Re: Opinions sought on an experiment
John wrote on 10/11/18 8:42 AM: Points taken because the whole thread is obviously contrived just to sneak in a bad pun. Guilty On 10/4/2018 12:37, Larry Colen wrote: Paul Stenquist wrote on 10/4/18 9:31 AM: It works well and provides the appropriate contrast. Thanks. I was worried that my bark was worse than my bight. On Oct 4, 2018, at 12:20 PM, Larry Colen wrote: I'm curious what people think about using the tree as a background for the knotwork photo https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/44187747395/in/album-72157671969270997/ -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/collections/72157612824732477/ -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/collections/72157612824732477/ -- 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: Opinions sought on an experiment
Points taken because the whole thread is obviously contrived just to sneak in a bad pun. On 10/4/2018 12:37, Larry Colen wrote: Paul Stenquist wrote on 10/4/18 9:31 AM: It works well and provides the appropriate contrast. Thanks. I was worried that my bark was worse than my bight. On Oct 4, 2018, at 12:20 PM, Larry Colen wrote: I'm curious what people think about using the tree as a background for the knotwork photo https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/44187747395/in/album-72157671969270997/ -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/collections/72157612824732477/ -- 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: Opinions sought on an experiment
On 10/4/2018 12:20, Larry Colen wrote: I'm curious what people think about using the tree as a background for the knotwork photo https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/44187747395/in/album-72157671969270997/ Shift the rope to the right so there's only one type of bark texture in the background. -- 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: Opinions sought on an experiment
It goes against my grain to comment about that. Others might get board. -Original Message- >From: Larry Colen >Subject: Opinions sought on an experiment > >I'm curious what people think about using the tree as a background for >the knotwork photo > >https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/44187747395/in/album-72157671969270997/ > >-- >Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc >https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/collections/72157612824732477/ -- 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: Opinions sought on an experiment
On 4/10/18, postmas...@robertstech.com, discombobulated, unleashed: > It works well and provides the appropriate contrast. Thanks. I was worried that my bark was worse than my bight. >>> >>> You should be strung up by the bolocks for that sentence Colen >> >>That may be true, but will you give me credit when you steal the line >>for yourself? > >I'll bet he could be roped into it. You'll get me in a strop -- 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: Opinions sought on an experiment
Larry Colen wrote: > > >Steve Cottrell wrote on 10/4/18 11:13 AM: >> On 4/10/18, Larry Colen, discombobulated, unleashed: >> >>> Paul Stenquist wrote on 10/4/18 9:31 AM: It works well and provides the appropriate contrast. >>> >>> Thanks. I was worried that my bark was worse than my bight. >> >> You should be strung up by the bolocks for that sentence Colen > >That may be true, but will you give me credit when you steal the line >for yourself? I'll bet he could be roped into 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: Opinions sought on an experiment
Steve Cottrell wrote on 10/4/18 11:13 AM: On 4/10/18, Larry Colen, discombobulated, unleashed: Paul Stenquist wrote on 10/4/18 9:31 AM: It works well and provides the appropriate contrast. Thanks. I was worried that my bark was worse than my bight. You should be strung up by the bolocks for that sentence Colen That may be true, but will you give me credit when you steal the line for yourself? -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/collections/72157612824732477/ -- 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: Opinions sought on an experiment
On 4/10/18, Larry Colen, discombobulated, unleashed: >Paul Stenquist wrote on 10/4/18 9:31 AM: >> It works well and provides the appropriate contrast. > >Thanks. I was worried that my bark was worse than my bight. You should be strung up by the bolocks for that sentence Colen -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__UK Shoot / Edit and || (O) |Live Broadcast News -- _ -- 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: Opinions sought on an experiment
That would be a knotty problem On 10/4/2018 11:37 AM, Larry Colen wrote: Paul Stenquist wrote on 10/4/18 9:31 AM: It works well and provides the appropriate contrast. Thanks. I was worried that my bark was worse than my bight. On Oct 4, 2018, at 12:20 PM, Larry Colen wrote: I'm curious what people think about using the tree as a background for the knotwork photo https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/44187747395/in/album-72157671969270997/ -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/collections/72157612824732477/ -- 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. -- Paul Sorenson Studio1941 Sooner or later "different" scares people. -- 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: Opinions sought on an experiment
Paul Stenquist wrote on 10/4/18 9:31 AM: It works well and provides the appropriate contrast. Thanks. I was worried that my bark was worse than my bight. On Oct 4, 2018, at 12:20 PM, Larry Colen wrote: I'm curious what people think about using the tree as a background for the knotwork photo https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/44187747395/in/album-72157671969270997/ -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/collections/72157612824732477/ -- 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 http://red4est.com/lrc https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/collections/72157612824732477/ -- 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: Opinions sought on an experiment
It works well and provides the appropriate contrast. > On Oct 4, 2018, at 12:20 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > > I'm curious what people think about using the tree as a background for the > knotwork photo > > https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/44187747395/in/album-72157671969270997/ > > -- > Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc > https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/collections/72157612824732477/ > > -- > 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: Opinions
First thing I see is the woman with her head cropped and skin tones too bright. Then I observe the reflection and I was expecting to see her face, but there's a man's head instead. This is surprising and confusing but in a good way, it grabs my interest, I'm trying to figure out what the heck is going on here. I would try a different processing. On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 1:12 AM, Bob W-PDML p...@web-options.com wrote: I'd be interested to hear your reaction this photo, please: http://www.web-options.com/Panorama.jpg Love it or hate it, I don't mind, but if you have an opinion I'd love to hear why you think whatever it is you think about it. Thanks, 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. -- 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: Opinions
On 17/3/14, Bob W-PDML, discombobulated, unleashed: There's a karting centre just by the Thames Barrier - is that the one? Indeed. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production --www.seeingeye.tv _ -- 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: Opinions
On 17/3/14, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: Alongside all of that, I look at modern Magnum photographers like Paolo Peregrin, Jonas Bendiksen, Alex Majoli and others who are doing really interesting things, and I look at my pictures and I think to myself 'my pictures are in a timewarp'. They're often nicely composed and interesting, but in a classical way, and I'm rather bored with them, just as I'm rather bored with the type of cinema that gives best picture to films like '12 Years a Slave', and no-one seems to be doing anything as interesting as 'Pierrot le Fou'. Exactly why I loved your pic. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production --www.seeingeye.tv _ -- 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: Opinions
On 18 Mar 2014, at 12:04, Steve Cottrell co...@seeingeye.tv wrote: On 17/3/14, Bob W-PDML, discombobulated, unleashed: There's a karting centre just by the Thames Barrier - is that the one? Indeed. If he moves to Greenwich it would be a pleasant little cycle to work for him along the river, and a fairly easy ride to college, which is at the Elephant isn't it? I don't know how rents here compare to where he is now, but it is a very studenty area, so I guess it can't be too bad. Plus, this place has just opened on the peninsula: http://www.scapeliving.com/scape-greenwich 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: Opinions
On 18/3/14, Bob W-PDML, discombobulated, unleashed: If he moves to Greenwich it would be a pleasant little cycle to work for him along the river, and a fairly easy ride to college, which is at the Elephant isn't it? I don't know how rents here compare to where he is now, but it is a very studenty area, so I guess it can't be too bad. Plus, this place has just opened on the peninsula: http://www.scapeliving.com/scape-greenwich Forwarded - thanks! -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production --www.seeingeye.tv _ -- 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: Opinions
I don't like it, but it's intriguing. There seems to be a lot going on in the reflection, but the person in the foreground dominates too much. Also the foreground looks washed out to me - and what are those black circles on the knitwear? Chris On 16 March 2014 23:12, Bob W-PDML p...@web-options.com wrote: I'd be interested to hear your reaction this photo, please: http://www.web-options.com/Panorama.jpg Love it or hate it, I don't mind, but if you have an opinion I'd love to hear why you think whatever it is you think about it. Thanks, 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. -- 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: Opinions
It appears to me that the man on right is inside a cafe and looking out the window into the early morning sun. The lettering on his shirt is the shadows of the lettering that is presumably on the glass window he is looking through. Part of what you see in the window is reflection (the small pitcher, for example) and part is what is going on outside (the woman walking down the sidewalk). I think that part of what is intriguing about it is that the pose of the man and the fact that his eyes are cut off gives the impression that he is looking up and out of the window, as if he is stretching to see his expected, but tardy, breakfast partner. But the reflection in the window has the man looking downward, disappointed, with no sign of the hand. It strikes me as a somewhat Salvadore Dali photograph. Certainly anything but ordinary. Thanks for sharing it. On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 1:59 AM, Chris Mitchell chris.mitch...@which.net wrote: I don't like it, but it's intriguing. There seems to be a lot going on in the reflection, but the person in the foreground dominates too much. Also the foreground looks washed out to me - and what are those black circles on the knitwear? Chris On 16 March 2014 23:12, Bob W-PDML p...@web-options.com wrote: I'd be interested to hear your reaction this photo, please: http://www.web-options.com/Panorama.jpg Love it or hate it, I don't mind, but if you have an opinion I'd love to hear why you think whatever it is you think about it. Thanks, 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. -- 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. -- Photographers must learn not to be ashamed to have their photographs look like photographs. ~ Alfred Stieglitz -- 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: Opinions
