I Wish

[Jack Davis]

I wish there were an AF-C custom function setting available wherein I could 
disallow the shutter's releasing unless focus is achieved. Still, for special 
affects, re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter priority option.
Make sense to anyone else?

Jack 



  

-- 
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.

I wish........

[David J Brooks]

...the horse farm we are associated with had asked for
pictures for their web site ~before~ I got rid of the PC,.

I'm now in back up heaven.

Dave

-- 
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: I Wish

[David J Brooks]

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Jack Davis  wrote:
> I wish there were an AF-C custom function setting available wherein I could 
> disallow the shutter's releasing unless focus is achieved. Still, for special 
> affects, re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter priority option.
> Make sense to anyone else?
>
> Jack

It does to me, so be afraid.

Dave
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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: I Wish

[Jack Davis]

I knew I could count on you, Dave. Actually calmed my fears. :)

Jack

--- On Fri, 12/10/10, David J Brooks  wrote:

> From: David J Brooks 
> Subject: Re: I Wish
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 7:48 AM
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 10:21 AM,
> Jack Davis 
> wrote:
> > I wish there were an AF-C custom function setting
> available wherein I could disallow the shutter's releasing
> unless focus is achieved. Still, for special affects,
> re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter priority option.
> > Make sense to anyone else?
> >
> > Jack
> 
> It does to me, so be afraid.
> 
> Dave
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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.
> 


  

-- 
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: I Wish

[Adam Maas]

There isn't one? It's an option on the higher-end Canon and Nikon bodies.

-Adam

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Jack Davis  wrote:
> I wish there were an AF-C custom function setting available wherein I could 
> disallow the shutter's releasing unless focus is achieved. Still, for special 
> affects, re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter priority option.
> Make sense to anyone else?
>
> Jack
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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.
>



-- 
M. Adam Maas
http://www.mawz.ca
Explorations of the City Around Us.

-- 
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: I Wish

[Dario Bonazza]

Jack Davis wrote:

I wish there were an AF-C custom function setting available wherein I could 
disallow the shutter's releasing unless focus is achieved. Still, for 
special affects, re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter priority 
option.

Make sense to anyone else?


The K-5 has it. About AF-C, you can select between Focus Priority and FPS 
Priority (meaning shutter priority).


Dario 



--
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: I Wish

[Mark Roberts]

Jack Davis wrote:

>I wish there were an AF-C custom function setting available wherein I could 
>disallow the shutter's releasing unless focus is achieved. Still, for special 
>affects, re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter priority option.
>Make sense to anyone else?

How would that work? AF-C is for predictive autofocus of moving
subjects so, by definition, it has to fire when the subject isn't in
focus (choosing the proper delay so that - if all goes well - the
subject will be in focus by the time the mirror goes up and the
shutter opens).


-- 
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: I Wish

[paul stenquist]

The K-5 allows you to prioritize focus or shooting speed in continuous 
autofocus. Choosing focus priority tends to make focus lock more likely in 
continuous shooting, although it's no guarantee that every frame will be in 
focus. 
Paul
On Dec 10, 2010, at 10:21 AM, Jack Davis wrote:

> I wish there were an AF-C custom function setting available wherein I could 
> disallow the shutter's releasing unless focus is achieved. Still, for special 
> affects, re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter priority option.
> Make sense to anyone else?
> 
> Jack 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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: I Wish

[Jack Davis]

I haven't purchased the K-5..yet(?) I'm using the K10&20

Jack

--- On Fri, 12/10/10, Adam Maas  wrote:

> From: Adam Maas 
> Subject: Re: I Wish
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 8:32 AM
> There isn't one? It's an option on
> the higher-end Canon and Nikon bodies.
> 
> -Adam
> 
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Jack Davis 
> wrote:
> > I wish there were an AF-C custom function setting
> available wherein I could disallow the shutter's releasing
> unless focus is achieved. Still, for special affects,
> re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter priority option.
> > Make sense to anyone else?
> >
> > Jack
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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.
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> M. Adam Maas
> http://www.mawz.ca
> Explorations of the City Around Us.
> 
> -- 
> 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: I Wish

[paul stenquist]

On Dec 10, 2010, at 11:45 AM, Mark Roberts wrote:

> Jack Davis wrote:
> 
>> I wish there were an AF-C custom function setting available wherein I could 
>> disallow the shutter's releasing unless focus is achieved. Still, for 
>> special affects, re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter priority option.
>> Make sense to anyone else?
> 
> How would that work? AF-C is for predictive autofocus of moving
> subjects so, by definition, it has to fire when the subject isn't in
> focus (choosing the proper delay so that - if all goes well - the
> subject will be in focus by the time the mirror goes up and the
> shutter opens).
> 
I don't think continuous autofocus is predictive. It just continues to adjust 
focus as the shutter button is held down at least half way. I think that if it 
were predictive, it would work only for one rate of subject movement. By 
prioritizing focus over speed, it will delay firing in machine-gun mode until 
it thinks it has a lock.
Paul
> 
> -- 
> 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: I Wish

[Jack Davis]

GOOD! Thanks, Dario.

Jack

--- On Fri, 12/10/10, Dario Bonazza  wrote:

> From: Dario Bonazza 
> Subject: Re: I Wish
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 8:42 AM
> Jack Davis wrote:
> 
> > I wish there were an AF-C custom function setting
> available wherein I could disallow the shutter's releasing
> unless focus is achieved. Still, for special affects,
> re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter priority option.
> > Make sense to anyone else?
> 
> The K-5 has it. About AF-C, you can select between Focus
> Priority and FPS Priority (meaning shutter priority).
> 
> Dario 
> 
> -- 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: I Wish

[Jack Davis]

It would need sufficient AF speed to allow refocusing tweaks. 
So, is Dario wrong about the K-5 having said feature?

Jack

--- On Fri, 12/10/10, Mark Roberts  wrote:

> From: Mark Roberts 
> Subject: Re: I Wish
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 8:45 AM
> Jack Davis wrote:
> 
> >I wish there were an AF-C custom function setting
> available wherein I could disallow the shutter's releasing
> unless focus is achieved. Still, for special affects,
> re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter priority option.
> >Make sense to anyone else?
> 
> How would that work? AF-C is for predictive autofocus of
> moving
> subjects so, by definition, it has to fire when the subject
> isn't in
> focus (choosing the proper delay so that - if all goes well
> - the
> subject will be in focus by the time the mirror goes up and
> the
> shutter opens).
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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: I Wish

[Jack Davis]

Thanks, Paul. I get that. Increased possibility of focus is the idea.

Jack

--- On Fri, 12/10/10, paul stenquist  wrote:

> From: paul stenquist 
> Subject: Re: I Wish
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 8:55 AM
> The K-5 allows you to prioritize
> focus or shooting speed in continuous autofocus. Choosing
> focus priority tends to make focus lock more likely in
> continuous shooting, although it's no guarantee that every
> frame will be in focus. 
> Paul
> On Dec 10, 2010, at 10:21 AM, Jack Davis wrote:
> 
> > I wish there were an AF-C custom function setting
> available wherein I could disallow the shutter's releasing
> unless focus is achieved. Still, for special affects,
> re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter priority option.
> > Make sense to anyone else?
> > 
> > Jack 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > 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: I Wish

[Steven Desjardins]

Isn't there a custom setting for something like that?

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Jack Davis  wrote:
> It would need sufficient AF speed to allow refocusing tweaks.
> So, is Dario wrong about the K-5 having said feature?
>
> Jack
>
> --- On Fri, 12/10/10, Mark Roberts  wrote:
>
>> From: Mark Roberts 
>> Subject: Re: I Wish
>> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
>> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 8:45 AM
>> Jack Davis wrote:
>>
>> >I wish there were an AF-C custom function setting
>> available wherein I could disallow the shutter's releasing
>> unless focus is achieved. Still, for special affects,
>> re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter priority option.
>> >Make sense to anyone else?
>>
>> How would that work? AF-C is for predictive autofocus of
>> moving
>> subjects so, by definition, it has to fire when the subject
>> isn't in
>> focus (choosing the proper delay so that - if all goes well
>> - the
>> subject will be in focus by the time the mirror goes up and
>> the
>> shutter opens).
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>



-- 
Steve Desjardins

-- 
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: I Wish

[Jack Davis]

Not in the K20 manual.;) I hope to be reading the K-5 manual in not too long.
Awaiting a couple more reviews and additional feed back from the PDML.

Jack

--- On Fri, 12/10/10, Steven Desjardins  wrote:

> From: Steven Desjardins 
> Subject: Re: I Wish
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:08 AM
> Isn't there a custom setting for
> something like that?
> 
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Jack Davis 
> wrote:
> > It would need sufficient AF speed to allow refocusing
> tweaks.
> > So, is Dario wrong about the K-5 having said feature?
> >
> > Jack
> >
> > --- On Fri, 12/10/10, Mark Roberts 
> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Mark Roberts 
> >> Subject: Re: I Wish
> >> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> >> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 8:45 AM
> >> Jack Davis wrote:
> >>
> >> >I wish there were an AF-C custom function
> setting
> >> available wherein I could disallow the shutter's
> releasing
> >> unless focus is achieved. Still, for special
> affects,
> >> re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter
> priority option.
> >> >Make sense to anyone else?
> >>
> >> How would that work? AF-C is for predictive
> autofocus of
> >> moving
> >> subjects so, by definition, it has to fire when
> the subject
> >> isn't in
> >> focus (choosing the proper delay so that - if all
> goes well
> >> - the
> >> subject will be in focus by the time the mirror
> goes up and
> >> the
> >> shutter opens).
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> 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.
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Steve Desjardins
> 
> -- 
> 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: I Wish

[Dario Bonazza]

Jack Davis wrote:


It would need sufficient AF speed to allow refocusing tweaks.
So, is Dario wrong about the K-5 having said feature?




From K-5 manual, page 123:


AF.C Continuous Mode

1 Focus priority - Takes pictures giving priority to keeping the subject in 
focus during Continuous Shooting. (default setting)
2 FPS priority - Takes pictures giving priority to the shooting speed during 
Continuous Shooting.


Dario 



--
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: I Wish

[paul stenquist]

No, Dario is correct. The continuous autofocus priority settings are explained 
in the manual, and I've been using continuous autofocus with focus priority.

On Dec 10, 2010, at 12:05 PM, Jack Davis wrote:

> It would need sufficient AF speed to allow refocusing tweaks. 
> So, is Dario wrong about the K-5 having said feature?
> 
> Jack
> 
> --- On Fri, 12/10/10, Mark Roberts  wrote:
> 
>> From: Mark Roberts 
>> Subject: Re: I Wish
>> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
>> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 8:45 AM
>> Jack Davis wrote:
>> 
>>> I wish there were an AF-C custom function setting
>> available wherein I could disallow the shutter's releasing
>> unless focus is achieved. Still, for special affects,
>> re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter priority option.
>>> Make sense to anyone else?
>> 
>> How would that work? AF-C is for predictive autofocus of
>> moving
>> subjects so, by definition, it has to fire when the subject
>> isn't in
>> focus (choosing the proper delay so that - if all goes well
>> - the
>> subject will be in focus by the time the mirror goes up and
>> the
>> shutter opens).
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> 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: I Wish

[Jack Davis]

Thanks again, Dario! I could look these things up I know, but a final question; 
does the K-5 also retain the AF.S focus lock feature?

Jack

--- On Fri, 12/10/10, Dario Bonazza  wrote:

> From: Dario Bonazza 
> Subject: Re: I Wish
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:12 AM
> Jack Davis wrote:
> 
> > It would need sufficient AF speed to allow refocusing
> tweaks.
> > So, is Dario wrong about the K-5 having said feature?
> 
> 
> > From K-5 manual, page 123:
> 
> AF.C Continuous Mode
> 
> 1 Focus priority - Takes pictures giving priority to
> keeping the subject in focus during Continuous Shooting.
> (default setting)
> 2 FPS priority - Takes pictures giving priority to the
> shooting speed during Continuous Shooting.
> 
> Dario 
> 
> -- 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: I Wish

[Jack Davis]

Thanks once again, Paul! Dario, also, confirmed "focus priority."

Jack

--- On Fri, 12/10/10, paul stenquist  wrote:

> From: paul stenquist 
> Subject: Re: I Wish
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:24 AM
> No, Dario is correct. The continuous
> autofocus priority settings are explained in the manual, and
> I've been using continuous autofocus with focus priority.
> 
> On Dec 10, 2010, at 12:05 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
> 
> > It would need sufficient AF speed to allow refocusing
> tweaks. 
> > So, is Dario wrong about the K-5 having said feature?
> > 
> > Jack
> > 
> > --- On Fri, 12/10/10, Mark Roberts 
> wrote:
> > 
> >> From: Mark Roberts 
> >> Subject: Re: I Wish
> >> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> >> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 8:45 AM
> >> Jack Davis wrote:
> >> 
> >>> I wish there were an AF-C custom function
> setting
> >> available wherein I could disallow the shutter's
> releasing
> >> unless focus is achieved. Still, for special
> affects,
> >> re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter
> priority option.
> >>> Make sense to anyone else?
> >> 
> >> How would that work? AF-C is for predictive
> autofocus of
> >> moving
> >> subjects so, by definition, it has to fire when
> the subject
> >> isn't in
> >> focus (choosing the proper delay so that - if all
> goes well
> >> - the
> >> subject will be in focus by the time the mirror
> goes up and
> >> the
> >> shutter opens).
> >> 
> >> 
> >> -- 
> >> 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.
> 


  

-- 
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: I Wish

[Dario Bonazza]

Jack Davis wrote:

Thanks again, Dario! I could look these things up I know, but a final 
question; does the K-5 also retain the AF.S focus lock feature?


