhone 5s, and my son uses his for almost everything now. I am stubborn, and cling to my old-fashioned DSLR, probably because I understand how to use it a bit better than I do the phone camera. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 11:27 AM, Darren Addy wrote: > http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/12/goodbye-cameras.html > > > -- > I don't have a problem with idiots. > I have a problem with the fact that they have an internet connection. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Goodbye, Cameras
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/12/goodbye-cameras.html -- I don't have a problem with idiots. I have a problem with the fact that they have an internet connection. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