on 2014-03-16 17:12 Bob W-PDML wrote I'd be interested to hear your reaction this photo, please: http://www.web-options.com/Panorama.jpg Love it or hate it, I don't mind, but if you have an opinion I'd love to hear why you think whatever it is you think about it. my reactions at first sight: noir, uncomfortable, mundane; taking more time, it's a bit intriguing, mostly in concept, but i don't really enjoy it; i don't like how the face is cut off perhaps the most resonance comes from the two expressions of the face(s?); there is a slight puzzle of what is the hand doing; looks like holding a comb, but the fingers aren't gripping -- 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: Opinions
On 16/03/2014, Bob W-PDML p...@web-options.com wrote: I'd be interested to hear your reaction this photo, please: http://www.web-options.com/Panorama.jpg Love it or hate it, I don't mind, but if you have an opinion I'd love to hear why you think whatever it is you think about it. It's the sort of image that makes me wonder what is just outside of the frame. -- 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: Opinions
From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of John Coyle To be honest, it does nothing for me. Additionally: There is no strong focal point The right-hand side is blown out (on my monitor at least). There is a confused out-of-focus area on the left hand side, which seems to contain a pair of socks hung over a rail. Does not contribute to the shot, IMO. Sorry to be totally negative, this one is so far removed from your other work in standard and content. No need to apologise. I'm not the sort of person who asks for opinions then gets upset when they are negative. It is indeed far from the type of thing I normally post, and that is one of the reasons why I asked people to comment. I will itemise it. I took it yesterday morning in the Café Rouge in York, which Rick is familiar with, while I was having my morning espresso. It's one of a series that I took because I liked the raking sunlight, the shadows and confusion of reflections and people outside. The person in the foreground is a woman, shielding her eyes from the sun as she looks outside at or for something. The dark circles are the shadows of the word 'Croque', from 'Croque Monsieur', although they could easily have been the shadows of the Mysterons! The man reflected in the window was sharing the table with her, and I assume that they are married to each other. The 'socks' - which I hadn't noticed until you pointed them out, and which I thought was funny - are the black paint and blacker shade of a doorway on the other side of the street, running into the black hair of the passer-by. On my screens nothing is washed out, and there's no clipping in Lightroom. You and Steve H both said 'noir'; Darren mentioned Dali; others have used words like 'unsettling' and 'intriguing', as well as 'a mess' and so on, which are all very interesting comments. When I saw it I thought it looked like a film still, something from which people would construct a narrative. It also has a strong element of collage, to me. However, I thought I might be making something out of a sow's ear, so I thought I'd throw it out there. Over the last few weeks we have studied Godard's film 'Pierrot le Fou', which I love, so perhaps I am photographing while under the influence. The film engendered a very lively discussion at the class last week, and I thought it was very interesting that people who can accept Picasso, and Pop Art and other 'difficult' stuff in traditional media struggle with Godard, who is doing a similar thing with cinema. Pierrot le Fou plays with narrative structure, and is a collage - a mess, if you like - with intent, and malice aforethought. It is an extraordinarily rich film, which positions itself in all sorts of ways, not least in opposition to traditional Hollywood cinema. Now, as it happens, on Saturday night I went to see '12 Years a Slave' which has been getting rave reviews, 3 Oscars including Best Picture, and so on. And whilst I enjoyed the film I came away rather disappointed because I don't think it has much depth beyond the story-telling and the obvious wasn't slavery a bad thing!. I'd be very surprised if in 50 years' time people are still talking and writing about it. I'd be very surprised if people are still talking and writing about it in one years' time. Yet Godard lasts. Alongside all of that, I look at modern Magnum photographers like Paolo Peregrin, Jonas Bendiksen, Alex Majoli and others who are doing really interesting things, and I look at my pictures and I think to myself 'my pictures are in a timewarp'. They're often nicely composed and interesting, but in a classical way, and I'm rather bored with them, just as I'm rather bored with the type of cinema that gives best picture to films like '12 Years a Slave', and no-one seems to be doing anything as interesting as 'Pierrot le Fou'. So, there it is. Thanks for your thoughts, and if anyone wants to post more, please do - all very gratefully received, and read with interest. B I'd be interested to hear your reaction this photo, please: http://www.web-options.com/Panorama.jpg Love it or hate it, I don't mind, but if you have an opinion I'd love to hear why you think whatever it is you think about 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: Opinions
On 17 Mar 2014, at 00:01, Steve Cottrell co...@seeingeye.tv wrote: On 16/3/14, Bob W-PDML, discombobulated, unleashed: I'd be interested to hear your reaction this photo, please: http://www.web-options.com/Panorama.jpg Love it or hate it, I don't mind, but if you have an opinion I'd love to hear why you think whatever it is you think about it. Love it. BW enters his abstract phase ;-) Nice work. PS Stef is looking at a part time job down your neck of the woods at an indoor karting centre. He was asking about Greenwich...I said 'I know a man who knows' Greenwich is full of students and very lively - he'd enjoy it here, or in Deptford even. There's a karting centre just by the Thames Barrier - is that the one? 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: Opinions
On 3/16/2014 7:12 PM, Bob W-PDML wrote: I'd be interested to hear your reaction this photo, please: http://www.web-options.com/Panorama.jpg Love it or hate it, I don't mind, but if you have an opinion I'd love to hear why you think whatever it is you think about it. Thanks, B It has a few interesting layers, but it doesn't hold my interest for very long. -- 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: Opinions
Bob, here is my take on the matter. I am seeing the half headless person and the reflection of the man's face which together look somewhat intriguing. However most of the frame is filled with the whatever garb the half headless man is wearing. The reflection on it does not help - I almost don't see it. So, I don't quite get it what you were trying to say and thus I don't really like this photograph. May be if more surrounding context was given on the bottom - the right heaviness of the frame wouldn't be that distracting... Hope at least some of my mumbling makes sense to you. Boris On 3/17/2014 1:12 AM, Bob W-PDML wrote: I'd be interested to hear your reaction this photo, please: http://www.web-options.com/Panorama.jpg Love it or hate it, I don't mind, but if you have an opinion I'd love to hear why you think whatever it is you think about it. Thanks, 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: Opinions
I don't hate it, but neither do I love it -- on initial viewing. It's an intriguing puzzle to me; I find I want to know what's going on and who is located where in it. It looks kind of universal to me, like it could be taken near a busy cafe in any part of the world. On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Bob W-PDML p...@web-options.com wrote: I'd be interested to hear your reaction this photo, please: http://www.web-options.com/Panorama.jpg Love it or hate it, I don't mind, but if you have an opinion I'd love to hear why you think whatever it is you think about it. Thanks, 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. -- -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: Opinions
To be honest, it does nothing for me. Additionally: There is no strong focal point The right-hand side is blown out (on my monitor at least). There is a confused out-of-focus area on the left hand side, which seems to contain a pair of socks hung over a rail. Does not contribute to the shot, IMO. Sorry to be totally negative, this one is so far removed from your other work in standard and content. John Coyle Brisbane, Australia -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Bob W-PDML Sent: Monday, 17 March 2014 9:13 AM To: Mail List Pentax-Discuss Subject: Opinions I'd be interested to hear your reaction this photo, please: http://www.web-options.com/Panorama.jpg Love it or hate it, I don't mind, but if you have an opinion I'd love to hear why you think whatever it is you think about it. Thanks, 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. -- 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: Opinions
On 16/3/14, Bob W-PDML, discombobulated, unleashed: I'd be interested to hear your reaction this photo, please: http://www.web-options.com/Panorama.jpg Love it or hate it, I don't mind, but if you have an opinion I'd love to hear why you think whatever it is you think about it. Love it. BW enters his abstract phase ;-) Nice work. PS Stef is looking at a part time job down your neck of the woods at an indoor karting centre. He was asking about Greenwich...I said 'I know a man who knows' -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production --www.seeingeye.tv _ -- 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: Opinions
Without looking at the other opinions: somehow troubling. The stark contrast, the scowl on the subject's face, the jumble of reflections are all unsettling. It's effective, for sure, if that's what you were after. Cheers, Rick On Mar 16, 2014, at 19:12 , Bob W-PDML wrote: I'd be interested to hear your reaction this photo, please: http://www.web-options.com/Panorama.jpg Love it or hate it, I don't mind, but if you have an opinion I'd love to hear why you think whatever it is you think about it. Thanks, 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. -- 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: Opinions
I don't love it or hate it - it just doesn't do anything for me. I don't care for the subject matter, don't know what I'm supposed to get out of it and it appears to me it was just a very quickly caught, unplanned image, There since you asked. Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Bob W-PDML p...@web-options.com Subject: Opinions I'd be interested to hear your reaction this photo, please: http://www.web-options.com/Panorama.jpg Love it or hate it, I don't mind, but if you have an opinion I'd love to hear why you think whatever it is you think about it. Thanks, 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: Opinions
It is a mess of an image, but a strangely intriguing mess of an image. On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Ken Waller kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote: I don't love it or hate it - it just doesn't do anything for me. I don't care for the subject matter, don't know what I'm supposed to get out of it and it appears to me it was just a very quickly caught, unplanned image, There since you asked. Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Bob W-PDML p...@web-options.com Subject: Opinions I'd be interested to hear your reaction this photo, please: http://www.web-options.com/Panorama.jpg Love it or hate it, I don't mind, but if you have an opinion I'd love to hear why you think whatever it is you think about it. Thanks, 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. -- Photographers must learn not to be ashamed to have their photographs look like photographs. ~ Alfred Stieglitz -- 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: Opinions