Of course! Focus priority is the default setting for AF.S, with the 
alternative choice of Release priority.


Dario 



--
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: I Wish

[Jack Davis]

Thank you, Dario. Guess I wasn't the first to want such a feature. ;)

Jack

--- On Fri, 12/10/10, Dario Bonazza  wrote:

> From: Dario Bonazza 
> Subject: Re: I Wish
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:40 AM
> Jack Davis wrote:
> 
> > Thanks again, Dario! I could look these things up I
> know, but a final question; does the K-5 also retain the
> AF.S focus lock feature?
> 
> Of course! Focus priority is the default setting for AF.S,
> with the alternative choice of Release priority.
> 
> Dario 
> 
> -- 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: I Wish

[David J Brooks]

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Adam Maas  wrote:
> There isn't one? It's an option on the higher-end Canon and Nikon bodies.
>
> -Adam

I'll look in my manuals, but i'm positive I can do that on my Nikons.

Dave
>
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Jack Davis  wrote:
>> I wish there were an AF-C custom function setting available wherein I could 
>> disallow the shutter's releasing unless focus is achieved. Still, for 
>> special affects, re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter priority option.
>> Make sense to anyone else?
>>
>> Jack
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> M. Adam Maas
> http://www.mawz.ca
> Explorations of the City Around Us.
>
> --
> 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: I Wish

[Bruce Walker]

Good gawd, man! How much more evidence of pure studliness do you need? 
The K-5 is near-perfect and everyone should have one. Put the reviews 
down and get out your wallet.


The only reason there won't be one under my Xmas tree this year is that 
"we" are getting a new floor for the house. I could have bought a 645D 
for what that's setting us back.


-bmw


On 10-12-10 12:11 PM, Jack Davis wrote:

Not in the K20 manual.;) I hope to be reading the K-5 manual in not too long.
Awaiting a couple more reviews and additional feed back from the PDML.

Jack

--- On Fri, 12/10/10, Steven Desjardins  wrote:


From: Steven Desjardins
Subject: Re: I Wish
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:08 AM
Isn't there a custom setting for
something like that?




--
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: I Wish

[Jack Davis]

Sounds like the wife is dutifully reminding you of AAA the other 
"important" things that need money before you get a new toy.
Wives tend to be so damned practical. hurmpth!!

Jack

--- On Fri, 12/10/10, Bruce Walker  wrote:

> From: Bruce Walker 
> Subject: Re: I Wish
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 11:51 AM
> Good gawd, man! How much more
> evidence of pure studliness do you need? The K-5 is
> near-perfect and everyone should have one. Put the reviews
> down and get out your wallet.
> 
> The only reason there won't be one under my Xmas tree this
> year is that "we" are getting a new floor for the house. I
> could have bought a 645D for what that's setting us back.
> 
> -bmw
> 
> 
> On 10-12-10 12:11 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
> > Not in the K20 manual.;) I hope to be reading the K-5
> manual in not too long.
> > Awaiting a couple more reviews and additional feed
> back from the PDML.
> > 
> > Jack
> > 
> > --- On Fri, 12/10/10, Steven Desjardins 
> wrote:
> > 
> >> From: Steven Desjardins
> >> Subject: Re: I Wish
> >> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
> >> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:08 AM
> >> Isn't there a custom setting for
> >> something like that?
> >> 
> 
> 
> -- 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: I Wish

[Doug Franklin]

On 2010-12-10 11:42, Dario Bonazza wrote:

Jack Davis wrote:


I wish there were an AF-C custom function setting available wherein I
could disallow the shutter's releasing unless focus is achieved.
Still, for special affects, re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter
priority option.
Make sense to anyone else?


The K-5 has it. About AF-C, you can select between Focus Priority and
FPS Priority (meaning shutter priority).


And the ist * D and K-10D, too.

--
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)

--
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: I Wish

[John Francis]

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 03:40:37PM -0500, Doug Franklin wrote:
> On 2010-12-10 11:42, Dario Bonazza wrote:
> >Jack Davis wrote:
> >
> >>I wish there were an AF-C custom function setting available wherein I
> >>could disallow the shutter's releasing unless focus is achieved.
> >>Still, for special affects, re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter
> >>priority option.
> >>Make sense to anyone else?
> >
> >The K-5 has it. About AF-C, you can select between Focus Priority and
> >FPS Priority (meaning shutter priority).
> 
> And the ist * D and K-10D, too.

I don't think so.

On those earlier bodies, AF-S is fixed at "focus priority", and AF-C
at "release priority".  There's no way to select a different mode
while keeping the same AF-S/AF-C setting.


-- 
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: I Wish

[Doug Franklin]

On 2010-12-10 16:23, John Francis wrote:

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 03:40:37PM -0500, Doug Franklin wrote:

On 2010-12-10 11:42, Dario Bonazza wrote:

Jack Davis wrote:


I wish there were an AF-C custom function setting available wherein I
could disallow the shutter's releasing unless focus is achieved.
Still, for special affects, re-focus or.. I'd like to retain a shutter
priority option.
Make sense to anyone else?


The K-5 has it. About AF-C, you can select between Focus Priority and
FPS Priority (meaning shutter priority).


And the ist * D and K-10D, too.


I don't think so.

On those earlier bodies, AF-S is fixed at "focus priority", and AF-C
at "release priority".  There's no way to select a different mode
while keeping the same AF-S/AF-C setting.


I would have sworn that not only was there a setting to change it, but 
that I had changed it in the past.  But I can't find it in the camera at 
the moment.


--
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)

--
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: I Wish

[Paul Sorenson]

I feel your pain.  Some time before the end of the year we're supposed 
to be getting new windows.  That's *four* K-5s that could have been 
under the tree. :-(


-p

On 12/10/2010 1:51 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
Good gawd, man! How much more evidence of pure studliness do you need? 
The K-5 is near-perfect and everyone should have one. Put the reviews 
down and get out your wallet.


The only reason there won't be one under my Xmas tree this year is 
that "we" are getting a new floor for the house. I could have bought a 
645D for what that's setting us back.


-bmw


On 10-12-10 12:11 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
Not in the K20 manual.;) I hope to be reading the K-5 manual in not 
too long.

Awaiting a couple more reviews and additional feed back from the PDML.

Jack

--- On Fri, 12/10/10, Steven Desjardins  wrote:


From: Steven Desjardins
Subject: Re: I Wish
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:08 AM
Isn't there a custom setting for
something like that?







--
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: I Wish

[John Francis]

Well, if we're going to one-up each other:

I could have got four 645Ds (with lenses) fow what we spent
on the kitchen remodel. Then there was a problem with the
heating which meant it was time to do the re-ducting that
we'd been putting off for years, and a small number of old
windows to be replaced before the tax credit ran out. That
would have covered a couple of K-5s with grips & DA* zooms.

This would have been a bit less of an issue if my wife hadn't
been rather unexpectedly laid off from the job she's had for
the last 12 years (the day after we'd bought her the E-PL1).
No cause for panic, but it does mean discretionary spending
doesn't run to four-figure toys at the moment.


.

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 04:56:02PM -0600, Paul Sorenson wrote:
> I feel your pain.  Some time before the end of the year we're
> supposed to be getting new windows.  That's *four* K-5s that could
> have been under the tree. :-(
> 
> -p
> 
> On 12/10/2010 1:51 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
> >Good gawd, man! How much more evidence of pure studliness do you
> >need? The K-5 is near-perfect and everyone should have one. Put
> >the reviews down and get out your wallet.
> >
> >The only reason there won't be one under my Xmas tree this year is
> >that "we" are getting a new floor for the house. I could have
> >bought a 645D for what that's setting us back.
> >
> >-bmw
> >
> >
> >On 10-12-10 12:11 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
> >>Not in the K20 manual.;) I hope to be reading the K-5 manual in
> >>not too long.
> >>Awaiting a couple more reviews and additional feed back from the PDML.
> >>
> >>Jack
> >>
> >>--- On Fri, 12/10/10, Steven Desjardins  wrote:
> >>
> >>>From: Steven Desjardins
> >>>Subject: Re: I Wish
> >>>To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
> >>>Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:08 AM
> >>>Isn't there a custom setting for
> >>>something like that?
> >>>
> >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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: I Wish

[paul stenquist]

I could have had six 645Ds for what it cost me to save Grace from her drunken 
wife-beating father and the British legal aid idiocy.
Paul

On Dec 10, 2010, at 6:34 PM, John Francis wrote:

> 
> Well, if we're going to one-up each other:
> 
> I could have got four 645Ds (with lenses) fow what we spent
> on the kitchen remodel. Then there was a problem with the
> heating which meant it was time to do the re-ducting that
> we'd been putting off for years, and a small number of old
> windows to be replaced before the tax credit ran out. That
> would have covered a couple of K-5s with grips & DA* zooms.
> 
> This would have been a bit less of an issue if my wife hadn't
> been rather unexpectedly laid off from the job she's had for
> the last 12 years (the day after we'd bought her the E-PL1).
> No cause for panic, but it does mean discretionary spending
> doesn't run to four-figure toys at the moment.
> 
> 
> .
> 
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 04:56:02PM -0600, Paul Sorenson wrote:
>> I feel your pain.  Some time before the end of the year we're
>> supposed to be getting new windows.  That's *four* K-5s that could
>> have been under the tree. :-(
>> 
>> -p
>> 
>> On 12/10/2010 1:51 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
>>> Good gawd, man! How much more evidence of pure studliness do you
>>> need? The K-5 is near-perfect and everyone should have one. Put
>>> the reviews down and get out your wallet.
>>> 
>>> The only reason there won't be one under my Xmas tree this year is
>>> that "we" are getting a new floor for the house. I could have
>>> bought a 645D for what that's setting us back.
>>> 
>>> -bmw
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 10-12-10 12:11 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
>>>> Not in the K20 manual.;) I hope to be reading the K-5 manual in
>>>> not too long.
>>>> Awaiting a couple more reviews and additional feed back from the PDML.
>>>> 
>>>> Jack
>>>> 
>>>> --- On Fri, 12/10/10, Steven Desjardins  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> From: Steven Desjardins
>>>>> Subject: Re: I Wish
>>>>> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
>>>>> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:08 AM
>>>>> Isn't there a custom setting for
>>>>> something like that?
>>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> 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: I Wish

[Steven Desjardins]

yep.  almost 645D's on a new attached garage.

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 6:34 PM, John Francis  wrote:
>
> Well, if we're going to one-up each other:
>
> I could have got four 645Ds (with lenses) fow what we spent
> on the kitchen remodel. Then there was a problem with the
> heating which meant it was time to do the re-ducting that
> we'd been putting off for years, and a small number of old
> windows to be replaced before the tax credit ran out. That
> would have covered a couple of K-5s with grips & DA* zooms.
>
> This would have been a bit less of an issue if my wife hadn't
> been rather unexpectedly laid off from the job she's had for
> the last 12 years (the day after we'd bought her the E-PL1).
> No cause for panic, but it does mean discretionary spending
> doesn't run to four-figure toys at the moment.
>
>
> .
>
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 04:56:02PM -0600, Paul Sorenson wrote:
>> I feel your pain.  Some time before the end of the year we're
>> supposed to be getting new windows.  That's *four* K-5s that could
>> have been under the tree. :-(
>>
>> -p
>>
>> On 12/10/2010 1:51 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
>> >Good gawd, man! How much more evidence of pure studliness do you
>> >need? The K-5 is near-perfect and everyone should have one. Put
>> >the reviews down and get out your wallet.
>> >
>> >The only reason there won't be one under my Xmas tree this year is
>> >that "we" are getting a new floor for the house. I could have
>> >bought a 645D for what that's setting us back.
>> >
>> >-bmw
>> >
>> >
>> >On 10-12-10 12:11 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
>> >>Not in the K20 manual.;) I hope to be reading the K-5 manual in
>> >>not too long.
>> >>Awaiting a couple more reviews and additional feed back from the PDML.
>> >>
>> >>Jack
>> >>
>> >>--- On Fri, 12/10/10, Steven Desjardins  wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>From: Steven Desjardins
>> >>>Subject: Re: I Wish
>> >>>To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
>> >>>Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:08 AM
>> >>>Isn't there a custom setting for
>> >>>something like that?
>> >>>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>



-- 
Steve Desjardins

-- 
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: I Wish

[Steven Desjardins]

Really.  That's sad.

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 6:37 PM, paul stenquist  wrote:
> I could have had six 645Ds for what it cost me to save Grace from her drunken 
> wife-beating father and the British legal aid idiocy.
> Paul
>
> On Dec 10, 2010, at 6:34 PM, John Francis wrote:
>
>>
>> Well, if we're going to one-up each other:
>>
>> I could have got four 645Ds (with lenses) fow what we spent
>> on the kitchen remodel. Then there was a problem with the
>> heating which meant it was time to do the re-ducting that
>> we'd been putting off for years, and a small number of old
>> windows to be replaced before the tax credit ran out. That
>> would have covered a couple of K-5s with grips & DA* zooms.
>>
>> This would have been a bit less of an issue if my wife hadn't
>> been rather unexpectedly laid off from the job she's had for
>> the last 12 years (the day after we'd bought her the E-PL1).
>> No cause for panic, but it does mean discretionary spending
>> doesn't run to four-figure toys at the moment.
>>
>>
>> .
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 04:56:02PM -0600, Paul Sorenson wrote:
>>> I feel your pain.  Some time before the end of the year we're
>>> supposed to be getting new windows.  That's *four* K-5s that could
>>> have been under the tree. :-(
>>>
>>> -p
>>>
>>> On 12/10/2010 1:51 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
>>>> Good gawd, man! How much more evidence of pure studliness do you
>>>> need? The K-5 is near-perfect and everyone should have one. Put
>>>> the reviews down and get out your wallet.
>>>>
>>>> The only reason there won't be one under my Xmas tree this year is
>>>> that "we" are getting a new floor for the house. I could have
>>>> bought a 645D for what that's setting us back.
>>>>
>>>> -bmw
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 10-12-10 12:11 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
>>>>> Not in the K20 manual.;) I hope to be reading the K-5 manual in
>>>>> not too long.
>>>>> Awaiting a couple more reviews and additional feed back from the PDML.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jack
>>>>>
>>>>> --- On Fri, 12/10/10, Steven Desjardins  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> From: Steven Desjardins
>>>>>> Subject: Re: I Wish
>>>>>> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
>>>>>> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:08 AM
>>>>>> Isn't there a custom setting for
>>>>>> something like that?
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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.
>



-- 
Steve Desjardins

-- 
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: I Wish

[Jack Davis]

A bit of strategy is, also, involved here. In two or three months the financial 
issue should be at least partially neutralized. I'm honestly in no particular 
hurry. Have a spring trip or two in mind which may set the timing for me.