I find it too busy for my taste. Perhaps if the left side was cropped to yield fewer main elements, it might work better. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Bob W-PDML p...@web-options.com wrote: I'd be interested to hear your reaction this photo, please: http://www.web-options.com/Panorama.jpg Love it or hate it, I don't mind, but if you have an opinion I'd love to hear why you think whatever it is you think about it. Thanks, 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. -- 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: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4
Mark, While several PDMLers have already responded to your question, I will add my impression. I wrote about this lens a few times earlier here. Here is my message from half a year ago: http://pdml.net/pipermail/pdml_pdml.net/2013-July/352571.html You can see other opinions on the same thread. Hope this helps, Igor On 12/30/2013 6:07 PM, Mark C wrote: I'm thinking about getting a DA 17-70 f4 as an upgrade to my DA 16-45 f4. Mostly looking for a little more reach and less gap between the long end and the short end of the telephoto zoom that I usually carry with it. I don't really need an f2.8 lens and, besides, they are not much longer than the one I have. Does anyone have any experience wit this lens? The user reviews I have stumbled into seem to be inconsistent. Photozone.de gives it fairly high marks... Mark -- 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: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4
Thanks, Jonathan! I appreciate this and the other reviews that you posted - I had not seen either of these, just the photozone.de review and the one on slrgear.com. The DA 17-70 does seem to get good marks in formal tests. I've been wavering a bit but these tend to push me back to considering it. Thanks again! Mark On 1/1/2014 2:20 PM, ma...@redwoodhorses.com wrote: Mark , Try this review, http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/default.asp?newsID=3676review=pentax+17- 70mm Jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Mark C Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 8:07 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 Thanks Jonathan. Is there a review of the 17-70 f4 on dxomark? I can't find it but I am probably missing it. They seem to have a high regard for the 16-45 though! I appreciate your feedback on the 17-70 as well. Mark On 12/30/2013 9:51 PM, ma...@redwoodhorses.com wrote: Check out http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Ratings I personally like the 17-70 f4 lens. jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Dario Bonazza Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 3:50 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I did the same for the same reason. Quality-wise, it's a bit worse than the 16-45, but the difference is not so obvious. The zoom range and the silent focus are true bonuses for my photography, hence I'm not tempted to get back to the 16-45 (which I still own). Dario -Messaggio originale- From: Mark C Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 12:07 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I'm thinking about getting a DA 17-70 f4 as an upgrade to my DA 16-45 f4. Mostly looking for a little more reach and less gap between the long end and the short end of the telephoto zoom that I usually carry with it. I don't really need an f2.8 lens and, besides, they are not much longer than the one I have. Does anyone have any experience wit this lens? The user reviews I have stumbled into seem to be inconsistent. Photozone.de gives it fairly high marks... Mark -- 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. - Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 2013.0.3462 / Database dei virus: 3658/6961 - Data di rilascio: 30/12/2013 -- 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: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4
Mark , Try this review, http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/default.asp?newsID=3676review=pentax+17- 70mm Jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Mark C Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 8:07 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 Thanks Jonathan. Is there a review of the 17-70 f4 on dxomark? I can't find it but I am probably missing it. They seem to have a high regard for the 16-45 though! I appreciate your feedback on the 17-70 as well. Mark On 12/30/2013 9:51 PM, ma...@redwoodhorses.com wrote: Check out http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Ratings I personally like the 17-70 f4 lens. jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Dario Bonazza Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 3:50 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I did the same for the same reason. Quality-wise, it's a bit worse than the 16-45, but the difference is not so obvious. The zoom range and the silent focus are true bonuses for my photography, hence I'm not tempted to get back to the 16-45 (which I still own). Dario -Messaggio originale- From: Mark C Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 12:07 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I'm thinking about getting a DA 17-70 f4 as an upgrade to my DA 16-45 f4. Mostly looking for a little more reach and less gap between the long end and the short end of the telephoto zoom that I usually carry with it. I don't really need an f2.8 lens and, besides, they are not much longer than the one I have. Does anyone have any experience wit this lens? The user reviews I have stumbled into seem to be inconsistent. Photozone.de gives it fairly high marks... Mark -- 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. - Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 2013.0.3462 / Database dei virus: 3658/6961 - Data di rilascio: 30/12/2013 -- 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: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4
Mark, Here is another test. http://www.popphoto.com/gear/2010/02/lens-test-pentax-da-17-70mm-f4-al-sdm-a f jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Mark C Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 8:07 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 Thanks Jonathan. Is there a review of the 17-70 f4 on dxomark? I can't find it but I am probably missing it. They seem to have a high regard for the 16-45 though! I appreciate your feedback on the 17-70 as well. Mark On 12/30/2013 9:51 PM, ma...@redwoodhorses.com wrote: Check out http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Ratings I personally like the 17-70 f4 lens. jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Dario Bonazza Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 3:50 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I did the same for the same reason. Quality-wise, it's a bit worse than the 16-45, but the difference is not so obvious. The zoom range and the silent focus are true bonuses for my photography, hence I'm not tempted to get back to the 16-45 (which I still own). Dario -Messaggio originale- From: Mark C Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 12:07 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I'm thinking about getting a DA 17-70 f4 as an upgrade to my DA 16-45 f4. Mostly looking for a little more reach and less gap between the long end and the short end of the telephoto zoom that I usually carry with it. I don't really need an f2.8 lens and, besides, they are not much longer than the one I have. Does anyone have any experience wit this lens? The user reviews I have stumbled into seem to be inconsistent. Photozone.de gives it fairly high marks... Mark -- 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. - Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 2013.0.3462 / Database dei virus: 3658/6961 - Data di rilascio: 30/12/2013 -- 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: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 Sigma 17-70mm lens reviews
Mark here are the pop photo tests for the Sigma 17-70mm lens http://www.popphoto.com/gear/2010/05/lens-test-sigma-17-70mm-f28-4-dc-os-mac ro-hsm-af http://www.popphoto.com/gear/2013/06/lens-test-sigma-17-70mm-f28-4-dc-os-hsm jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Mark C Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 8:07 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 Thanks Jonathan. Is there a review of the 17-70 f4 on dxomark? I can't find it but I am probably missing it. They seem to have a high regard for the 16-45 though! I appreciate your feedback on the 17-70 as well. Mark On 12/30/2013 9:51 PM, ma...@redwoodhorses.com wrote: Check out http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Ratings I personally like the 17-70 f4 lens. jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Dario Bonazza Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 3:50 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I did the same for the same reason. Quality-wise, it's a bit worse than the 16-45, but the difference is not so obvious. The zoom range and the silent focus are true bonuses for my photography, hence I'm not tempted to get back to the 16-45 (which I still own). Dario -Messaggio originale- From: Mark C Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 12:07 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I'm thinking about getting a DA 17-70 f4 as an upgrade to my DA 16-45 f4. Mostly looking for a little more reach and less gap between the long end and the short end of the telephoto zoom that I usually carry with it. I don't really need an f2.8 lens and, besides, they are not much longer than the one I have. Does anyone have any experience wit this lens? The user reviews I have stumbled into seem to be inconsistent. Photozone.de gives it fairly high marks... Mark -- 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. - Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 2013.0.3462 / Database dei virus: 3658/6961 - Data di rilascio: 30/12/2013 -- 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: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4
Paul via phone On Jan 1, 2014, at 2:20 PM, ma...@redwoodhorses.com wrote: Mark , Try this review, http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/default.asp?newsID=3676review=pentax+17- 70mm Jonathan They tested it on a k10?? How odd. Paul -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Mark C Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 8:07 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 Thanks Jonathan. Is there a review of the 17-70 f4 on dxomark? I can't find it but I am probably missing it. They seem to have a high regard for the 16-45 though! I appreciate your feedback on the 17-70 as well. Mark On 12/30/2013 9:51 PM, ma...@redwoodhorses.com wrote: Check out http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Ratings I personally like the 17-70 f4 lens. jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Dario Bonazza Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 3:50 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I did the same for the same reason. Quality-wise, it's a bit worse than the 16-45, but the difference is not so obvious. The zoom range and the silent focus are true bonuses for my photography, hence I'm not tempted to get back to the 16-45 (which I still own). Dario -Messaggio originale- From: Mark C Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 12:07 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I'm thinking about getting a DA 17-70 f4 as an upgrade to my DA 16-45 f4. Mostly looking for a little more reach and less gap between the long end and the short end of the telephoto zoom that I usually carry with it. I don't really need an f2.8 lens and, besides, they are not much longer than the one I have. Does anyone have any experience wit this lens? The user reviews I have stumbled into seem to be inconsistent. Photozone.de gives it fairly high marks... Mark -- 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. - Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 2013.0.3462 / Database dei virus: 3658/6961 - Data di rilascio: 30/12/2013 -- 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: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 and camera and lens evolution