Jack

--- On Fri, 12/10/10, Paul Sorenson  wrote:

> From: Paul Sorenson 
> Subject: Re: I Wish
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 2:56 PM
> I feel your pain.  Some time
> before the end of the year we're supposed to be getting new
> windows.  That's *four* K-5s that could have been under
> the tree. :-(
> 
> -p
> 
> On 12/10/2010 1:51 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
> > Good gawd, man! How much more evidence of pure
> studliness do you need? The K-5 is near-perfect and everyone
> should have one. Put the reviews down and get out your
> wallet.
> > 
> > The only reason there won't be one under my Xmas tree
> this year is that "we" are getting a new floor for the
> house. I could have bought a 645D for what that's setting us
> back.
> > 
> > -bmw
> > 
> > 
> > On 10-12-10 12:11 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
> >> Not in the K20 manual.;) I hope to be reading the
> K-5 manual in not too long.
> >> Awaiting a couple more reviews and additional feed
> back from the PDML.
> >> 
> >> Jack
> >> 
> >> --- On Fri, 12/10/10, Steven Desjardins 
> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> From: Steven Desjardins
> >>> Subject: Re: I Wish
> >>> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
> >>> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:08 AM
> >>> Isn't there a custom setting for
> >>> something like that?
> >>> 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> -- 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: I Wish

[Jack Davis]

I know you agree that you got a real bargain and certainly the best possible 
outcome.

Jack

--- On Fri, 12/10/10, paul stenquist  wrote:

> From: paul stenquist 
> Subject: Re: I Wish
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 3:37 PM
> I could have had six 645Ds for what
> it cost me to save Grace from her drunken wife-beating
> father and the British legal aid idiocy.
> Paul
> 
> On Dec 10, 2010, at 6:34 PM, John Francis wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Well, if we're going to one-up each other:
> > 
> > I could have got four 645Ds (with lenses) fow what we
> spent
> > on the kitchen remodel. Then there was a problem with
> the
> > heating which meant it was time to do the re-ducting
> that
> > we'd been putting off for years, and a small number of
> old
> > windows to be replaced before the tax credit ran out.
> That
> > would have covered a couple of K-5s with grips &
> DA* zooms.
> > 
> > This would have been a bit less of an issue if my wife
> hadn't
> > been rather unexpectedly laid off from the job she's
> had for
> > the last 12 years (the day after we'd bought her the
> E-PL1).
> > No cause for panic, but it does mean discretionary
> spending
> > doesn't run to four-figure toys at the moment.
> > 
> > 
> > .
> > 
> > On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 04:56:02PM -0600, Paul
> Sorenson wrote:
> >> I feel your pain.  Some time before the end
> of the year we're
> >> supposed to be getting new windows.  That's
> *four* K-5s that could
> >> have been under the tree. :-(
> >> 
> >> -p
> >> 
> >> On 12/10/2010 1:51 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
> >>> Good gawd, man! How much more evidence of pure
> studliness do you
> >>> need? The K-5 is near-perfect and everyone
> should have one. Put
> >>> the reviews down and get out your wallet.
> >>> 
> >>> The only reason there won't be one under my
> Xmas tree this year is
> >>> that "we" are getting a new floor for the
> house. I could have
> >>> bought a 645D for what that's setting us
> back.
> >>> 
> >>> -bmw
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> On 10-12-10 12:11 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
> >>>> Not in the K20 manual.;) I hope to be
> reading the K-5 manual in
> >>>> not too long.
> >>>> Awaiting a couple more reviews and
> additional feed back from the PDML.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Jack
> >>>> 
> >>>> --- On Fri, 12/10/10, Steven
> Desjardins 
> wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> From: Steven Desjardins
> >>>>> Subject: Re: I Wish
> >>>>> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
> >>>>> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:08
> AM
> >>>>> Isn't there a custom setting for
> >>>>> something like that?
> >>>>> 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> -- 
> >> 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.
>



  


-- 
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: I Wish

[paul stenquist]

It was certainly the best possible outcome. But the British government's 
mindless funding of any citizen who wants to take legal action is indefensible. 
And having to compete with the UK
s financial resources makes it less than a bargain.
Paul
On Dec 10, 2010, at 7:08 PM, Jack Davis wrote:

> I know you agree that you got a real bargain and certainly the best possible 
> outcome.
> 
> Jack
> 
> --- On Fri, 12/10/10, paul stenquist  wrote:
> 
>> From: paul stenquist 
>> Subject: Re: I Wish
>> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
>> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 3:37 PM
>> I could have had six 645Ds for what
>> it cost me to save Grace from her drunken wife-beating
>> father and the British legal aid idiocy.
>> Paul
>> 
>> On Dec 10, 2010, at 6:34 PM, John Francis wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> Well, if we're going to one-up each other:
>>> 
>>> I could have got four 645Ds (with lenses) fow what we
>> spent
>>> on the kitchen remodel. Then there was a problem with
>> the
>>> heating which meant it was time to do the re-ducting
>> that
>>> we'd been putting off for years, and a small number of
>> old
>>> windows to be replaced before the tax credit ran out.
>> That
>>> would have covered a couple of K-5s with grips &
>> DA* zooms.
>>> 
>>> This would have been a bit less of an issue if my wife
>> hadn't
>>> been rather unexpectedly laid off from the job she's
>> had for
>>> the last 12 years (the day after we'd bought her the
>> E-PL1).
>>> No cause for panic, but it does mean discretionary
>> spending
>>> doesn't run to four-figure toys at the moment.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> .
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 04:56:02PM -0600, Paul
>> Sorenson wrote:
>>>> I feel your pain.  Some time before the end
>> of the year we're
>>>> supposed to be getting new windows.  That's
>> *four* K-5s that could
>>>> have been under the tree. :-(
>>>> 
>>>> -p
>>>> 
>>>> On 12/10/2010 1:51 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
>>>>> Good gawd, man! How much more evidence of pure
>> studliness do you
>>>>> need? The K-5 is near-perfect and everyone
>> should have one. Put
>>>>> the reviews down and get out your wallet.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The only reason there won't be one under my
>> Xmas tree this year is
>>>>> that "we" are getting a new floor for the
>> house. I could have
>>>>> bought a 645D for what that's setting us
>> back.
>>>>> 
>>>>> -bmw
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 10-12-10 12:11 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
>>>>>> Not in the K20 manual.;) I hope to be
>> reading the K-5 manual in
>>>>>> not too long.
>>>>>> Awaiting a couple more reviews and
>> additional feed back from the PDML.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Jack
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --- On Fri, 12/10/10, Steven
>> Desjardins 
>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> From: Steven Desjardins
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: I Wish
>>>>>>> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
>>>>>>> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:08
>> AM
>>>>>>> Isn't there a custom setting for
>>>>>>> something like that?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -- 
>>>> 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.
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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: I Wish

[John Francis]

It's a philosophical difference, and no more "indefensible"
than the US system of "one law for the rich, one for the poor"
which allows those with deep enough pockets to buy their way
out of just about any situation.

Under any system there will be cases that some find offensive.
You were just unfortunate to be on the receiving end of one
such situation.  In an ideal world the rules would cover all
cases, but realistically that will never happen.


On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 08:12:55PM -0500, paul stenquist wrote:
> It was certainly the best possible outcome. But the British government's 
> mindless funding of any citizen who wants to take legal action is 
> indefensible. And having to compete with the UK
> s financial resources makes it less than a bargain.
> Paul
> On Dec 10, 2010, at 7:08 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
> 
> > I know you agree that you got a real bargain and certainly the best 
> > possible outcome.
> > 
> > Jack
> > 
> > --- On Fri, 12/10/10, paul stenquist  wrote:
> > 
> >> From: paul stenquist 
> >> Subject: Re: I Wish
> >> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> >> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 3:37 PM
> >> I could have had six 645Ds for what
> >> it cost me to save Grace from her drunken wife-beating
> >> father and the British legal aid idiocy.
> >> Paul
> >> 
> >> On Dec 10, 2010, at 6:34 PM, John Francis wrote:
> >> 
> >>> 
> >>> Well, if we're going to one-up each other:
> >>> 
> >>> I could have got four 645Ds (with lenses) fow what we
> >> spent
> >>> on the kitchen remodel. Then there was a problem with
> >> the
> >>> heating which meant it was time to do the re-ducting
> >> that
> >>> we'd been putting off for years, and a small number of
> >> old
> >>> windows to be replaced before the tax credit ran out.
> >> That
> >>> would have covered a couple of K-5s with grips &
> >> DA* zooms.
> >>> 
> >>> This would have been a bit less of an issue if my wife
> >> hadn't
> >>> been rather unexpectedly laid off from the job she's
> >> had for
> >>> the last 12 years (the day after we'd bought her the
> >> E-PL1).
> >>> No cause for panic, but it does mean discretionary
> >> spending
> >>> doesn't run to four-figure toys at the moment.
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> .
> >>> 
> >>> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 04:56:02PM -0600, Paul
> >> Sorenson wrote:
> >>>> I feel your pain.  Some time before the end
> >> of the year we're
> >>>> supposed to be getting new windows.  That's
> >> *four* K-5s that could
> >>>> have been under the tree. :-(
> >>>> 
> >>>> -p
> >>>> 
> >>>> On 12/10/2010 1:51 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
> >>>>> Good gawd, man! How much more evidence of pure
> >> studliness do you
> >>>>> need? The K-5 is near-perfect and everyone
> >> should have one. Put
> >>>>> the reviews down and get out your wallet.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> The only reason there won't be one under my
> >> Xmas tree this year is
> >>>>> that "we" are getting a new floor for the
> >> house. I could have
> >>>>> bought a 645D for what that's setting us
> >> back.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> -bmw
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> On 10-12-10 12:11 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
> >>>>>> Not in the K20 manual.;) I hope to be
> >> reading the K-5 manual in
> >>>>>> not too long.
> >>>>>> Awaiting a couple more reviews and
> >> additional feed back from the PDML.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Jack
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> --- On Fri, 12/10/10, Steven
> >> Desjardins 
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> From: Steven Desjardins
> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: I Wish
> >>>>>>> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
> >>>>>>> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:08
> >> AM
> >>>>>>> Isn't there a custom setting for
> >>>>>>> something like that?
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> -- 
> >>>> 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.
> >> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > 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: I Wish

[paul stenquist]

On Dec 10, 2010, at 9:03 PM, John Francis wrote:

> 
> It's a philosophical difference, and no more "indefensible"
> than the US system of "one law for the rich, one for the poor"
> which allows those with deep enough pockets to buy their way
> out of just about any situation.
> 
> Under any system there will be cases that some find offensive.
> You were just unfortunate to be on the receiving end of one
> such situation.  In an ideal world the rules would cover all
> cases, but realistically that will never happen.

Perhaps but I  would have thought the British legal aid people  would have 
checked this guy's background and criminal record before they hired him the 
most expensive legal firm in Michigan. I would guess that this fiasco cost the 
UK taxpayer's  $200,000 or more.  In any case, I shouldn't have raised the 
issue, but I'm still having trouble getting over it.
Paul
> 
> 
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 08:12:55PM -0500, paul stenquist wrote:
>> It was certainly the best possible outcome. But the British government's 
>> mindless funding of any citizen who wants to take legal action is 
>> indefensible. And having to compete with the UK
>> s financial resources makes it less than a bargain.
>> Paul
>> On Dec 10, 2010, at 7:08 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
>> 
>>> I know you agree that you got a real bargain and certainly the best 
>>> possible outcome.
>>> 
>>> Jack
>>> 
>>> --- On Fri, 12/10/10, paul stenquist  wrote:
>>> 
>>>> From: paul stenquist 
>>>> Subject: Re: I Wish
>>>> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
>>>> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 3:37 PM
>>>> I could have had six 645Ds for what
>>>> it cost me to save Grace from her drunken wife-beating
>>>> father and the British legal aid idiocy.
>>>> Paul
>>>> 
>>>> On Dec 10, 2010, at 6:34 PM, John Francis wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Well, if we're going to one-up each other:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I could have got four 645Ds (with lenses) fow what we
>>>> spent
>>>>> on the kitchen remodel. Then there was a problem with
>>>> the
>>>>> heating which meant it was time to do the re-ducting
>>>> that
>>>>> we'd been putting off for years, and a small number of
>>>> old
>>>>> windows to be replaced before the tax credit ran out.
>>>> That
>>>>> would have covered a couple of K-5s with grips &
>>>> DA* zooms.
>>>>> 
>>>>> This would have been a bit less of an issue if my wife
>>>> hadn't
>>>>> been rather unexpectedly laid off from the job she's
>>>> had for
>>>>> the last 12 years (the day after we'd bought her the
>>>> E-PL1).
>>>>> No cause for panic, but it does mean discretionary
>>>> spending
>>>>> doesn't run to four-figure toys at the moment.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> .
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 04:56:02PM -0600, Paul
>>>> Sorenson wrote:
>>>>>> I feel your pain.  Some time before the end
>>>> of the year we're
>>>>>> supposed to be getting new windows.  That's
>>>> *four* K-5s that could
>>>>>> have been under the tree. :-(
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -p
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 12/10/2010 1:51 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
>>>>>>> Good gawd, man! How much more evidence of pure
>>>> studliness do you
>>>>>>> need? The K-5 is near-perfect and everyone
>>>> should have one. Put
>>>>>>> the reviews down and get out your wallet.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The only reason there won't be one under my
>>>> Xmas tree this year is
>>>>>>> that "we" are getting a new floor for the
>>>> house. I could have
>>>>>>> bought a 645D for what that's setting us
>>>> back.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -bmw
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 10-12-10 12:11 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
>>>>>>>> Not in the K20 manual.;) I hope to be
>>>> reading the K-5 manual in
>>>>>>>> not too long.
>>>>

Re: I Wish

[P. J. Alling]

Apparently it's discriminatory to keep sex-abusers from adopting in 
children in Great Britain.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2010/nov/30/sex-offenders-adoption-children



On 12/10/2010 8:12 PM, paul stenquist wrote:

It was certainly the best possible outcome. But the British government's 
mindless funding of any citizen who wants to take legal action is indefensible. 
And having to compete with the UK
s financial resources makes it less than a bargain.
Paul
On Dec 10, 2010, at 7:08 PM, Jack Davis wrote:


I know you agree that you got a real bargain and certainly the best possible 
outcome.