Paul, Hi I noticed that, camera and lens evolution really is hard to keep up with. It finally ended for film cameras and lenses with the advent of digital. I still have 3 Pentax Lx bodies rebuilt by Pentax just before the closed there repair facility in Colorado. Also a complement of Prime and zoom lenses from 14m/m to 500mm. Some people might say it is all obsolete, I tend to think it just reached an evolutionary end. Then the Pentax 645nII came into my life. Then I noticed I was back to using my Rollei SL66 camera. I sold my Sinar 4x5 studio camera so long ago I don't remember If I really liked it. Some day maybe someone will contact me and make an offer I can't refuse for all or part of my Pentax LX system. In the mean time Life moves forward, So Happy New year everybody. Jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Paul Stenquist Sent: Wednesday, January 01, 2014 11:39 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 Paul via phone On Jan 1, 2014, at 2:20 PM, ma...@redwoodhorses.com wrote: Mark , Try this review, http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/default.asp?newsID=3676review=pent ax+17- 70mm Jonathan They tested it on a k10?? How odd. Paul -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Mark C Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 8:07 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 Thanks Jonathan. Is there a review of the 17-70 f4 on dxomark? I can't find it but I am probably missing it. They seem to have a high regard for the 16-45 though! I appreciate your feedback on the 17-70 as well. Mark On 12/30/2013 9:51 PM, ma...@redwoodhorses.com wrote: Check out http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Ratings I personally like the 17-70 f4 lens. jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Dario Bonazza Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 3:50 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I did the same for the same reason. Quality-wise, it's a bit worse than the 16-45, but the difference is not so obvious. The zoom range and the silent focus are true bonuses for my photography, hence I'm not tempted to get back to the 16-45 (which I still own). Dario -Messaggio originale- From: Mark C Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 12:07 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I'm thinking about getting a DA 17-70 f4 as an upgrade to my DA 16-45 f4. Mostly looking for a little more reach and less gap between the long end and the short end of the telephoto zoom that I usually carry with it. I don't really need an f2.8 lens and, besides, they are not much longer than the one I have. Does anyone have any experience wit this lens? The user reviews I have stumbled into seem to be inconsistent. Photozone.de gives it fairly high marks... Mark -- 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. - Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 2013.0.3462 / Database dei virus: 3658/6961 - Data di rilascio: 30/12/2013 -- 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: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4
I've been tempted by the 17-70 for years; the SDM problems have held me back (and being frugal, of course). Rick On Dec 30, 2013, at 23:07 , Mark C wrote: Thanks Jonathan. Is there a review of the 17-70 f4 on dxomark? I can't find it but I am probably missing it. They seem to have a high regard for the 16-45 though! I appreciate your feedback on the 17-70 as well. Mark On 12/30/2013 9:51 PM, ma...@redwoodhorses.com wrote: Check out http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Ratings I personally like the 17-70 f4 lens. jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Dario Bonazza Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 3:50 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I did the same for the same reason. Quality-wise, it's a bit worse than the 16-45, but the difference is not so obvious. The zoom range and the silent focus are true bonuses for my photography, hence I'm not tempted to get back to the 16-45 (which I still own). Dario -Messaggio originale- From: Mark C Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 12:07 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I'm thinking about getting a DA 17-70 f4 as an upgrade to my DA 16-45 f4. Mostly looking for a little more reach and less gap between the long end and the short end of the telephoto zoom that I usually carry with it. I don't really need an f2.8 lens and, besides, they are not much longer than the one I have. Does anyone have any experience wit this lens? The user reviews I have stumbled into seem to be inconsistent. Photozone.de gives it fairly high marks... Mark -- 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. - Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 2013.0.3462 / Database dei virus: 3658/6961 - Data di rilascio: 30/12/2013 -- 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: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4
Thanks, Rick. Some of the user reviews I looked at commented on SDM problems. I noticed comments here that SDM has been improved in newer lenses. I've been assuming that in this case lenses assembled recently had improved SDM drives and lower failure rates - so I've been heartened to consider using it. I will say that the past SDM issues would make me want to buy new vs old, to be sure to have warranty coverage. Mark On 12/31/2013 10:33 AM, Rick Womer wrote: I've been tempted by the 17-70 for years; the SDM problems have held me back (and being frugal, of course). Rick On Dec 30, 2013, at 23:07 , Mark C wrote: Thanks Jonathan. Is there a review of the 17-70 f4 on dxomark? I can't find it but I am probably missing it. They seem to have a high regard for the 16-45 though! I appreciate your feedback on the 17-70 as well. Mark On 12/30/2013 9:51 PM, ma...@redwoodhorses.com wrote: Check out http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Ratings I personally like the 17-70 f4 lens. jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Dario Bonazza Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 3:50 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I did the same for the same reason. Quality-wise, it's a bit worse than the 16-45, but the difference is not so obvious. The zoom range and the silent focus are true bonuses for my photography, hence I'm not tempted to get back to the 16-45 (which I still own). Dario -Messaggio originale- From: Mark C Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 12:07 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I'm thinking about getting a DA 17-70 f4 as an upgrade to my DA 16-45 f4. Mostly looking for a little more reach and less gap between the long end and the short end of the telephoto zoom that I usually carry with it. I don't really need an f2.8 lens and, besides, they are not much longer than the one I have. Does anyone have any experience wit this lens? The user reviews I have stumbled into seem to be inconsistent. Photozone.de gives it fairly high marks... Mark -- 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. - Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 2013.0.3462 / Database dei virus: 3658/6961 - Data di rilascio: 30/12/2013 -- 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: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4
Based on what I've read, in-lens focus motors have been a warranty problem for all manufacturers. I had one failure, the DA 60-250, from among my three SDM lenses. But I love them. Paul via phone On Dec 31, 2013, at 5:45 PM, Mark C pdml-m...@charter.net wrote: Thanks, Rick. Some of the user reviews I looked at commented on SDM problems. I noticed comments here that SDM has been improved in newer lenses. I've been assuming that in this case lenses assembled recently had improved SDM drives and lower failure rates - so I've been heartened to consider using it. I will say that the past SDM issues would make me want to buy new vs old, to be sure to have warranty coverage. Mark On 12/31/2013 10:33 AM, Rick Womer wrote: I've been tempted by the 17-70 for years; the SDM problems have held me back (and being frugal, of course). Rick On Dec 30, 2013, at 23:07 , Mark C wrote: Thanks Jonathan. Is there a review of the 17-70 f4 on dxomark? I can't find it but I am probably missing it. They seem to have a high regard for the 16-45 though! I appreciate your feedback on the 17-70 as well. Mark On 12/30/2013 9:51 PM, ma...@redwoodhorses.com wrote: Check out http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Ratings I personally like the 17-70 f4 lens. jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Dario Bonazza Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 3:50 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I did the same for the same reason. Quality-wise, it's a bit worse than the 16-45, but the difference is not so obvious. The zoom range and the silent focus are true bonuses for my photography, hence I'm not tempted to get back to the 16-45 (which I still own). Dario -Messaggio originale- From: Mark C Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 12:07 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I'm thinking about getting a DA 17-70 f4 as an upgrade to my DA 16-45 f4. Mostly looking for a little more reach and less gap between the long end and the short end of the telephoto zoom that I usually carry with it. I don't really need an f2.8 lens and, besides, they are not much longer than the one I have. Does anyone have any experience wit this lens? The user reviews I have stumbled into seem to be inconsistent. Photozone.de gives it fairly high marks... Mark -- 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. - Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 2013.0.3462 / Database dei virus: 3658/6961 - Data di rilascio: 30/12/2013 -- 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: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4
I did the same for the same reason. Quality-wise, it's a bit worse than the 16-45, but the difference is not so obvious. The zoom range and the silent focus are true bonuses for my photography, hence I'm not tempted to get back to the 16-45 (which I still own). Dario -Messaggio originale- From: Mark C Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 12:07 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I'm thinking about getting a DA 17-70 f4 as an upgrade to my DA 16-45 f4. Mostly looking for a little more reach and less gap between the long end and the short end of the telephoto zoom that I usually carry with it. I don't really need an f2.8 lens and, besides, they are not much longer than the one I have. Does anyone have any experience wit this lens? The user reviews I have stumbled into seem to be inconsistent. Photozone.de gives it fairly high marks... Mark -- 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. - Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 2013.0.3462 / Database dei virus: 3658/6961 - Data di rilascio: 30/12/2013 -- 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: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4
I keep looking at this lens too. Not a lot of information on the list about it but you can find a review of it here. http://www.photozone.de/pentax/408-pentax_1770_4 On 12/30/2013 6:07 PM, Mark C wrote: I'm thinking about getting a DA 17-70 f4 as an upgrade to my DA 16-45 f4. Mostly looking for a little more reach and less gap between the long end and the short end of the telephoto zoom that I usually carry with it. I don't really need an f2.8 lens and, besides, they are not much longer than the one I have. Does anyone have any experience wit this lens? The user reviews I have stumbled into seem to be inconsistent. Photozone.de gives it fairly high marks... Mark -- A newspaper is a device for making the ignorant more ignorant, and the crazy, crazier. - H.L.Mencken -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4