Jack

--- On Fri, 12/10/10, paul stenquist  wrote:


From: paul stenquist
Subject: Re: I Wish
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 3:37 PM
I could have had six 645Ds for what
it cost me to save Grace from her drunken wife-beating
father and the British legal aid idiocy.
Paul

On Dec 10, 2010, at 6:34 PM, John Francis wrote:


Well, if we're going to one-up each other:

I could have got four 645Ds (with lenses) fow what we

spent

on the kitchen remodel. Then there was a problem with

the

heating which meant it was time to do the re-ducting

that

we'd been putting off for years, and a small number of

old

windows to be replaced before the tax credit ran out.

That

would have covered a couple of K-5s with grips&

DA* zooms.

This would have been a bit less of an issue if my wife

hadn't

been rather unexpectedly laid off from the job she's

had for

the last 12 years (the day after we'd bought her the

E-PL1).

No cause for panic, but it does mean discretionary

spending

doesn't run to four-figure toys at the moment.


.

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 04:56:02PM -0600, Paul

Sorenson wrote:

I feel your pain.  Some time before the end

of the year we're

supposed to be getting new windows.  That's

*four* K-5s that could

have been under the tree. :-(

-p

On 12/10/2010 1:51 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:

Good gawd, man! How much more evidence of pure

studliness do you

need? The K-5 is near-perfect and everyone

should have one. Put

the reviews down and get out your wallet.

The only reason there won't be one under my

Xmas tree this year is

that "we" are getting a new floor for the

house. I could have

bought a 645D for what that's setting us

back.

-bmw


On 10-12-10 12:11 PM, Jack Davis wrote:

Not in the K20 manual.;) I hope to be

reading the K-5 manual in

not too long.
Awaiting a couple more reviews and

additional feed back from the PDML.

Jack

--- On Fri, 12/10/10, Steven

Desjardins
wrote:

From: Steven Desjardins
Subject: Re: I Wish
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:08

AM

Isn't there a custom setting for
something like that?





--
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.







--
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.





--
Where's the Kaboom?  There was supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom!

--Marvin the Martian.


--
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: I Wish

[Jack Davis]

Your success in "rescuing" your grand daughter for your daughter as well as 
yourself is priceless. I completely get that the cost/funds imbalance was 
extremely unfair and difficult to understand.

Jack

--- On Fri, 12/10/10, paul stenquist  wrote:

> From: paul stenquist 
> Subject: Re: I Wish
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 5:12 PM
> It was certainly the best possible
> outcome. But the British government's mindless funding of
> any citizen who wants to take legal action is indefensible.
> And having to compete with the UK
> s financial resources makes it less than a bargain.
> Paul
> On Dec 10, 2010, at 7:08 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
> 
> > I know you agree that you got a real bargain and
> certainly the best possible outcome.
> > 
> > Jack
> > 
> > --- On Fri, 12/10/10, paul stenquist 
> wrote:
> > 
> >> From: paul stenquist 
> >> Subject: Re: I Wish
> >> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> >> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 3:37 PM
> >> I could have had six 645Ds for what
> >> it cost me to save Grace from her drunken
> wife-beating
> >> father and the British legal aid idiocy.
> >> Paul
> >> 
> >> On Dec 10, 2010, at 6:34 PM, John Francis wrote:
> >> 
> >>> 
> >>> Well, if we're going to one-up each other:
> >>> 
> >>> I could have got four 645Ds (with lenses) fow
> what we
> >> spent
> >>> on the kitchen remodel. Then there was a
> problem with
> >> the
> >>> heating which meant it was time to do the
> re-ducting
> >> that
> >>> we'd been putting off for years, and a small
> number of
> >> old
> >>> windows to be replaced before the tax credit
> ran out.
> >> That
> >>> would have covered a couple of K-5s with grips
> &
> >> DA* zooms.
> >>> 
> >>> This would have been a bit less of an issue if
> my wife
> >> hadn't
> >>> been rather unexpectedly laid off from the job
> she's
> >> had for
> >>> the last 12 years (the day after we'd bought
> her the
> >> E-PL1).
> >>> No cause for panic, but it does mean
> discretionary
> >> spending
> >>> doesn't run to four-figure toys at the
> moment.
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> .
> >>> 
> >>> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 04:56:02PM -0600,
> Paul
> >> Sorenson wrote:
> >>>> I feel your pain.  Some time before
> the end
> >> of the year we're
> >>>> supposed to be getting new windows. 
> That's
> >> *four* K-5s that could
> >>>> have been under the tree. :-(
> >>>> 
> >>>> -p
> >>>> 
> >>>> On 12/10/2010 1:51 PM, Bruce Walker
> wrote:
> >>>>> Good gawd, man! How much more evidence
> of pure
> >> studliness do you
> >>>>> need? The K-5 is near-perfect and
> everyone
> >> should have one. Put
> >>>>> the reviews down and get out your
> wallet.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> The only reason there won't be one
> under my
> >> Xmas tree this year is
> >>>>> that "we" are getting a new floor for
> the
> >> house. I could have
> >>>>> bought a 645D for what that's setting
> us
> >> back.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> -bmw
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> On 10-12-10 12:11 PM, Jack Davis
> wrote:
> >>>>>> Not in the K20 manual.;) I hope to
> be
> >> reading the K-5 manual in
> >>>>>> not too long.
> >>>>>> Awaiting a couple more reviews
> and
> >> additional feed back from the PDML.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Jack
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> --- On Fri, 12/10/10, Steven
> >> Desjardins
> 
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> From: Steven Desjardins
> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: I Wish
> >>>>>>> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail
> List"
> >>>>>>> Date: Friday, December 10,
> 2010, 9:08
> >> AM
> >>>>>>> Isn't there a custom setting
> for
> >>>>>>> something like that?
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> -- 
> >>>> 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.
> >> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > 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: I Wish

[David Mann]

On Dec 11, 2010, at 5:58 AM, paul stenquist wrote:

> I don't think continuous autofocus is predictive. It just continues to adjust 
> focus as the shutter button is held down at least half way. I think that if 
> it were predictive, it would work only for one rate of subject movement.

The Z-1p had predictive AF (I just checked the manual).  So I hope the DSLRs 
have it!  There shouldn't be any reason why you couldn't track an accelerating 
subject, unless the sensors impose a limitation of some kind.

I'm starting to get frustrated with my K10D because it seems to be trying to 
focus beyond infinity with wide-angle lenses, when I try and focus on distant 
subjects.  Might need to have it looked at because I have it set to only 
release the shutter if it's in focus, while in AF-S mode.  So I have to use 
AF-C a lot more.

Cheers,
Dave


-- 
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: I Wish

[eckinator]

ouch... what a long list of unhappened 645Ds. I'll add that I am one
behind because my insurance company gave me bad advice and my sick pay
was € 9900 too low over the past 11 months which pretty much makes
/my/ 645D a non-reality... grrr
Ecke

2010/12/11 David Mann :
> On Dec 11, 2010, at 5:58 AM, paul stenquist wrote:
>
>> I don't think continuous autofocus is predictive. It just continues to 
>> adjust focus as the shutter button is held down at least half way. I think 
>> that if it were predictive, it would work only for one rate of subject 
>> movement.
>
> The Z-1p had predictive AF (I just checked the manual).  So I hope the DSLRs 
> have it!  There shouldn't be any reason why you couldn't track an 
> accelerating subject, unless the sensors impose a limitation of some kind.
>
> I'm starting to get frustrated with my K10D because it seems to be trying to 
> focus beyond infinity with wide-angle lenses, when I try and focus on distant 
> subjects.  Might need to have it looked at because I have it set to only 
> release the shutter if it's in focus, while in AF-S mode.  So I have to use 
> AF-C a lot more.
>
> Cheers,
> Dave
>
>
> --
> 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: I Wish

[paul stenquist]

Thanks Jack. Yeah, the talk about big expenditures just reminded me of it. But 
it's water under the bridge, and Grace is a joy. It does me no good to dwell on 
it.
Paul

On Dec 10, 2010, at 11:04 PM, Jack Davis wrote:

> Your success in "rescuing" your grand daughter for your daughter as well as 
> yourself is priceless. I completely get that the cost/funds imbalance was 
> extremely unfair and difficult to understand.
> 
> Jack
> 
> --- On Fri, 12/10/10, paul stenquist  wrote:
> 
>> From: paul stenquist 
>> Subject: Re: I Wish
>> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
>> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 5:12 PM
>> It was certainly the best possible
>> outcome. But the British government's mindless funding of
>> any citizen who wants to take legal action is indefensible.
>> And having to compete with the UK
>> s financial resources makes it less than a bargain.
>> Paul
>> On Dec 10, 2010, at 7:08 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
>> 
>>> I know you agree that you got a real bargain and
>> certainly the best possible outcome.
>>> 
>>> Jack
>>> 
>>> --- On Fri, 12/10/10, paul stenquist 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> From: paul stenquist 
>>>> Subject: Re: I Wish
>>>> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
>>>> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 3:37 PM
>>>> I could have had six 645Ds for what
>>>> it cost me to save Grace from her drunken
>> wife-beating
>>>> father and the British legal aid idiocy.
>>>> Paul
>>>> 
>>>> On Dec 10, 2010, at 6:34 PM, John Francis wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Well, if we're going to one-up each other:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I could have got four 645Ds (with lenses) fow
>> what we
>>>> spent
>>>>> on the kitchen remodel. Then there was a
>> problem with
>>>> the
>>>>> heating which meant it was time to do the
>> re-ducting
>>>> that
>>>>> we'd been putting off for years, and a small
>> number of
>>>> old
>>>>> windows to be replaced before the tax credit
>> ran out.
>>>> That
>>>>> would have covered a couple of K-5s with grips
>> &
>>>> DA* zooms.
>>>>> 
>>>>> This would have been a bit less of an issue if
>> my wife
>>>> hadn't
>>>>> been rather unexpectedly laid off from the job
>> she's
>>>> had for
>>>>> the last 12 years (the day after we'd bought
>> her the
>>>> E-PL1).
>>>>> No cause for panic, but it does mean
>> discretionary
>>>> spending
>>>>> doesn't run to four-figure toys at the
>> moment.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> .
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 04:56:02PM -0600,
>> Paul
>>>> Sorenson wrote:
>>>>>> I feel your pain.  Some time before
>> the end
>>>> of the year we're
>>>>>> supposed to be getting new windows. 
>> That's
>>>> *four* K-5s that could
>>>>>> have been under the tree. :-(
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -p
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 12/10/2010 1:51 PM, Bruce Walker
>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Good gawd, man! How much more evidence
>> of pure
>>>> studliness do you
>>>>>>> need? The K-5 is near-perfect and
>> everyone
>>>> should have one. Put
>>>>>>> the reviews down and get out your
>> wallet.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The only reason there won't be one
>> under my
>>>> Xmas tree this year is
>>>>>>> that "we" are getting a new floor for
>> the
>>>> house. I could have
>>>>>>> bought a 645D for what that's setting
>> us
>>>> back.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -bmw
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 10-12-10 12:11 PM, Jack Davis
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Not in the K20 manual.;) I hope to
>> be
>>>> reading the K-5 manual in
>>>>>>>> not too long.
>>>>>>>> Awaiting a couple more reviews
>> and
>>>> additional feed back from the PDML.
>>>>

Re: I Wish

[David J Brooks]

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 5:56 PM, Paul Sorenson  wrote:
> I feel your pain.  Some time before the end of the year we're supposed to be
> getting new windows.  That's *four* K-5s that could have been under the
> tree. :-(
>
> -p

I had my heating and air guy in on Thursday to clean the gas furnace.
His assessment was its just about ready to fail, cracks are eminent.
He is going to try and do the work next week, depending on avalability.

That will cost about a D3.

Dave

>
> On 12/10/2010 1:51 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
>>
>> Good gawd, man! How much more evidence of pure studliness do you need? The
>> K-5 is near-perfect and everyone should have one. Put the reviews down and
>> get out your wallet.
>>
>> The only reason there won't be one under my Xmas tree this year is that
>> "we" are getting a new floor for the house. I could have bought a 645D for
>> what that's setting us back.
>>
>> -bmw
>>
>>
>> On 10-12-10 12:11 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
>>>
>>> Not in the K20 manual.;) I hope to be reading the K-5 manual in not too
>>> long.
>>> Awaiting a couple more reviews and additional feed back from the PDML.
>>>
>>> Jack
>>>
>>> --- On Fri, 12/10/10, Steven Desjardins  wrote:
>>>
>>>> From: Steven Desjardins
>>>> Subject: Re: I Wish
>>>> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
>>>> Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 9:08 AM
>>>> Isn't there a custom setting for
>>>> something like that?
>>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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: I Wish

[John Sessoms]

From: John Francis


It's a philosophical difference, and no more "indefensible"
than the US system of "one law for the rich, one for the poor"
which allows those with deep enough pockets to buy their way
out of just about any situation.


My understanding is the British law in this case is sort of in response 
to an old U.S. Supreme Court decision that EVERY defendant should have 
access to adequate legal counsel.


The U.S. decision applied only to criminal cases, but the British didn't 
make that distinction when Parliament passed their law. And they 
actually put some teeth in their law.


--
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: I Wish

[Bob W]

> > It's a philosophical difference, and no more "indefensible"
> > than the US system of "one law for the rich, one for the poor"
> > which allows those with deep enough pockets to buy their way
> > out of just about any situation.
> 
> My understanding is the British law in this case is sort of in response
> to an old U.S. Supreme Court decision that EVERY defendant should have
> access to adequate legal counsel.
> 
> The U.S. decision applied only to criminal cases, but the British
> didn't
> make that distinction when Parliament passed their law. And they
> actually put some teeth in their law.

they did make a distinction. There are different rules and entitlements
applying to criminal and civil law and different organisations dealing with
each branch.


Any human system which tries to be just is subject to freeloaders, to people
whose entitlement may seem unfair, and to people we just plain don't like
such as wife-beaters, but that's part of the price of trying to be a just
society. One that I personally don't mind paying provided there are
reasonable efforts to identify and deter the few freeloaders.

In addition to that, the rates paid to lawyers working under the scheme are
fixed by parliament, so it doesn't matter how much the law firm may charge
for private work. For legal aid work they get the same rate as everyone
else. Having said that, plenty of lawyers have become millionaires from
legal aid work, so they're not paying peanuts.

B


-- 
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: I Wish

[John Sessoms]

From: "Bob W"


It's a philosophical difference, and no more "indefensible"
> > than the US system of "one law for the rich, one for the poor"
> > which allows those with deep enough pockets to buy their way
> > out of just about any situation.

>
> My understanding is the British law in this case is sort of in response
> to an old U.S. Supreme Court decision that EVERY defendant should have
> access to adequate legal counsel.
>
> The U.S. decision applied only to criminal cases, but the British
> didn't
> make that distinction when Parliament passed their law. And they
> actually put some teeth in their law.


they did make a distinction. There are different rules and entitlements
applying to criminal and civil law and different organisations dealing with
each branch.



What I meant is the British applied the concept that "no one should be 
denied effective legal representation just because they can't afford to 
pay a lawyer" to civil law as well as criminal cases.


They did not limit it to criminal defendants the way the U.S. Supreme 
Court decision did. In the U.S. you can still be cheated of justice in 
civil matters simply because you don't have as much money to pay lawyers 
as the other side does.


Civil litigation is expensive, and someone with enough money can screw 
you in court - burying you in lawyers, forcing you to choose between 
bankruptcy or surrender. Sometimes both.


It happened to someone I know.

He was a one man shop working on computer networks starting the early 
80s. When the internet began to open up to commercial operations, he 
registered his domain name as gateway.net.


Later a company in South Dakota chose the name Gateway2000. In the late 
90s they realized the 2000 part of their name was getting ready to 
become obsolete, and changed their name to Gateway.


They offered my friend $1000 for the domain name he had been using for 
15 years, and when he declined to sell, they sued him for trademark 
infringement. Buried him in lawyers.


The first thing they did was seek an injunction to prohibit him from 
using his domain name until the case was settled. An injunction the 
court granted despite his showing that he had been doing business as 
Gateway, using the domain name gateway.net a decade before the 
Gateway2000 company was incorporated, and long before they decided to 
change their name to simply Gateway.


Gateway2000 had the money, and were able to buy the court. Their lawyers 
shopped around until they found a judge who would grant the injunction.


Bankrupted him. Gateway used their financial muscle to buy "justice"; or 
more properly, to deny justice to my acquaintance.


Which, BTW, is why I never recommend Gateway, and won't buy anything 
from them. And since Acer now owns Gateway, screw them too!



Any human system which tries to be just is subject to freeloaders, to people
whose entitlement may seem unfair, and to people we just plain don't like
such as wife-beaters, but that's part of the price of trying to be a just
society. One that I personally don't mind paying provided there are
reasonable efforts to identify and deter the few freeloaders.


I'm not criticizing it. As you might infer from above, I don't think 
it's a good idea for "justice" to be for sale to the highest bidder.



--
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: I Wish

[John Francis]

On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 09:39:07AM -0500, John Sessoms wrote:
> From: John Francis
> 
> >It's a philosophical difference, and no more "indefensible"
> >than the US system of "one law for the rich, one for the poor"
> >which allows those with deep enough pockets to buy their way
> >out of just about any situation.
> 
> My understanding is the British law in this case is sort of in
> response to an old U.S. Supreme Court decision that EVERY defendant
> should have access to adequate legal counsel.
> 
> The U.S. decision applied only to criminal cases, but the British
> didn't make that distinction when Parliament passed their law. And
> they actually put some teeth in their law.

That may be one part of it.  Another part is that the British setup
will generally handle something like a custody hearing in a lower
court, so the costs are a lot more reasonable.

I don't think anybody is suggesting that Paul didn't get a raw deal
from the way the system worked in his particular case. But this was
an outlier case, complicated by the fact that a minor child appears
to have been removed from the jurisdiction of the appropriate court
without the proper formalities.  This in itself could be enough to
guarantee legal support for a British citizen claiming parental
rights, not to mention the fact that the cornerstone of many legal
systems, the presumption of innocence, is only worth anything if
it is applied to all without pre-judging how deserving they are.

It's easy to support a principle if you agree with the beneficiary.
The true test is if you can support someone you personally dislike.
As Voltaire probably didn't actually state: "I disagree with what
you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it".



-- 
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: I Wish

[Walter Gilbert]

 It's my understanding that, in the British system, unlike in the US, 
the loser of the case is responsible for the legal fees and court costs 
of the winner.  That would tend to make their system more workable, an d 
would almost certainly make them more likely to foot the bill for the 
highest-paid law firm in Detroit, knowing they wouldn't have to pay for 
the other guy's representation if they lost.


Of course, my understanding could be way off-base.  But, it seems like I 
read that somewhere.


-- Walt

On 12/11/2010 12:03 PM, John Sessoms wrote:

From: "Bob W"


It's a philosophical difference, and no more "indefensible"
> > than the US system of "one law for the rich, one for the poor"
> > which allows those with deep enough pockets to buy their way
> > out of just about any situation.

>
> My understanding is the British law in this case is sort of in 
response
> to an old U.S. Supreme Court decision that EVERY defendant should 
have

> access to adequate legal counsel.
>
> The U.S. decision applied only to criminal cases, but the British
> didn't
> make that distinction when Parliament passed their law. And they
> actually put some teeth in their law.


they did make a distinction. There are different rules and entitlements
applying to criminal and civil law and different organisations 
dealing with

each branch.



What I meant is the British applied the concept that "no one should be 
denied effective legal representation just because they can't afford 
to pay a lawyer" to civil law as well as criminal cases.


They did not limit it to criminal defendants the way the U.S. Supreme 
Court decision did. In the U.S. you can still be cheated of justice in 
civil matters simply because you don't have as much money to pay 
lawyers as the other side does.


Civil litigation is expensive, and someone with enough money can screw 
you in court - burying you in lawyers, forcing you to choose between 
bankruptcy or surrender. Sometimes both.


It happened to someone I know.

He was a one man shop working on computer networks starting the early 
80s. When the internet began to open up to commercial operations, he 
registered his domain name as gateway.net.


Later a company in South Dakota chose the name Gateway2000. In the 
late 90s they realized the 2000 part of their name was getting ready 
to become obsolete, and changed their name to Gateway.


They offered my friend $1000 for the domain name he had been using for 
15 years, and when he declined to sell, they sued him for trademark 
infringement. Buried him in lawyers.


The first thing they did was seek an injunction to prohibit him from 
using his domain name until the case was settled. An injunction the 
court granted despite his showing that he had been doing business as 
Gateway, using the domain name gateway.net a decade before the 
Gateway2000 company was incorporated, and long before they decided to 
change their name to simply Gateway.


Gateway2000 had the money, and were able to buy the court. Their 
lawyers shopped around until they found a judge who would grant the 
injunction.


Bankrupted him. Gateway used their financial muscle to buy "justice"; 
or more properly, to deny justice to my acquaintance.


Which, BTW, is why I never recommend Gateway, and won't buy anything 
from them. And since Acer now owns Gateway, screw them too!


Any human system which tries to be just is subject to freeloaders, to 
people
whose entitlement may seem unfair, and to people we just plain don't 
like
such as wife-beaters, but that's part of the price of trying to be a 
just

society. One that I personally don't mind paying provided there are
reasonable efforts to identify and deter the few freeloaders.


I'm not criticizing it. As you might infer from above, I don't think 
it's a good idea for "justice" to be for sale to the highest bidder.






--
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: I Wish

[Keith Whaley]

John Sessoms wrote:

[...]

Gateway2000 had the money, and were able to buy the court. Their lawyers 
shopped around until they found a judge who would grant the injunction.


Bankrupted him. Gateway used their financial muscle to buy "justice"; or 
more properly, to deny justice to my acquaintance.


Which, BTW, is why I never recommend Gateway, and won't buy anything 
from them. And since Acer now owns Gateway, screw them too!


Any human system which tries to be just is subject to freeloaders, to 
people

whose entitlement may seem unfair, and to people we just plain don't like
such as wife-beaters, but that's part of the price of trying to be a just
society. One that I personally don't mind paying provided there are
reasonable efforts to identify and deter the few freeloaders.


I'm not criticizing it. As you might infer from above, I don't think 
it's a good idea for "justice" to be for sale to the highest bidder.



I totally agree! Thanks or the true story. Good to know...

keith whaley

--
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: I Wish

[Jack Davis]

It's my understanding (in some cases I know to be correct) that in USA civil 
cases, court costs and attorney's fees are included in the award. How common 
this is, is not known to me.

Jack

--- On Sat, 12/11/10, Walter Gilbert  wrote:

> From: Walter Gilbert 
> Subject: Re: I Wish
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
> Date: Saturday, December 11, 2010, 10:16 AM
>  It's my understanding that, in the
> British system, unlike in the US, the loser of the case is
> responsible for the legal fees and court costs of the
> winner.  That would tend to make their system more
> workable, an d would almost certainly make them more likely
> to foot the bill for the highest-paid law firm in Detroit,
> knowing they wouldn't have to pay for the other guy's
> representation if they lost.
> 
> Of course, my understanding could be way off-base. 
> But, it seems like I read that somewhere.
> 
> -- Walt
> 
> On 12/11/2010 12:03 PM, John Sessoms wrote:
> > From: "Bob W"
> > 
> >>>> It's a philosophical difference, and no
> more "indefensible"
> >>>> > > than the US system of "one law
> for the rich, one for the poor"
> >>>> > > which allows those with deep
> enough pockets to buy their way
> >>>> > > out of just about any
> situation.
> >>> >
> >>> > My understanding is the British law in
> this case is sort of in response
> >>> > to an old U.S. Supreme Court decision
> that EVERY defendant should have
> >>> > access to adequate legal counsel.
> >>> >
> >>> > The U.S. decision applied only to
> criminal cases, but the British
> >>> > didn't
> >>> > make that distinction when Parliament
> passed their law. And they
> >>> > actually put some teeth in their law.
> >> 
> >> they did make a distinction. There are different
> rules and entitlements
> >> applying to criminal and civil law and different
> organisations dealing with
> >> each branch.
> >> <http://www.legalservices.gov.uk/default.asp>
> > 
> > What I meant is the British applied the concept that
> "no one should be denied effective legal representation just
> because they can't afford to pay a lawyer" to civil law as
> well as criminal cases.
> > 
> > They did not limit it to criminal defendants the way
> the U.S. Supreme Court decision did. In the U.S. you can
> still be cheated of justice in civil matters simply because
> you don't have as much money to pay lawyers as the other
> side does.
> > 
> > Civil litigation is expensive, and someone with enough
> money can screw you in court - burying you in lawyers,
> forcing you to choose between bankruptcy or surrender.
> Sometimes both.
> > 
> > It happened to someone I know.
> > 
> > He was a one man shop working on computer networks
> starting the early 80s. When the internet began to open up
> to commercial operations, he registered his domain name as
> gateway.net.
> > 
> > Later a company in South Dakota chose the name
> Gateway2000. In the late 90s they realized the 2000 part of
> their name was getting ready to become obsolete, and changed
> their name to Gateway.
> > 
> > They offered my friend $1000 for the domain name he
> had been using for 15 years, and when he declined to sell,
> they sued him for trademark infringement. Buried him in
> lawyers.
> > 
> > The first thing they did was seek an injunction to
> prohibit him from using his domain name until the case was
> settled. An injunction the court granted despite his showing
> that he had been doing business as Gateway, using the domain
> name gateway.net a decade before the Gateway2000 company was
> incorporated, and long before they decided to change their
> name to simply Gateway.
> > 
> > Gateway2000 had the money, and were able to buy the
> court. Their lawyers shopped around until they found a judge
> who would grant the injunction.
> > 
> > Bankrupted him. Gateway used their financial muscle to
> buy "justice"; or more properly, to deny justice to my
> acquaintance.
> > 
> > Which, BTW, is why I never recommend Gateway, and
> won't buy anything from them. And since Acer now owns
> Gateway, screw them too!
> > 
> >> Any human system which tries to be just is subject
> to freeloaders, to people
> >> whose entitlement may seem unfair, and to people
> we just plain don't like
> >> such as wife-beaters, but that's part of the price
> of trying to be a just
> >> society. One that I personally don't mind paying
> provided there are
> >> reasonable efforts to identify and deter the few
> freeloaders.
> > 
> > I'm not criticizing it. As you might infer from above,
> I don't think it's a good idea for "justice" to be for sale
> to the highest bidder.
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> -- 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: I Wish

[Walter Gilbert]

 It varies from one state to the next, and from one jurisdiction 
(district or circuit level) to the next.  In some cases, it's up to the 
judge's discretion, and in others, it's the jury's.  State courts have a 
huge degree of autonomy, even down to the very basis of legal precedent 
-- in most US states, law is based on British common law, whereas, in 
Louisiana, it's French common law.