Check out http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Ratings I personally like the 17-70 f4 lens. jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Dario Bonazza Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 3:50 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I did the same for the same reason. Quality-wise, it's a bit worse than the 16-45, but the difference is not so obvious. The zoom range and the silent focus are true bonuses for my photography, hence I'm not tempted to get back to the 16-45 (which I still own). Dario -Messaggio originale- From: Mark C Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 12:07 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I'm thinking about getting a DA 17-70 f4 as an upgrade to my DA 16-45 f4. Mostly looking for a little more reach and less gap between the long end and the short end of the telephoto zoom that I usually carry with it. I don't really need an f2.8 lens and, besides, they are not much longer than the one I have. Does anyone have any experience wit this lens? The user reviews I have stumbled into seem to be inconsistent. Photozone.de gives it fairly high marks... Mark -- 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. - Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 2013.0.3462 / Database dei virus: 3658/6961 - Data di rilascio: 30/12/2013 -- 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: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4
Thanks, Dario. I will probably hang onto my 16-45 as well. The 17-70 is sounding good... Mark On 12/30/2013 6:50 PM, Dario Bonazza wrote: I did the same for the same reason. Quality-wise, it's a bit worse than the 16-45, but the difference is not so obvious. The zoom range and the silent focus are true bonuses for my photography, hence I'm not tempted to get back to the 16-45 (which I still own). Dario -Messaggio originale- From: Mark C Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 12:07 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I'm thinking about getting a DA 17-70 f4 as an upgrade to my DA 16-45 f4. Mostly looking for a little more reach and less gap between the long end and the short end of the telephoto zoom that I usually carry with it. I don't really need an f2.8 lens and, besides, they are not much longer than the one I have. Does anyone have any experience wit this lens? The user reviews I have stumbled into seem to be inconsistent. Photozone.de gives it fairly high marks... Mark -- 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: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4
Thanks Jonathan. Is there a review of the 17-70 f4 on dxomark? I can't find it but I am probably missing it. They seem to have a high regard for the 16-45 though! I appreciate your feedback on the 17-70 as well. Mark On 12/30/2013 9:51 PM, ma...@redwoodhorses.com wrote: Check out http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Ratings I personally like the 17-70 f4 lens. jonathan -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Dario Bonazza Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 3:50 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I did the same for the same reason. Quality-wise, it's a bit worse than the 16-45, but the difference is not so obvious. The zoom range and the silent focus are true bonuses for my photography, hence I'm not tempted to get back to the 16-45 (which I still own). Dario -Messaggio originale- From: Mark C Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 12:07 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Opinions on DA 17-70 f4 I'm thinking about getting a DA 17-70 f4 as an upgrade to my DA 16-45 f4. Mostly looking for a little more reach and less gap between the long end and the short end of the telephoto zoom that I usually carry with it. I don't really need an f2.8 lens and, besides, they are not much longer than the one I have. Does anyone have any experience wit this lens? The user reviews I have stumbled into seem to be inconsistent. Photozone.de gives it fairly high marks... Mark -- 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. - Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 2013.0.3462 / Database dei virus: 3658/6961 - Data di rilascio: 30/12/2013 -- 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: Opinions on later Tamron 24/2.5
I have the adaptall 28mm 2.5. The lens isn't well corrected with digital and throws aberrations along the sides of the frame that erode sharpness. I have a feeling that the 24 might have the same issues. I would take some test shots in sunlight and look at the corners. If its newer than adaptall it might be better corrected for CA. Just something to look out for. On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 6:12 PM, Collin Brendemuehl coll...@brendemuehl.net wrote: I'm looking @ one in a store nearby. It's a later unit from Tamron with a deeper blue coating, I would guestimate that from around the time when they bought up Bronica. And though it is MF, it has a window on the distance scale like AF lenses have. Anyone here used such with a DSLR? I think I'll take my A adapter down and check it out for myself as well. -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
Hi Adam, I bought one at 2003 for my Z-1p and continued to use it with digital bodies (until the DA* series arrived). It have served fine. Of course it has more distortion and is not as sharp as top lenses, but I've never said this lens is a crap, why did I had to spend my money. The other FAJ lenses, sorry to say, are quite crappy. First I was worried about the plastic mount, but after all those years it's still fully intact. I have also tested it head-to-head against early DA18-55 kit lens (with K10D) and liked FAJ much more then A. In a short - better geometry and less vignetting. Overall, it's surprisingly decent lens. It's much better than you would presume. BR, Margus Adam Maas wrote: I know it's cheaply built, but I've got one offered to me at a very reasonable price and it would make a nice wide zoom option for my Z-1p. Sadly funds do not currently extend to a FA 20 or FA 20-35 which would be my preferred choice. So, how is it on film? -Adam -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
On 8/16/2010 1:32 AM, P. J. Alling wrote: Optically they're supposed to be fairly good, but with a build of finest mouse-hair. I've one of these FAJ 18-35 lenses. Sans non-metal mount (I fail to characterize it in any more accurate way) the build is actually quite good for a lens worth $150 brand new (or thereabouts). In particular, comparing it with FA 24-90 which is higher up the ladder and more expensive, FAJ wins, sadly. 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
Ira H. Bryant IV wrote: Anyway, I know that I'm not answering the question you asked, but I hope it helps anyway. Mark! -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 07:28:25 +0100 mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: Ira H. Bryant IV wrote: Anyway, I know that I'm not answering the question you asked, but I hope it helps anyway. Mark! C'mon, if the people on this list only answered the questions that were asked then the list would have died off ages ago! :) -- Ira Bryant irabry...@sbcglobal.net -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 01:48 -0500, Ira H. Bryant IV irabry...@sbcglobal.net wrote: On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 07:28:25 +0100 mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: Ira H. Bryant IV wrote: Anyway, I know that I'm not answering the question you asked, but I hope it helps anyway. Mark! C'mon, if the people on this list only answered the questions that were asked then the list would have died off ages ago! :) Well - Let's MARK! that as well Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Send your email first class -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
2010/8/16 P. J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com: Optically they're supposed to be fairly good, but with a build of finest mouse-hair. and that while we're at it - MARK -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
Brian Walters wrote: On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 01:48 -0500, Ira H. Bryant IV irabry...@sbcglobal.net wrote: On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 07:28:25 +0100 mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: Ira H. Bryant IV wrote: Anyway, I know that I'm not answering the question you asked, but I hope it helps anyway. Mark! C'mon, if the people on this list only answered the questions that were asked then the list would have died off ages ago! :) Well - Let's MARK! that as well I hope you're not going to take that lying down, Ira -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
FYI, the FA20-35 works great with digital. The range may not be as interesting as it was with film, but image quality is wonderful. it's also surprisingly light. On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 6:56 AM, mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: Brian Walters wrote: On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 01:48 -0500, Ira H. Bryant IV irabry...@sbcglobal.net wrote: On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 07:28:25 +0100 mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: Ira H. Bryant IV wrote: Anyway, I know that I'm not answering the question you asked, but I hope it helps anyway. Mark! C'mon, if the people on this list only answered the questions that were asked then the list would have died off ages ago! :) Well - Let's MARK! that as well I hope you're not going to take that lying down, Ira -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
I don't know about the FAJ 18-35, but I was in the same position as you and went for the Samyang manual focus 19-35. I got the Phoenix-branded one, but it comes in many guises. I didn't use it for a long time because I really didn't have confidence in it, but I pulled it out the other day and thought it did pretty well. Much better than I expected. I used it on my ME Super with black and white film. Unfortunately, I haven't scanned any of the negatives or prints, so I can't show an example. I believe there is an auto-focus version, but I have read it is not as good. Funnily enough, just today I was looking at the FA 20-35 on the Keh website. I would really like to have that lens, but for me it is a film-specific lens and I don't use film enough to justify the cost to myself. I don't regret the Samyang but the 20-35 has a good reputation. Anyway, I know that I'm not answering the question you asked, but I hope it helps anyway. Ira On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 21:48:47 -0400 Adam Maas a...@mawz.ca wrote: I know it's cheaply built, but I've got one offered to me at a very reasonable price and it would make a nice wide zoom option for my Z-1p. Sadly funds do not currently extend to a FA 20 or FA 20-35 which would be my preferred choice. So, how is it on film? -Adam -- Ira Bryant irabry...@sbcglobal.net -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
I apologize, the Phoenix 19-35 is made by Cosina and not Samyang. I get my third-party sell-to-anyone OEMs confused sometimes. Anyway, the truth is probably a plus, not a minus. If I had my choice of Cosina-made lenses I would be a very happy man. Ira On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 22:14:16 -0500 Ira H. Bryant IV irabry...@sbcglobal.net wrote: I don't know about the FAJ 18-35, but I was in the same position as you and went for the Samyang manual focus 19-35. I got the Phoenix-branded one, but it comes in many guises. I didn't use it for a long time because I really didn't have confidence in it, but I pulled it out the other day and thought it did pretty well. Much better than I expected. I used it on my ME Super with black and white film. Unfortunately, I haven't scanned any of the negatives or prints, so I can't show an example. I believe there is an auto-focus version, but I have read it is not as good. Funnily enough, just today I was looking at the FA 20-35 on the Keh website. I would really like to have that lens, but for me it is a film-specific lens and I don't use film enough to justify the cost to myself. I don't regret the Samyang but the 20-35 has a good reputation. Anyway, I know that I'm not answering the question you asked, but I hope it helps anyway. Ira On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 21:48:47 -0400 Adam Maas a...@mawz.ca wrote: I know it's cheaply built, but I've got one offered to me at a very reasonable price and it would make a nice wide zoom option for my Z-1p. Sadly funds do not currently extend to a FA 20 or FA 20-35 which would be my preferred choice. So, how is it on film? -Adam -- Ira Bryant irabry...@sbcglobal.net -- 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: Opinions on the FAJ 18-35 for film use.