-- Walt

On 12/11/2010 1:41 PM, Jack Davis wrote:

It's my understanding (in some cases I know to be correct) that in USA civil 
cases, court costs and attorney's fees are included in the award. How common 
this is, is not known to me.

Jack

--- On Sat, 12/11/10, Walter Gilbert  wrote:


From: Walter Gilbert
Subject: Re: I Wish
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Date: Saturday, December 11, 2010, 10:16 AM
  It's my understanding that, in the
British system, unlike in the US, the loser of the case is
responsible for the legal fees and court costs of the
winner.  That would tend to make their system more
workable, an d would almost certainly make them more likely
to foot the bill for the highest-paid law firm in Detroit,
knowing they wouldn't have to pay for the other guy's
representation if they lost.

Of course, my understanding could be way off-base. 
But, it seems like I read that somewhere.


-- Walt

On 12/11/2010 12:03 PM, John Sessoms wrote:

From: "Bob W"


It's a philosophical difference, and no

more "indefensible"

than the US system of "one law

for the rich, one for the poor"

which allows those with deep

enough pockets to buy their way

out of just about any

situation.

My understanding is the British law in

this case is sort of in response

to an old U.S. Supreme Court decision

that EVERY defendant should have

access to adequate legal counsel.

The U.S. decision applied only to

criminal cases, but the British

didn't
make that distinction when Parliament

passed their law. And they

actually put some teeth in their law.

they did make a distinction. There are different

rules and entitlements

applying to criminal and civil law and different

organisations dealing with

each branch.
<http://www.legalservices.gov.uk/default.asp>

What I meant is the British applied the concept that

"no one should be denied effective legal representation just
because they can't afford to pay a lawyer" to civil law as
well as criminal cases.

They did not limit it to criminal defendants the way

the U.S. Supreme Court decision did. In the U.S. you can
still be cheated of justice in civil matters simply because
you don't have as much money to pay lawyers as the other
side does.

Civil litigation is expensive, and someone with enough

money can screw you in court - burying you in lawyers,
forcing you to choose between bankruptcy or surrender.
Sometimes both.

It happened to someone I know.

He was a one man shop working on computer networks

starting the early 80s. When the internet began to open up
to commercial operations, he registered his domain name as
gateway.net.

Later a company in South Dakota chose the name

Gateway2000. In the late 90s they realized the 2000 part of
their name was getting ready to become obsolete, and changed
their name to Gateway.

They offered my friend $1000 for the domain name he

had been using for 15 years, and when he declined to sell,
they sued him for trademark infringement. Buried him in
lawyers.

The first thing they did was seek an injunction to

prohibit him from using his domain name until the case was
settled. An injunction the court granted despite his showing
that he had been doing business as Gateway, using the domain
name gateway.net a decade before the Gateway2000 company was
incorporated, and long before they decided to change their
name to simply Gateway.

Gateway2000 had the money, and were able to buy the

court. Their lawyers shopped around until they found a judge
who would grant the injunction.

Bankrupted him. Gateway used their financial muscle to

buy "justice"; or more properly, to deny justice to my
acquaintance.

Which, BTW, is why I never recommend Gateway, and

won't buy anything from them. And since Acer now owns
Gateway, screw them too!

Any human system which tries to be just is subject

to freeloaders, to people

whose entitlement may seem unfair, and to people

we just plain don't like

such as wife-beaters, but that's part of the price

of trying to be a just

society. One that I personally don't mind paying

provided there are

reasonable efforts to identify and deter the few

freeloaders.

I'm not criticizing it. As you might infer from above,

I don't think it's a good idea for "justice" to be for sale
to the highest bidder.




-- 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

Re: I Wish

[John Sessoms]

From: Walter Gilbert


  It's my understanding that, in the British system, unlike in the US,
the loser of the case is responsible for the legal fees and court costs
of the winner.  That would tend to make their system more workable, an d
would almost certainly make them more likely to foot the bill for the
highest-paid law firm in Detroit, knowing they wouldn't have to pay for
the other guy's representation if they lost.

Of course, my understanding could be way off-base.  But, it seems like I
read that somewhere.


There are some places in the U.S. system where "loser pays" applies. 
That's one of the arguments for registering your copyrights, because 
that's one of those places.


You still don't want to go to court if you can find a way to enforce 
your rights without it, but it's there if you can't find any other way.


--
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: I Wish

[John Sessoms]

From: Jack Davis


It's my understanding (in some cases I know to be correct) that in
USA civil cases, court costs and attorney's fees are included in the
award. How common this is, is not known to me.

Jack


I believe that applies to some cases brought in federal courts. May also 
apply in some state courts, but not necessarily in all of them.


The guy I knew never got to court. Case was never heard on the merits, 
which favored him.


Gateway2000 got a judge to issue an injunction barring him from using 
his own domain while the case was under litigation.


He was bankrupted before he ever got a hearing.

--
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: I wish........

[AlunFoto]

2011/1/20 David J Brooks :
> I'm now in back up heaven.

Must be better than backup hell, at least?
Hope you retrieve the images smoothly.

Jostein

-- 
http://www.alunfoto.no/galleri/
http://alunfoto.blogspot.com

-- 
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: I wish........

[David J Brooks]

On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 3:30 AM, AlunFoto  wrote:
> 2011/1/20 David J Brooks :
>> I'm now in back up heaven.
>
> Must be better than backup hell, at least?
> Hope you retrieve the images smoothly.
>
> Jostein

Retrieving smoothly, but my early archives are not as organized as my
recent ones, if you know what i'm getting at.

Dave
>
> --
> http://www.alunfoto.no/galleri/
> http://alunfoto.blogspot.com
>
> --
> 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.

a camera I wish Pentax made...

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

Here's a fairly extensive preview of the GR Digital:
http://www.letsgodigital.org/html/review/ricoh/gr/ 
digital_camera_EN1.html


Godfrey

Pentax patents I wish they'd productize!

[Mark Erickson]

All,

I haven't looked at Pentax patents for awhile, so I did a search at the U.S. 
Patent Office website.  I found these extremely cool Pentax Patents: 

   6311022 "Film-Back Exchangeable Camera" 

Maybe a new version of their 645, but with exchangeable backs?  Cool 

   6318912 "Adapter Having a Tilt and Shift Mechanism" 

I really want this one!  Looks like a teleconverter built into a tilt-shift 
mechanism.  Must require stop-down metering, though.  Very, very cool 

   6301441 "Lens Driving Device" 

Looks like a mechanism to allow simultaneous auto and manual focus--the same 
functionality now offered by USM lenses.  Maybe this will be built into a 
new range of Pentax lenses? 

You can view the patents for free at the U.S. Patent Trademark Office 
website.  Here is a link to their patent number search engine. 

   http://164.195.100.11/netahtml/srchnum.htm 

 --Mark
-
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: a camera I wish Pentax made...

[Kostas Kavoussanakis]

On Sat, 24 Sep 2005, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:


Here's a fairly extensive preview of the GR Digital:
http://www.letsgodigital.org/html/review/ricoh/gr/digital_camera_EN1.html


I thought you had no brand affection :-)

On the advice of fellow-PDMLer John Whittingham I bought an old Ricoh 
5300 and it is a fine, no-nonsense rangefinder with an excellent macro 
facility.


Of course I only use it for crap like ebay :-)

Kostas

Re: a camera I wish Pentax made...

[P. J. Alling]

Based on the Pixel density, I think it will have a hard time living up 
to the quality images produce by the GR2.  It'll probably be very noisy 
at high ISO.


Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:


Here's a fairly extensive preview of the GR Digital:
http://www.letsgodigital.org/html/review/ricoh/gr/ 
digital_camera_EN1.html


Godfrey





--
When you're worried or in doubt, 
	Run in circles, (scream and shout).

Re: a camera I wish Pentax made...

[Cotty]

On 24/9/05, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Here's a fairly extensive preview of the GR Digital:
>http://www.letsgodigital.org/html/review/ricoh/gr/ 
>digital_camera_EN1.html
>
>Godfrey

unbroken link:

<http://www.letsgodigital.org/html/review/ricoh/gr/digital_camera_EN1.html>

Here's a camera I wish Pentax made:

<http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/epson-rd1.shtml>






Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_

Re: a camera I wish Pentax made...

[Mark Roberts]

Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Here's a camera I wish Pentax made:
>
><http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/epson-rd1.shtml>

Oddly enough, film rangefinders cameras have never excited me, yet I
find the prospect of a decent digital rangefinder most interesting. Pity
about the price...
 
 
-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: a camera I wish Pentax made...

[keith_w]

Cotty wrote:


On 24/9/05, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed:



Here's a fairly extensive preview of the GR Digital:
http://www.letsgodigital.org/html/review/ricoh/gr/ 
digital_camera_EN1.html


Godfrey




unbroken link:

<http://www.letsgodigital.org/html/review/ricoh/gr/digital_camera_EN1.html>

Here's a camera I wish Pentax made:

<http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/epson-rd1.shtml>


At US$3000 ?
No thanks...
Love the camera, hate the bucks...

keith


Cheers,
  Cotty

Re: a camera I wish Pentax made...

[keith_w]

Mark Roberts wrote:


Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



Here's a camera I wish Pentax made:

<http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/epson-rd1.shtml>




Oddly enough, film rangefinders cameras have never excited me, yet I
find the prospect of a decent digital rangefinder most interesting. Pity
about the price...


Oh, I understand the reticence, but...in a less expensive mode:
I recently purchased a cherry Oly 35S, highly regarded and an 
outstanding performer ~ and just a week or so ago, re-enabled myself 
with an almost new Contax IIIa. I'm in whatever passes for hog heaven! 
Sighhh.


keith whaley

Re: a camera I wish Pentax made...

[graywolf]

Aways having prefer RF's for general photography, I am glad someone 
makes such a digital. I only wish I could afford one. However if I had 
one I would propably wish it was full-frame .


graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---



Cotty wrote:


Here's a camera I wish Pentax made:

<http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/epson-rd1.shtml>

 

Re: a camera I wish Pentax made...

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Sep 24, 2005, at 11:56 AM, Cotty wrote:

<http://www.letsgodigital.org/html/review/ricoh/gr/ 
digital_camera_EN1.html>


Thanks for fixing the link.


Here's a camera I wish Pentax made:
<http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/epson-rd1.shtml>


I played with one of those a few months ago. Sorry, I found it pretty  
crappy. Awkward controls (but a cool readout gizmo for battery/ 
exposures/etc), a decent viewfinder/rangefinder, and hideously too  
expensive for what you're getting. I'd much rather have a Pentax *ist  
DS. ;-)


Godfrey

Re: a camera I wish Pentax made...

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Sep 24, 2005, at 9:47 AM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:


Here's a fairly extensive preview of the GR Digital:
http://www.letsgodigital.org/html/review/ricoh/gr/ 
digital_camera_EN1.html


I thought you had no brand affection :-)


Just because I don't have any brand loyalty doesn't mean that I don't  
have any affection for the brand. I would love to see Pentax produce  
something as keen as the Ricoh GR-digital.


Godfrey

Re: a camera I wish Pentax made...

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

- Based on the test images I've seen, it will have no trouble living  
up to the image quality of the GR1.


- Based on the sensor size, I expect it will produce noisy results at  
ISO 200 and above, yes. With an f/2.6 lens and the small sensor, I'd  
just lock it to ISO 100 and leave it there (just like I do with the  
A2). It does create RAW format files, so 200-400 should be usable  
with noise reduction techniques (again, just like the A2).


What's a GR2? ;-)

Godfrey

On Sep 24, 2005, at 10:44 AM, P. J. Alling wrote:

Based on the Pixel density, I think it will have a hard time living  
up to the quality images produce by the GR2.  It'll probably be  
very noisy at high ISO.



Here's a fairly extensive preview of the GR Digital:
http://www.letsgodigital.org/html/review/ricoh/gr/  
digital_camera_EN1.html

Photo gadgets that I wish they made

[Larry Colen]

I've got a set of greycards (white, grey, & black) that are a bit larger than a 
business card.  I frequently use them to get a white balance reference, since 
I'm more likely to shoot in weird lighting than in "standard" light, such as 
sunlight, or flash.  I recently realized that it would be really handy if the 
edges of the grey card were marked in inches and fractions on one side, and cms 
& mms on the other.  That way, when I take a photo of it next to a flower, or a 
bug, to get a white balance reference, I'd also have something to give a good 
size reference.
The ideal would be to have a grid of inches or cms, with the fractional 
markings along the edge.

Speaking of grey cards,  I really wish I could get lens caps, in 18% neutral 
grey.  That way, I'd always have my white balance reference with me.

--
Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est





-- 
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.