On 8/17/2010 9:48 PM, Adam Maas wrote: I know it's cheaply built, but I've got one offered to me at a very reasonable price and it would make a nice wide zoom option for my Z-1p. Sadly funds do not currently extend to a FA 20 or FA 20-35 which would be my preferred choice. So, how is it on film? -Adam Optically they're supposed to be fairly good, but with a build of finest mouse-hair. -- His lack of education is more than compensated for by his keenly developed moral bankruptcy. -Woody Allen -- 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: Opinions on Tamron 90mm macro?
If it is AF and will cost you $150, it's a steal. On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Charles Robinson charl...@visi.com wrote: There is a guy locally selling an old zx-30 with 3 lenses (including this Tamron) for $150. All I can find for 90mm Tamron macro autofocus lenses is one that looks... pretty nice. I'll know more when I see it at lunchtime, but if it's what I think it is, I've seen this lens alone go for $300. The focal length is something I've been wanting a while for concert work. Macro would be a bonus. I was wondering if anyone has used this particular beast and has a run and get it or run away! opinion. Also: If anyone is interested in a zx-30 with a Pentax 28-80 and a Sigma 70-210 zoom, I guess I'll have those available pretty soon for a good price. :-) -Charles -- Charles Robinson - charl...@visi.com Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson -- 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: Opinions on Tamron 90mm macro?
On Dec 10, 2009, at 10:46, Boris Liberman wrote: If it is AF and will cost you $150, it's a steal. I'm hopeful. His photo of all the gear laid out shows a lens which does NOT look like the older MF f2.5 lens. Fingers crossed! -Charles -- Charles Robinson - charl...@visi.com Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson -- 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: Opinions on Tamron 90mm macro?
I have the Tamron 90 in Nikon mount, bought new in 2006 i think. Its good, but along the same lines as my FA 100 macro. Some days it produces some good images and some days kinda soft images. Having said that, i had only used it on the D200 in jpeg mode, which was always a struggle for me to get keepers. I have now switched to Raw, but have not used it since the switch. For that price, why not Dave On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 11:34 AM, Charles Robinson charl...@visi.com wrote: There is a guy locally selling an old zx-30 with 3 lenses (including this Tamron) for $150. All I can find for 90mm Tamron macro autofocus lenses is one that looks... pretty nice. I'll know more when I see it at lunchtime, but if it's what I think it is, I've seen this lens alone go for $300. The focal length is something I've been wanting a while for concert work. Macro would be a bonus. I was wondering if anyone has used this particular beast and has a run and get it or run away! opinion. Also: If anyone is interested in a zx-30 with a Pentax 28-80 and a Sigma 70-210 zoom, I guess I'll have those available pretty soon for a good price. :-) -Charles -- Charles Robinson - charl...@visi.com Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson -- 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: Opinions on Tamron 90mm macro?
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Charles Robinson charl...@visi.com wrote: On Dec 10, 2009, at 10:46, Boris Liberman wrote: If it is AF and will cost you $150, it's a steal. I'm hopeful. His photo of all the gear laid out shows a lens which does NOT look like the older MF f2.5 lens. Fingers crossed! There is also a manual focus Tamron 90mm f2.8 in Adaptall-2 mount that looks similar to the newer models. I like mine although I haven't used it a lot and the Adaptall-2 PK-A adapter is finicky. KEH has one of these in stock with the PK adapter (actually, Ricoh XRP which is basically PK with the Ricoh pin I believe -- certainly not PKA). The PK-A adapter is somewhat expensive these days so if auto aperture is a requirement... Cymen -- 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: Opinions on Tamron 90mm macro?
On Dec 10, 2009, at 16:22, Cymen Vig wrote: On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Charles Robinson charl...@visi.com wrote: On Dec 10, 2009, at 10:46, Boris Liberman wrote: If it is AF and will cost you $150, it's a steal. I'm hopeful. His photo of all the gear laid out shows a lens which does NOT look like the older MF f2.5 lens. Fingers crossed! There is also a manual focus Tamron 90mm f2.8 in Adaptall-2 mount that looks similar to the newer models. I like mine although I haven't used it a lot and the Adaptall-2 PK-A adapter is finicky. KEH has one of these in stock with the PK adapter (actually, Ricoh XRP which is basically PK with the Ricoh pin I believe -- certainly not PKA). The PK-A adapter is somewhat expensive these days so if auto aperture is a requirement... Yup, that's what it ended up being. -Charles -- Charles Robinson - charl...@visi.com Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson -- 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: Opinions on Tamron 90mm macro?
On Dec 10, 2009, at 8:34 AM, Charles Robinson wrote: There is a guy locally selling an old zx-30 with 3 lenses (including this Tamron) for $150. All I can find for 90mm Tamron macro autofocus lenses is one that looks... pretty nice. I'll know more when I see it at lunchtime, but if it's what I think it is, I've seen this lens alone go for $300. The focal length is something I've been wanting a while for concert work. Macro would be a bonus. I was wondering if anyone has used this particular beast and has a run and get it or run away! opinion. Also: If anyone is interested in a zx-30 with a Pentax 28-80 and a Sigma 70-210 zoom, I guess I'll have those available pretty soon for a good price. :-) I kept finding myself in situations where I couldn't get close enough with my DFA 50 macro to get the shot I wanted. The DFA 100 wasn't in my budget and I ended up with a Tamrnon SP 90/2.5. It's an adaptall 2 lens, and while there's nothing specifically wrong with it, it only goes to about 1:2 in macro, so I haven't been using it as a macro nearly as much as I expected, and it's so close in length to my FA 77, that I find myself using it, with autofocus and f/1.8 anytime I'd need a lens of about this length. There's nothing really wrong with it, but I so rarely find myself in situations where it's the lens of mine that I need. -Charles -- Charles Robinson - charl...@visi.com Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson -- 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: Opinions on FA 100-300mm Zoom
Some have had good luck with the FA 100-300, but the consensus is that it's not as good. Check ebay. I sold my 80-320 two weeks ago on ebay. It went for $130 to a fellow in Australia. Shipping was $31, and it arrived in less than a week. Paul On Jul 28, 2009, at 6:57 AM, Brian Walters wrote: G'day all Sadly, my FA 80-320 mm zoom has started to play up. It can no longer focus at infinity beyond about the 180 mm setting. It seems to work OK otherwise. I'm considering the DA 55-300 mm as a replacement but I've seen a couple of FA 100-300 zooms go for reasonable prices recently. Does anyone have experience with the FA 100-300, particularly in comparison to the 80-320, which I think is excellent? Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Or how I learned to stop worrying and love email again -- 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: Opinions on FA 100-300mm Zoom
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 7:31 AM, paul stenquistpnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote: heck ebay. I sold my 80-320 two weeks ago on ebay. It went for $130 Crap. I wish i had known that. I would have but a bid in. Live and learn 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: Opinions on FA 100-300mm Zoom
I sold my 80-320 to finance the 55-300. The 55-300 is much better above 200 mm and it doesn't creep while walking around. My FA100-300 doesn't see any use. It's for sale! Toine 2009/7/28 Brian Walters supera1...@fastmail.fm: G'day all Sadly, my FA 80-320 mm zoom has started to play up. It can no longer focus at infinity beyond about the 180 mm setting. It seems to work OK otherwise. I'm considering the DA 55-300 mm as a replacement but I've seen a couple of FA 100-300 zooms go for reasonable prices recently. Does anyone have experience with the FA 100-300, particularly in comparison to the 80-320, which I think is excellent? Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Or how I learned to stop worrying and love email again -- 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: Opinions on FA 100-300mm Zoom
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 07:31 -0400, paul stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote: Some have had good luck with the FA 100-300, but the consensus is that it's not as good. Check ebay. I sold my 80-320 two weeks ago on ebay. It went for $130 to a fellow in Australia. Shipping was $31, and it arrived in less than a week. Hmmm - pity my 80-320 didn't die a couple of weeks earlier. Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ On Jul 28, 2009, at 6:57 AM, Brian Walters wrote: G'day all Sadly, my FA 80-320 mm zoom has started to play up. It can no longer focus at infinity beyond about the 180 mm setting. It seems to work OK otherwise. I'm considering the DA 55-300 mm as a replacement but I've seen a couple of FA 100-300 zooms go for reasonable prices recently. Does anyone have experience with the FA 100-300, particularly in comparison to the 80-320, which I think is excellent? Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Or how I learned to stop worrying and love email again -- 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. -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Accessible with your email software or over the web -- 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: Opinions on FA 100-300mm Zoom
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 14:18 +0200, Toine to...@repiuk.nl wrote: I sold my 80-320 to finance the 55-300. The 55-300 is much better above 200 mm and it doesn't creep while walking around. My FA100-300 doesn't see any use. It's for sale! Based on that, and on Paul's post, I think I see a 55-300 in my future. Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ 2009/7/28 Brian Walters supera1...@fastmail.fm: G'day all Sadly, my FA 80-320 mm zoom has started to play up. It can no longer focus at infinity beyond about the 180 mm setting. It seems to work OK otherwise. I'm considering the DA 55-300 mm as a replacement but I've seen a couple of FA 100-300 zooms go for reasonable prices recently. Does anyone have experience with the FA 100-300, particularly in comparison to the 80-320, which I think is excellent? Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Or how I learned to stop worrying and love email again -- 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. -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Accessible with your email software or over the web -- 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: Opinions on FA 100-300mm Zoom
At 8:57 PM +1000 7/28/09, Brian Walters wrote: G'day all Sadly, my FA 80-320 mm zoom has started to play up. It can no longer focus at infinity beyond about the 180 mm setting. It seems to work OK otherwise. I'm considering the DA 55-300 mm as a replacement but I've seen a couple of FA 100-300 zooms go for reasonable prices recently. Does anyone have experience with the FA 100-300, particularly in comparison to the 80-320, which I think is excellent? I have one that I bought used off another listmember four years ago. For the price it is okay...not the sharpest lens but a nice reach. It is better on digital than on 35mm, since it vignettes slightly at the corners on the latter cameras... I do not have the 80-320. -- Steve Sharpe d...@eastlink.ca http://earth.delith.com/photo_gallery.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Opinions on FA 100-300mm Zoom