Photo gadgets that I wish they made

[Bipin Gupta]

Hello Larry, just take a fine point permanent marker, a millimeter
scale and mark your own scale on the card. To make it look pro, first
mark 3-horizontal guide lines with a pencil. Use the outer lines for
the centimeter mark and the top + center lines for the millimeter
mark.
And presto you have what you need for your macro work.
Regards. Bipin.
camp:Thornhill, Ontario, Canada & not from the far away enchanting land.

-- 
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.

the body I wish pentax would build

[Collin Brendemuehl]

We talked about lenses but there is something needed in bodires.
I was remimded of this recently when my son got his hands
on a Fiji GA645.  I had forgotten how nice that vertical frame
was for shooting people.
What Pentax could do is (a) rotate the frame to a vertical
orientation or (b) create a square sensor.  (A) would be great for shootimg 
people
and (b) would fill the Blad niche.  (A) would excite me.

Sincerely,

Collin Brendemuehl 
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose" 
-- Jim Elliott 






-- 
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.

I wish I had the K7 this afternoon

[Larry Colen]

The cal fire plane flew directly over me about a second before it
dropped the retardant on the fire about 200m away. My K20D took what
seemed like forever to lock focus.

It's probably a good thing for my productivity that I don't have
anything that'll convert K20 raw files at the office.

I did appreciate, and exhaust the bigger buffer of the K20 over the
K100.

It also may have helped if I had ever used rapid fire mode before
using it in the heat of battle, as it were.

-- 
The first step is learning to take great photos, 
the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good.
Larry Colen l...@red4est.comhttp://www.red4est.com/lrc


--
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: Photo gadgets that I wish they made

[Paul Sorenson]

White balance lens cap...

http://www.adorama.com/searchsite/default.aspx?searchinfo=vivicap

and of course, there's ExpoDisc...but that's not cheap.

-p

On 1/8/2013 12:29 AM, Larry Colen wrote:

I've got a set of greycards (white, grey, & black) that are a bit larger than a business 
card.  I frequently use them to get a white balance reference, since I'm more likely to shoot in 
weird lighting than in "standard" light, such as sunlight, or flash.  I recently 
realized that it would be really handy if the edges of the grey card were marked in inches and 
fractions on one side, and cms & mms on the other.  That way, when I take a photo of it next 
to a flower, or a bug, to get a white balance reference, I'd also have something to give a good 
size reference.
The ideal would be to have a grid of inches or cms, with the fractional 
markings along the edge.

Speaking of grey cards,  I really wish I could get lens caps, in 18% neutral 
grey.  That way, I'd always have my white balance reference with me.

--
Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est







--
Being old doesn't seem so old now that I'm old.

--
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: Photo gadgets that I wish they made

[Larry Colen]

On Jan 7, 2013, at 11:02 PM, Paul Sorenson wrote:

> White balance lens cap...
> 
> http://www.adorama.com/searchsite/default.aspx?searchinfo=vivicap

I've got something like that, but I find reflective white balance cards work a 
lot better for me.

> 

--
Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est





-- 
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: Photo gadgets that I wish they made

[Derby Chang]

How about

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/716958-REG/WhiBal_WB7_KC_G7_Key_Chain_White.html



On 8/01/2013 5:29 PM, Larry Colen wrote:

I've got a set of greycards (white, grey, & black) that are a bit larger than a business 
card.  I frequently use them to get a white balance reference, since I'm more likely to shoot in 
weird lighting than in "standard" light, such as sunlight, or flash.  I recently 
realized that it would be really handy if the edges of the grey card were marked in inches and 
fractions on one side, and cms & mms on the other.  That way, when I take a photo of it next 
to a flower, or a bug, to get a white balance reference, I'd also have something to give a good 
size reference.
The ideal would be to have a grid of inches or cms, with the fractional 
markings along the edge.

Speaking of grey cards,  I really wish I could get lens caps, in 18% neutral 
grey.  That way, I'd always have my white balance reference with me.

--
Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est








--
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: Photo gadgets that I wish they made

[Larry Colen]

On Jan 8, 2013, at 2:59 AM, Derby Chang wrote:

> 
> How about
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/716958-REG/WhiBal_WB7_KC_G7_Key_Chain_White.html

That looks good, though I'd probably want the slightly larger one:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/768395-REG/WhiBal_WB7_PC_G7_White_Balance_Pocket.html

Unfortunately, it only has the distance scale on the short end.

> 
> 
> 
> On 8/01/2013 5:29 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
>> I've got a set of greycards (white, grey, & black) that are a bit larger 
>> than a business card.  I frequently use them to get a white balance 
>> reference, since I'm more likely to shoot in weird lighting than in 
>> "standard" light, such as sunlight, or flash.  I recently realized that it 
>> would be really handy if the edges of the grey card were marked in inches 
>> and fractions on one side, and cms & mms on the other.  That way, when I 
>> take a photo of it next to a flower, or a bug, to get a white balance 
>> reference, I'd also have something to give a good size reference.
>> The ideal would be to have a grid of inches or cms, with the fractional 
>> markings along the edge.
>> 
>> Speaking of grey cards,  I really wish I could get lens caps, in 18% neutral 
>> grey.  That way, I'd always have my white balance reference with me.
>> 
>> --
>> Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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.

--
Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est





-- 
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: Photo gadgets that I wish they made

[John Sessoms]

From: Larry Colen


I've got a set of greycards (white, grey, & black) that are a bit
larger than a business card.  I frequently use them to get a white
balance reference, since I'm more likely to shoot in weird lighting
than in "standard" light, such as sunlight, or flash.  I recently
realized that it would be really handy if the edges of the grey card
were marked in inches and fractions on one side, and cms & mms on the
other.  That way, when I take a photo of it next to a flower, or a
bug, to get a white balance reference, I'd also have something to
give a good size reference. The ideal would be to have a grid of
inches or cms, with the fractional markings along the edge.

Speaking of grey cards,  I really wish I could get lens caps, in 18%
neutral grey.  That way, I'd always have my white balance reference
with me.


Ask and you shall receive:

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/content_images_2/colorchecker-passport/3-way-open.jpg

The X-rite Color Checker Passport has a scale along one edge & the 
squares are all the same size which provides the grid.


--
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: Photo gadgets that I wish they made

[kwaller]

Larry - there's nothing new under the sun - back in 1988, when I started 
doing vehicle inspections for product litigation, I used plastic 6" rulers 
with eight of an inch markings along one edge & the other edge marked in 
metric - while the entire ruler was essentially a grey card. With 2 of these 
in an image, at right angles, you not only could attain proper colors but 
also get accurate dimensions in 2 directions.


They are available at -
http://www.crimescene.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=53&products_id=391

Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller

- Original Message - 
From: "Larry Colen" 

Subject: Photo gadgets that I wish they made


I've got a set of greycards (white, grey, & black) that are a bit larger 
than a business card.  I frequently use them to get a white balance 
reference, since I'm more likely to shoot in weird lighting than in 
"standard" light, such as sunlight, or flash.  I recently realized that it 
would be really handy if the edges of the grey card were marked in inches 
and fractions on one side, and cms & mms on the other.  That way, when I 
take a photo of it next to a flower, or a bug, to get a white balance 
reference, I'd also have something to give a good size reference.
The ideal would be to have a grid of inches or cms, with the fractional 
markings along the edge.


Speaking of grey cards,  I really wish I could get lens caps, in 18% 
neutral grey.  That way, I'd always have my white balance reference with 
me.


--
Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est



--
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: Photo gadgets that I wish they made

[Larry Colen]

On Jan 8, 2013, at 1:21 PM,  wrote:

> Larry - there's nothing new under the sun - back in 1988, when I started 
> doing vehicle inspections for product litigation, I used plastic 6" rulers 
> with eight of an inch markings along one edge & the other edge marked in 
> metric - while the entire ruler was essentially a grey card. With 2 of these 
> in an image, at right angles, you not only could attain proper colors but 
> also get accurate dimensions in 2 directions.
> 
> They are available at -
> http://www.crimescene.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=53&products_id=391

Excellent!  Thanks!

> 
> Kenneth Waller
> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
> 
> - Original Message - From: "Larry Colen" 
> Subject: Photo gadgets that I wish they made
> 
> 
>> I've got a set of greycards (white, grey, & black) that are a bit larger 
>> than a business card.  I frequently use them to get a white balance 
>> reference, since I'm more likely to shoot in weird lighting than in 
>> "standard" light, such as sunlight, or flash.  I recently realized that it 
>> would be really handy if the edges of the grey card were marked in inches 
>> and fractions on one side, and cms & mms on the other.  That way, when I 
>> take a photo of it next to a flower, or a bug, to get a white balance 
>> reference, I'd also have something to give a good size reference.
>> The ideal would be to have a grid of inches or cms, with the fractional 
>> markings along the edge.
>> 
>> Speaking of grey cards,  I really wish I could get lens caps, in 18% neutral 
>> grey.  That way, I'd always have my white balance reference with me.
>> 
>> --
>> Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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.

--
Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est





-- 
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: Photo gadgets that I wish they made

[Larry Colen]

On Jan 8, 2013, at 6:27 AM, Bipin Gupta wrote:

> Hello Larry, just take a fine point permanent marker, a millimeter
> scale and mark your own scale on the card. To make it look pro, first
> mark 3-horizontal guide lines with a pencil. Use the outer lines for
> the centimeter mark and the top + center lines for the millimeter
> mark.
> And presto you have what you need for your macro work.

That's pretty much what I did, though not quite as cleanly as that.

> 

--
Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est





-- 
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: the body I wish pentax would build

[Paul Stenquist]

On Sep 11, 2011, at 5:30 PM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote:

> We talked about lenses but there is something needed in bodires.
> I was remimded of this recently when my son got his hands
> on a Fiji GA645.  I had forgotten how nice that vertical frame
> was for shooting people.

You can rotate the camera yourself. Just turn it 90 degrees counterclockwise. 
And if you have the battery grip, you'll have controls and a shutter button 
right up there on top.

Paul
> What Pentax could do is (a) rotate the frame to a vertical
> orientation or (b) create a square sensor.  (A) would be great for shootimg 
> people
> and (b) would fill the Blad niche.  (A) would excite me.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Collin Brendemuehl 
> "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose" 
> -- Jim Elliott 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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: the body I wish pentax would build

[Darren Addy]

I think the discussion of bodies is a good direction.
If Pentax could take everything they have learned and executed up
until now (in the K-5) and add a few features:

USB 3.0 connectivity
A second card slot
A built-in intervalometer
An articulating live view screen

The most radical idea (that NO one has done yet, to my knowledge)...
an IR block that can be flipped-up or slid out of the way for infrared
shooting. If implemented, this should not be off the sensor when
lenses are removed from the body. (Pressing the unlock lens button
should automatically re-engage it). It would be interesting to have
the capability to automatically shift the focus in the AF for infrared
with Pentax DA lenses also. This would make this model especially
attractive to the astrophotography market, which Pentax seems to be
acknowledging with their GPS unit.

Darren Addy
Kearney, Nebraska

-- 
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: the body I wish pentax would build

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

Sony had the "night mode" on several fixed lens video and still
cameras in the early 2000s which flipped the IR-block filter out of
the way of the sensor. Then the product liability suits rolled in when
users discovered that nylon fabrics are essentially transparent to IR
illumination and thousands of peepers at the beach had the opportunity
to photograph people in see-through bathing suits. Sony responded by
crippling the night-mode at first (it could only be used with the lens
wide open and at exposure times between 1/30-1/60 second, effectively
destroying pictures at the sunny beach) and later dropped it entirely.

I doubt any manufacturer is going to put that into a consumer camera
again as a standard function any time soon. An expensive, special
purpose astronomical camera ... sure. Astronomers rarely spend their
time peeping at nekkid girls on the beach because they're sleeping
during daylight hours ... ];-)


On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Darren Addy  wrote:
> I think the discussion of bodies is a good direction.
> If Pentax could take everything they have learned and executed up
> until now (in the K-5) and add a few features:
>
> USB 3.0 connectivity
> A second card slot
> A built-in intervalometer
> An articulating live view screen
>
> The most radical idea (that NO one has done yet, to my knowledge)...
> an IR block that can be flipped-up or slid out of the way for infrared
> shooting. If implemented, this should not be off the sensor when
> lenses are removed from the body. (Pressing the unlock lens button
> should automatically re-engage it). It would be interesting to have
> the capability to automatically shift the focus in the AF for infrared
> with Pentax DA lenses also. This would make this model especially
> attractive to the astrophotography market, which Pentax seems to be
> acknowledging with their GPS unit.
>
> Darren Addy
> Kearney, Nebraska
>
> --
> 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.
>



-- 
Godfrey
  godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com

-- 
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: the body I wish pentax would build

[Paul Sorenson]

Hm.  The K-5 already has the intervalometer. See pg 152 in the manual)
http://www.pentaximaging.com/support/manuals-and-literature/

The second card slot would be nice, the articulating screen even better.

Not so sure about USB 3 - card readers are cheap.

-p

On 9/12/2011 1:15 PM, Darren Addy wrote:

I think the discussion of bodies is a good direction.
If Pentax could take everything they have learned and executed up
until now (in the K-5) and add a few features:

USB 3.0 connectivity
A second card slot
A built-in intervalometer
An articulating live view screen

The most radical idea (that NO one has done yet, to my knowledge)...
an IR block that can be flipped-up or slid out of the way for infrared
shooting. If implemented, this should not be off the sensor when
lenses are removed from the body. (Pressing the unlock lens button
should automatically re-engage it). It would be interesting to have
the capability to automatically shift the focus in the AF for infrared
with Pentax DA lenses also. This would make this model especially
attractive to the astrophotography market, which Pentax seems to be
acknowledging with their GPS unit.

Darren Addy
Kearney, Nebraska



--
Being old doesn't seem so old now that I'm old.

--
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: the body I wish pentax would build

[Darren Addy]

As long as we are WISHING, wouldn't it be cool if Pentax would take
the knowledge they achieve from building the 645D and offer a 645
digital back for the 67?

Obviously, 67 equipment prices would rise but I think there would be a
not-insignificant number of  people who would pay $3k-4k to make a 67
digital with a sensor size larger than FF DSLRs (even if it was with
full manual exposure and focusing). I don't think it would cannibalize
645D sales, since the 645D offers AF and auto-exposure and all that
good stuff.

Never happen but we can wish

Darren Addy
Kearney, Nebraska

-- 
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: I wish I had the K7 this afternoon

[Keith Whaley]

Larry Colen wrote:

The cal fire plane flew directly over me about a second before it
dropped the retardant on the fire about 200m away. My K20D took what
seemed like forever to lock focus.

It's probably a good thing for my productivity that I don't have
anything that'll convert K20 raw files at the office.

I did appreciate, and exhaust the bigger buffer of the K20 over the
K100.

It also may have helped if I had ever used rapid fire mode before
using it in the heat of battle, as it were.




Where is your office?

Where was the fire?

keith whaley

--
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: I wish I had the K7 this afternoon

[Larry Colen]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 04:08:42PM -0700, Keith Whaley wrote:
> Larry Colen wrote:
> 
> 
> Where is your office?

South San Jose, 
855 embedded way, San Jose CA, 95138


> 
> Where was the fire?

Along coyote creek trail between blossom hill/silver creek to about
the park (Hellyer park?)

http://tinyurl.com/lkkwkl

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=vnus+san+jose+ca&sll=36.321811,-105.278683&sspn=0.065627,0.077248&g=%22coyote+creek+fire%22&ie=UTF8&t=h&ll=37.263098,-121.791505&spn=0.008103,0.009656&z=17

> 
> keith whaley
> 
> --
> 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.

-- 
The first step is learning to take great photos, 
the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good.
Larry Colen l...@red4est.comhttp://www.red4est.com/lrc


--
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: I wish I had the K7 this afternoon

[John Francis]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 03:58:46PM -0700, Larry Colen wrote:
> The cal fire plane flew directly over me about a second before it
> dropped the retardant on the fire about 200m away. My K20D took what
> seemed like forever to lock focus.

I never even heard the plane, and Larry's office is only a couple
of miles from my house!  Until Larry posted I had no idea I was
that close to an active fire.  Must watch the news tonight ...



--
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: Lens I wish Pentax made: an FA 85mm F2

[Fred]

> That's right, an FA 85mm F2 lens in black, Without LTD written on
> the barrel. That way it would cost around $350 US like the  N
> or C 85mm F1.8 lenses do. I bet it would be a hot seller.

Yes, "it would be a hot seller" indeed.  I know the thread is about
"Lens I wish Pentax made", but a moderately priced 85mm lens is a
lens that ~Pentax~ ought to wish it would make.

Fred
-
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: Lens I wish Pentax made: an FA 85mm F2

[Brendan]

I'd so get one of these 

--- Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > That's right, an FA 85mm F2 lens in black, Without
> LTD written on
> > the barrel. That way it would cost around $350 US
> like the  N
> > or C 85mm F1.8 lenses do. I bet it would be a
> hot seller.
> 


__ 
Web-hosting solutions for home and business! http://website.yahoo.ca
-
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: Yet Another PK-Mount 85/1.4 (Man, I wish!)

[Fred]

> I'd love to get a Kmt version. And I'd love to get this new(?)
> 85/1.4 if indeed it is kmt They are M42, manual diaphram,
> right?

No, Christopher, the Zenitar 85/1.4 is a true K-mount lens.  It not
only has a permanent K-mount flange (and not just an M42-to-K-mount
adapter), it also has the diaphragm linkage lever, too.  So, it has
an automatic diaphragm, just like any other normal K-mount lens.

Fred
-
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 .

I wish that internet software developers would stop "improving" my experience.

[P. J. Alling]

So I've been using Firefox for years as my email client, and suddenly an 
annoyance from the past returned.


The attachment reminder.  Use a word that includes the string "attach" 
and Firefox used to annoyingly ask if you forgot to attach something.


Back then it wasn't that easy to turn off, but I figured out how to do it.

Now, it has come back, with the most recent update.  At least turning it 
off was easy this time.


But, does anyone else just want to say, please don't improve my 
experience any more.



--
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: I wish that internet software developers would stop "improving" my experience.

[Bruce Walker]

It's really too bad that there isn't some part of the Internet made
out of metal and wood, like vintage cameras. Stuff that is well built
and made to last, that you learn how to use and then they become
automatic in your hands.

The older I get, the more I agree with your complaint, PJ.


btw, I assume you are referring to Thunderbird? Firefox is that other
web browser; the one that isn't Chrome.


On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 9:44 AM, P. J. Alling
 wrote:
> So I've been using Firefox for years as my email client, and suddenly an
> annoyance from the past returned.
>
> The attachment reminder.  Use a word that includes the string "attach" and
> Firefox used to annoyingly ask if you forgot to attach something.
>
> Back then it wasn't that easy to turn off, but I figured out how to do it.
>
> Now, it has come back, with the most recent update.  At least turning it off
> was easy this time.
>
> But, does anyone else just want to say, please don't improve my experience
> any more.
>
>
> --
> 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: I wish that internet software developers would stop "improving" my experience.

[Boris Liberman]

Peter, this attachment things exists like forever... It saved my arse few
times. Though if course I manage to forget to attach the attachment anyway.

Speaking of UX in general, it's mostly improving with some occasional
hiccups...

Just my cents...

On 26 Feb 2017 16:45, "P. J. Alling"  wrote:

> So I've been using Firefox for years as my email client, and suddenly an
> annoyance from the past returned.
>
> The attachment reminder.  Use a word that includes the string "attach" and
> Firefox used to annoyingly ask if you forgot to attach something.
>
> Back then it wasn't that easy to turn off, but I figured out how to do it.
>
> Now, it has come back, with the most recent update.  At least turning it
> off was easy this time.
>
> But, does anyone else just want to say, please don't improve my experience
> any more.
>
>
> --
> 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: I wish that internet software developers would stop "improving" my experience.

[P. J. Alling]

Yes that's right Thunderbird.  It's been divorced from Firefox for 
years, but you still remember they were once family.



On 2/26/2017 10:18 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:

It's really too bad that there isn't some part of the Internet made
out of metal and wood, like vintage cameras. Stuff that is well built
and made to last, that you learn how to use and then they become
automatic in your hands.

The older I get, the more I agree with your complaint, PJ.


btw, I assume you are referring to Thunderbird? Firefox is that other
web browser; the one that isn't Chrome.


On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 9:44 AM, P. J. Alling
 wrote:

So I've been using Firefox for years as my email client, and suddenly an
annoyance from the past returned.

The attachment reminder.  Use a word that includes the string "attach" and
Firefox used to annoyingly ask if you forgot to attach something.

Back then it wasn't that easy to turn off, but I figured out how to do it.

Now, it has come back, with the most recent update.  At least turning it off
was easy this time.

But, does anyone else just want to say, please don't improve my experience
any more.


--
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: I wish that internet software developers would stop "improving" my experience.

[P. J. Alling]

Yes, but it's annoying when something you've used literally for years 
starts working differently.


I was just forced by circumstance to get a smart phone.   I've only had 
it for about a month and already an update removed an "unimportant" 
feature that I'd found to be amazingly convenient in one of it's core 
apps.   I actually sent in a complaint and was informed by the 
development team that no one else complained.


This kind of crap is something I'd have been embarrassed by when I was 
writing "shrink wrapped" code.


On 2/26/2017 11:34 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:

Peter, this attachment things exists like forever... It saved my arse few
times. Though if course I manage to forget to attach the attachment anyway.

Speaking of UX in general, it's mostly improving with some occasional
hiccups...

Just my cents...

On 26 Feb 2017 16:45, "P. J. Alling"  wrote:


So I've been using Firefox for years as my email client, and suddenly an
annoyance from the past returned.

The attachment reminder.  Use a word that includes the string "attach" and
Firefox used to annoyingly ask if you forgot to attach something.

Back then it wasn't that easy to turn off, but I figured out how to do it.

Now, it has come back, with the most recent update.  At least turning it
off was easy this time.

But, does anyone else just want to say, please don't improve my experience
any more.


--
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: I wish that internet software developers would stop "improving" my experience.

[ann sanfedele]

Yes.
how did you turn it off ? I have Thuderbird too

ann

On 2/26/2017 9:44 AM, P. J. Alling wrote:
So I've been using Firefox for years as my email client, and suddenly 
an annoyance from the past returned.


The attachment reminder.  Use a word that includes the string "attach" 
and Firefox used to annoyingly ask if you forgot to attach something.


Back then it wasn't that easy to turn off, but I figured out how to do 
it.


Now, it has come back, with the most recent update.  At least turning 
it off was easy this time.


But, does anyone else just want to say, please don't improve my 
experience any more.






--
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: I wish that internet software developers would stop "improving" my experience.

[Boris Liberman]

AnnSan :-), I've just replied to you off-list, as I had to include the
screen-shot that shows what has to be done in order to turn this
feature off.

On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 8:23 PM, ann sanfedele  wrote:
> Yes.
> how did you turn it off ? I have Thuderbird too
>
> ann
>
>
> On 2/26/2017 9:44 AM, P. J. Alling wrote:
>>
>> So I've been using Firefox for years as my email client, and suddenly an
>> annoyance from the past returned.
>>
>> The attachment reminder.  Use a word that includes the string "attach" and
>> Firefox used to annoyingly ask if you forgot to attach something.
>>
>> Back then it wasn't that easy to turn off, but I figured out how to do it.
>>
>> Now, it has come back, with the most recent update.  At least turning it
>> off was easy this time.
>>
>> But, does anyone else just want to say, please don't improve my experience
>> any more.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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.



-- 
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: I wish that internet software developers would stop "improving" my experience.

[Boris Liberman]

Peter, I find it worth my while to spend the time and get to know the
marvels of modern engineering that I live with - be it a cell phone or
any other thing for that matter. Having said that, I do admit that if
I have to switch from one appliance to another, say the same cell
phone - I always feel great deal of hesitation, because I get so used
to the way I configure and set it up so each such change makes me feel
reluctant to upgrade.

You mileage is of course different.

On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 7:34 PM, P. J. Alling
 wrote:
> Yes, but it's annoying when something you've used literally for years starts
> working differently.
>
> I was just forced by circumstance to get a smart phone.   I've only had it
> for about a month and already an update removed an "unimportant" feature
> that I'd found to be amazingly convenient in one of it's core apps.   I
> actually sent in a complaint and was informed by the development team that
> no one else complained.
>
> This kind of crap is something I'd have been embarrassed by when I was
> writing "shrink wrapped" code.
>
> On 2/26/2017 11:34 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:
>>
>> Peter, this attachment things exists like forever... It saved my arse few
>> times. Though if course I manage to forget to attach the attachment
>> anyway.
>>
>> Speaking of UX in general, it's mostly improving with some occasional
>> hiccups...
>>
>> Just my cents...
>>
>> On 26 Feb 2017 16:45, "P. J. Alling"  wrote:
>>
>>> So I've been using Firefox for years as my email client, and suddenly an
>>> annoyance from the past returned.
>>>
>>> The attachment reminder.  Use a word that includes the string "attach"
>>> and
>>> Firefox used to annoyingly ask if you forgot to attach something.
>>>
>>> Back then it wasn't that easy to turn off, but I figured out how to do
>>> it.
>>>
>>> Now, it has come back, with the most recent update.  At least turning it
>>> off was easy this time.
>>>
>>> But, does anyone else just want to say, please don't improve my
>>> experience
>>> any more.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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.



-- 
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: I wish that internet software developers would stop "improving" my experience.

[ann sanfedele]

so I saw.. and replied.. of course it asked me if I forgot when I did 
that reply!
and as I said privately, I probably should leave it on since I'm 
actually quite likely to forgot to attach and attachment


ann

On 2/26/2017 1:28 PM, Boris Liberman wrote:

AnnSan :-), I've just replied to you off-list, as I had to include the
screen-shot that shows what has to be done in order to turn this
feature off.

On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 8:23 PM, ann sanfedele  wrote:

Yes.
how did you turn it off ? I have Thuderbird too

ann


On 2/26/2017 9:44 AM, P. J. Alling wrote:

So I've been using Firefox for years as my email client, and suddenly an
annoyance from the past returned.

The attachment reminder.  Use a word that includes the string "attach" and
Firefox used to annoyingly ask if you forgot to attach something.

Back then it wasn't that easy to turn off, but I figured out how to do it.

Now, it has come back, with the most recent update.  At least turning it
off was easy this time.

But, does anyone else just want to say, please don't improve my experience
any more.




--
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: I wish that internet software developers would stop "improving" my experience.

[P. J. Alling]

Boris probably sent you the same information.  But just in case, on the 
Menu, go to Tools->Options which opens a dialog box. Choose the 
Composition tab, un-check "Check for missing attachments.  Click OK.


The first time i did that I had to edit an ".ini" file, but of course 
Thunderbird called it something else with a different extension.



On 2/26/2017 1:23 PM, ann sanfedele wrote:

Yes.
how did you turn it off ? I have Thuderbird too

ann

On 2/26/2017 9:44 AM, P. J. Alling wrote:
So I've been using Firefox for years as my email client, and suddenly 
an annoyance from the past returned.


The attachment reminder.  Use a word that includes the string 
"attach" and Firefox used to annoyingly ask if you forgot to attach 
something.


Back then it wasn't that easy to turn off, but I figured out how to 
do it.


Now, it has come back, with the most recent update.  At least turning 
it off was easy this time.


But, does anyone else just want to say, please don't improve my 
experience any more.









--
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.