Sold my FA 80~320 (eBay, $135+$15 shipping) a couple weeks ago. I'm expecting delivery of a DA 55~300 (BH, $350 w/free shipping) in a couple days. While I'm realistic about sample variations, I like the test numbers I've read along with positive contrast reports. Therefore, am holding off on the DA*60~250 for now. Jack --- On Tue, 7/28/09, paul stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote: From: paul stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net Subject: Re: Opinions on FA 100-300mm Zoom To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2009, 4:31 AM Some have had good luck with the FA 100-300, but the consensus is that it's not as good. Check ebay. I sold my 80-320 two weeks ago on ebay. It went for $130 to a fellow in Australia. Shipping was $31, and it arrived in less than a week. Paul On Jul 28, 2009, at 6:57 AM, Brian Walters wrote: G'day all Sadly, my FA 80-320 mm zoom has started to play up. It can no longer focus at infinity beyond about the 180 mm setting. It seems to work OK otherwise. I'm considering the DA 55-300 mm as a replacement but I've seen a couple of FA 100-300 zooms go for reasonable prices recently. Does anyone have experience with the FA 100-300, particularly in comparison to the 80-320, which I think is excellent? Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ -- --http://www.fastmail.fm - Or how I learned to stop worrying and love email again -- 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: Opinions on FA 100-300mm Zoom
I found the Tamron 70-300 LD Di to be very good, sharper than my FA 80-320 and F 70-210. they're cheap to buy too. I've not tried the 55-300 but hear it's very good. John From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Brian Walters [supera1...@fastmail.fm] Sent: 28 July 2009 11:57 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Opinions on FA 100-300mm Zoom G'day all Sadly, my FA 80-320 mm zoom has started to play up. It can no longer focus at infinity beyond about the 180 mm setting. It seems to work OK otherwise. I'm considering the DA 55-300 mm as a replacement but I've seen a couple of FA 100-300 zooms go for reasonable prices recently. Does anyone have experience with the FA 100-300, particularly in comparison to the 80-320, which I think is excellent? Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Or how I learned to stop worrying and love email again -- 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: Opinions on FA 100-300mm Zoom
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 8:57 AM, Jack Davisjdavi...@yahoo.com wrote: Sold my FA 80~320 (eBay, $135+$15 shipping) a couple weeks ago. I'm expecting delivery of a DA 55~300 (BH, $350 w/free shipping) in a couple days. While I'm realistic about sample variations, I like the test numbers I've read along with positive contrast reports. Therefore, am holding off on the DA*60~250 for now. Jack Arg, a guy just can't win around here.:-) Let us know what you think of the 55-300. My 60-250 and or D300 and or K7 fund is still quite low right now. 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: Opinions please
Bob W wrote: A picture: http://www.web-options.com/L1000308.jpg The highlights, particularly the child's face, look blown out, but they're not really. Sometimes there is no detail in white. Bob That is rather brilliant. I'd say, another surrealist shot in the vein of your girl in the park. D -- der...@iinet.net.au http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc -- 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: Opinions please
Bob W wrote: A picture: http://www.web-options.com/L1000308.jpg The highlights, particularly the child's face, look blown out, but they're not really. Sometimes there is no detail in white. Bob That is rather brilliant. I'd say, another surrealist shot in the vein of your girl in the park. D Thanks to everyone who opinionated - the picture was far better received than I expected it to be. Bob -- 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: Opinions please
Very good capture Bob. Agree white should not offer detail other than any other colors or shades (didn't work so well this transtation, but I always get tired by this time of night). I keep trying to adjust the horizon, CCW just a little bit... minor nit indeed. One shot or did you bracket? the buildings and road are not straight or level in any dimension. Plus I took it with a why dangle lens, so things are a bit distorted. I didn't bracket. I got one shot in just before this one, then he was gone from the good background. Bob -- 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: Opinions please
Here comes another vote from the Norwegian jury. -- MaritimTim 2009/5/25 Bob W p...@web-options.com: A picture: http://www.web-options.com/L1000308.jpg The highlights, particularly the child's face, look blown out, but they're not really. Sometimes there is no detail in white. Bob -- 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: Opinions please
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: A picture: http://www.web-options.com/L1000308.jpg The highlights, particularly the child's face, look blown out, but they're not really. Sometimes there is no detail in white. Death, destruction, people with weapons - wait, that was another thread. Okay, keeping in mind that I have very low standards for myself, I'd be very happy with this one. You caught the child perfectly mid-stride (not an easy thing to do with scooters and skateboards and the like) and ~also~ in just the right position in the frame (between the doors and those black poles). The geometry in this is amazing. Whether the face is blown out or not, I guess I'd prefer a bit more detail in it, but that lack of detail isn't enough to turn take this good photo and turn it into a bad one. In other words (god I'm feeling inarticulate this evening!) I like it a lot. Now I must leave the office, go home and eat dinner. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- 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: Opinions please
On Mon, 25 May 2009 22:55:07 +0100 Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: http://www.web-options.com/L1000308.jpg The highlights, particularly the child's face, look blown out, but they're not really. Sometimes there is no detail in white. Bob would like a higher def version but... I like how the shot works to emphasize how wee the lad is. verticals and the window sill is even over his head. -- Love is that condition in which the happiness of another person is essential to your own... Jealousy is a disease, love is a healthy condition.- Robert Heinlein -- 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: Opinions please
Very good capture Bob. Agree white should not offer detail other than any other colors or shades (didn't work so well this transtation, but I always get tired by this time of night). I keep trying to adjust the horizon, CCW just a little bit... minor nit indeed. One shot or did you bracket? LF Bob W escreveu: A picture: http://www.web-options.com/L1000308.jpg The highlights, particularly the child's face, look blown out, but they're not really. Sometimes there is no detail in white. Bob -- 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. -- Luiz Felipe luiz.felipe at techmit.com.br http://techmit.com.br/luizfelipe/ -- 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: Opinions please
From: Bob W p...@web-options.com A picture: http://www.web-options.com/L1000308.jpg The highlights, particularly the child's face, look blown out, but they're not really. Sometimes there is no detail in white. I like it ... it looks like a figure in a diorama rather than a real child, makes that leap out of documentarian into abstrative perception. Godfrey -- 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: Opinions please
On 25/5/09, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: http://www.web-options.com/L1000308.jpg The highlights, particularly the child's face, look blown out, but they're not really. Sometimes there is no detail in white. Looks fine to me, I can see plenty of detail. Nice pic. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.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: Opinions please
Exposure looks fine to me. I like it. On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: A picture: http://www.web-options.com/L1000308.jpg The highlights, particularly the child's face, look blown out, but they're not really. Sometimes there is no detail in white. Bob -- 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. -- ~Nick David Wright http://www.nickdavidwright.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: Opinions please
He's a red-head. Like me at his age, he has no color to his skin. But there are freckles, I'd wager. Move in closer! On May 25, 2009, at 14:55 , Bob W wrote: A picture: http://www.web-options.com/L1000308.jpg The highlights, particularly the child's face, look blown out, but they're not really. Sometimes there is no detail in white. Joseph McAllister Pentaxian http://gallery.me.com/jomac http://web.me.com/jomac/show.me/Blog/Blog.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Opinions please
I like it. I'm looking at it on my laptop, so much is lost. But it projects a mood that I'd describe as mysterious if not dark. The child appears almost as a mannequin, and his position in frame and tightly programmed look contribute to a somewhat unnatural feeling. Strange, interesting, compelling. Paul On May 25, 2009, at 5:55 PM, Bob W wrote: A picture: http://www.web-options.com/L1000308.jpg The highlights, particularly the child's face, look blown out, but they're not really. Sometimes there is no detail in white. Bob -- 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: Opinions please
What Godfrey said Kenneth Waller http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f - Original Message - From: Godfrey DiGiorgi godd...@mac.com Subject: Re: Opinions please From: Bob W p...@web-options.com A picture: http://www.web-options.com/L1000308.jpg The highlights, particularly the child's face, look blown out, but they're not really. Sometimes there is no detail in white. I like it ... it looks like a figure in a diorama rather than a real child, makes that leap out of documentarian into abstrative perception. Godfrey -- 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: Opinions please
This has red hair. Therefore the way his face came out is only natural... Or at least this is what I am thinking. On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 12:55 AM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: A picture: http://www.web-options.com/L1000308.jpg The highlights, particularly the child's face, look blown out, but they're not really. Sometimes there is no detail in white. Bob -- 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: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted
Hi Boris, I found the 17-35 very acceptable in all other respects, it's interesting to note that it's not just Klaus who noticed the field curvature but Pop Photo and IIRC Shutterbug. It may have been one of the few times I should have given more heed to the reviewers opinions. Regards, John From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 13 November 2008 19:28 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted Hi! Thanks, John. Yes, I noticed that some of the reviews mentioned that... I will have another, closer, look. Boris John Whittingham wrote: Hi Boris The Tamron 17-35 has quite a bit of field curvature resulting in a lot of images that do not look sharp at the edges. This was something I found quite unacceptable in a lens I used mainly for landscape and group photographs and I eventually sold it and bought the DA 16-45. The DA 16-45 has to be one of the best value lenses I ever bought and I'm more than satisfied with the results. Apparently the Tamron 17-50 shares the same field curvature issues as the 17-35, I'm hoping the 10-24 performs better in this respect because I'd really like to try one and keep it company with my Tamron 28-75 or a bag full of FA primes. Regards, John -- 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: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted
Hi! Thanks, John. Yes, I noticed that some of the reviews mentioned that... I will have another, closer, look. Boris John Whittingham wrote: Hi Boris The Tamron 17-35 has quite a bit of field curvature resulting in a lot of images that do not look sharp at the edges. This was something I found quite unacceptable in a lens I used mainly for landscape and group photographs and I eventually sold it and bought the DA 16-45. The DA 16-45 has to be one of the best value lenses I ever bought and I'm more than satisfied with the results. Apparently the Tamron 17-50 shares the same field curvature issues as the 17-35, I'm hoping the 10-24 performs better in this respect because I'd really like to try one and keep it company with my Tamron 28-75 or a bag full of FA primes. Regards, John -- 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: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted
Hehe I have an eye on that one as well ;) On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 5:14 AM, Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thibouille wrote: Boris, my 16-45 may go at a time or another ... I just dunno yet. Please let me know when you would know ;-). But many ideas are running through my head, including, but not limited to, Tamron 17-50/2.8 that can be had for a very fair price here in Israel brand new. 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. -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille -- Photo: K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... Thinkpad: X23+UB,X60+UB Programing: D7 user (trying out D2007) -- 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: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted
In fact, to disclose even more details on my pondering, I am thinking of selling FAJ 18-35 (probably somewhat overdue anyway), a film body and a 21 ltd (please notice) and buy Tamron 17-35/2.8. Then I'll have 2 Tamron zooms and 4 Pentax full frame primes - quite enough for me. Boris On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 11:53 AM, Thibouille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hehe I have an eye on that one as well ;) On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 5:14 AM, Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thibouille wrote: Boris, my 16-45 may go at a time or another ... I just dunno yet. Please let me know when you would know ;-). But many ideas are running through my head, including, but not limited to, Tamron 17-50/2.8 that can be had for a very fair price here in Israel brand new. 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. -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille -- Photo: K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... Thinkpad: X23+UB,X60+UB Programing: D7 user (trying out D2007) -- 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: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted
Hi Boris The Tamron 17-35 has quite a bit of field curvature resulting in a lot of images that do not look sharp at the edges. This was something I found quite unacceptable in a lens I used mainly for landscape and group photographs and I eventually sold it and bought the DA 16-45. The DA 16-45 has to be one of the best value lenses I ever bought and I'm more than satisfied with the results. Apparently the Tamron 17-50 shares the same field curvature issues as the 17-35, I'm hoping the 10-24 performs better in this respect because I'd really like to try one and keep it company with my Tamron 28-75 or a bag full of FA primes. Regards, John From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12 November 2008 11:47 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted In fact, to disclose even more details on my pondering, I am thinking of selling FAJ 18-35 (probably somewhat overdue anyway), a film body and a 21 ltd (please notice) and buy Tamron 17-35/2.8. Then I'll have 2 Tamron zooms and 4 Pentax full frame primes - quite enough for me. Boris On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 11:53 AM, Thibouille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hehe I have an eye on that one as well ;) On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 5:14 AM, Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thibouille wrote: Boris, my 16-45 may go at a time or another ... I just dunno yet. Please let me know when you would know ;-). But many ideas are running through my head, including, but not limited to, Tamron 17-50/2.8 that can be had for a very fair price here in Israel brand new. 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. -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille -- Photo: K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... Thinkpad: X23+UB,X60+UB Programing: D7 user (trying out D2007) -- 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. -- 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: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted
Bill I reckon that DA 16-45/4 is a stop slower, a bit shorter but buy one, return none kind of lens for fraction of the price. I may be buying one myself some day. And yet, may be not, I don't know... Boris William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: PN Stenquist Subject: Re: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted If you buy from a reputable supplier, there is no risk. BH replaced mine without question. What's more, the problem was due to assembly mistakes in manufacture. I'm sure it's been resolved. (Although pixel peeping paranoid users will continue to imagine problems.) If you are talking about the 16-50, It would appear that Pentax has not resolved the problem. It's still a buy three, return at least two style of lens. William Robb -- 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: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted
I'm hoping it's good, because I want one. BH photo has a few reviews, seem to be mostly self congratulatory expressions that the buyer made a good choice. Boris Lieberman wrote: Hi! I don't recall any significant discussion of this lens. Anyone owning it? Or is it the general opinion of this list, that this lens is of insufficient quality? How about distortion at 17 mm? Thanks in advance. 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. -- You get further with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone. --Al Capone. -- 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: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted
Boris, my 16-45 may go at a time or another ... I just dunno yet. -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille -- Photo: K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... Thinkpad: X23+UB,X60+UB Programing: D7 user (trying out D2007) -- 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: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted
Thibouille wrote: Boris, my 16-45 may go at a time or another ... I just dunno yet. Please let me know when you would know ;-). But many ideas are running through my head, including, but not limited to, Tamron 17-50/2.8 that can be had for a very fair price here in Israel brand new. 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: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted
If you buy from a reputable supplier, there is no risk. BH replaced mine without question. What's more, the problem was due to assembly mistakes in manufacture. I'm sure it's been resolved. (Although pixel peeping paranoid users will continue to imagine problems.) Paul On Nov 9, 2008, at 11:16 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: Hoover like in the namesake dam? Seriously, you've answered my question completely, sir William. I get to keep the money. And no, Paul, I am not in position to *risk* my money in getting potentially flawed by production DA* 16-50. Locally it is not even being sold. I can get a DA 16-45/4 though (for $450) which I probably will eventually. Boris William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Boris Liberman Subject: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted Hi! I don't recall any significant discussion of this lens. Anyone owning it? Or is it the general opinion of this list, that this lens is of insufficient quality? How about distortion at 17 mm? Does the word Hoover mean anything to you? Seriously, it's sharp and contrasty enough, but the barrel distortion is awful. William Robb -- 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: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted
A My sense of humour radar has been intermittent the last week or so. Cheers, Dave 2008/11/10 Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Dave, I know that very well. I was trying to be kidding here. On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 8:41 AM, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Boris Liberman Sent: Monday, 10 November 2008 1:16 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted Hoover like in the namesake dam? Hoover as in the company that makes vacuum cleaners. In other words, machines that suck. 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: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted
Paul, each time I send a lens to US of A for replacement and each time I receive one as it passes through our border, I get to pay money. After two or three replacement transactions, I'll be better of flying to NYC and cherry picking the sucker over the counter. On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 4:01 PM, PN Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you buy from a reputable supplier, there is no risk. BH replaced mine without question. What's more, the problem was due to assembly mistakes in manufacture. I'm sure it's been resolved. (Although pixel peeping paranoid users will continue to imagine problems.) Paul On Nov 9, 2008, at 11:16 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: Hoover like in the namesake dam? Seriously, you've answered my question completely, sir William. I get to keep the money. And no, Paul, I am not in position to *risk* my money in getting potentially flawed by production DA* 16-50. Locally it is not even being sold. I can get a DA 16-45/4 though (for $450) which I probably will eventually. Boris William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Boris Liberman Subject: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted Hi! I don't recall any significant discussion of this lens. Anyone owning it? Or is it the general opinion of this list, that this lens is of insufficient quality? How about distortion at 17 mm? Does the word Hoover mean anything to you? Seriously, it's sharp and contrasty enough, but the barrel distortion is awful. William Robb -- 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. -- 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: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted
I understand. It's unfortunate that Pentax doesn't have a better presence in Israel. Paul On Nov 10, 2008, at 9:09 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: Paul, each time I send a lens to US of A for replacement and each time I receive one as it passes through our border, I get to pay money. After two or three replacement transactions, I'll be better of flying to NYC and cherry picking the sucker over the counter. On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 4:01 PM, PN Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you buy from a reputable supplier, there is no risk. BH replaced mine without question. What's more, the problem was due to assembly mistakes in manufacture. I'm sure it's been resolved. (Although pixel peeping paranoid users will continue to imagine problems.) Paul On Nov 9, 2008, at 11:16 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: Hoover like in the namesake dam? Seriously, you've answered my question completely, sir William. I get to keep the money. And no, Paul, I am not in position to *risk* my money in getting potentially flawed by production DA* 16-50. Locally it is not even being sold. I can get a DA 16-45/4 though (for $450) which I probably will eventually. Boris William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Boris Liberman Subject: Opinions about DA 17-70/4 SDM wanted Hi! I don't recall any significant discussion of this lens. Anyone owning it? Or is it the general opinion of this list, that this lens is of insufficient quality? How about distortion at 17 mm? Does the word Hoover mean anything to you? Seriously, it's sharp and contrasty enough, but the barrel distortion is awful. William Robb -- 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. -- 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. -- 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.
