Re: thoughts on 100mm macro...?

[Boris Liberman]

On 9/8/2010 10:34 PM, Christine Nielsen wrote:

Today, I enabled myself with the Pentax smc FA 100mm 2.8 macro lens.
Funny thing is,  it happened kind of by accident... I thought I was
purchasing the DFA 100mm 2.8 macro (the non-WR version), but it turns
out I overlooked the missing "D" when I placed my order.  Whoops.
...
What I wonder is this:  what am I missing out on because of my
shopping cart mix-up?  (Besides the price difference...)  I'm not sure
I understand the difference between the DFA&  FA designations...  Are
there other features of either lens that I should consider before I
declare this one a keeper?

Thanks,
-c


Congratulations, you got yourself on of the best lenses Pentax ever 
produced. Although a bit large and heavy it is mighty excellent...


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: thoughts on 100mm macro...?

[Christine Nielsen]

Thanks, David!  I just might take you up on that offer at some point...

On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 9:33 PM, David Parsons  wrote:
> If you want to play with one, I've got one you can borrow.  I don't
> use it much.  Let me know before a club meeting and I'll bring it in
> for you.
>
> I've got the Sunpak 8R, and it has 49, 55, and 58mm adapters (along
> with the native 52mm on the ring).
>
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 9:22 PM, Christine Nielsen  wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Bob Sullivan  wrote:
>>> Christine,
>>> The DFA 100mm f2.8 Macro has a 49mm front filter size vs 58mm on the
>>> older versions.
>>> This might make a difference if you're planning on using a ringflash
>>> as 49mm is easier to find.
>>
>>
>> Oooh... ringflash!  Now there's something I could use...  Not that I
>> have plans to acquire one (or at least, didn't before reading this
>> email), but after a quick google, it looks like they often come with
>> adapters for various filter sizes... Maybe I can still keep my options
>> open with the 58mm filter size?
>>
>> --
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
>> follow the directions.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> David Parsons Photography
> http://www.davidparsonsphoto.com
>
> Aloha Photographer Photoblog
> http://alohaphotog.blogspot.com/
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.
>

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: thoughts on 100mm macro...?

[David Parsons]

If you want to play with one, I've got one you can borrow.  I don't
use it much.  Let me know before a club meeting and I'll bring it in
for you.

I've got the Sunpak 8R, and it has 49, 55, and 58mm adapters (along
with the native 52mm on the ring).

On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 9:22 PM, Christine Nielsen  wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Bob Sullivan  wrote:
>> Christine,
>> The DFA 100mm f2.8 Macro has a 49mm front filter size vs 58mm on the
>> older versions.
>> This might make a difference if you're planning on using a ringflash
>> as 49mm is easier to find.
>
>
> Oooh... ringflash!  Now there's something I could use...  Not that I
> have plans to acquire one (or at least, didn't before reading this
> email), but after a quick google, it looks like they often come with
> adapters for various filter sizes... Maybe I can still keep my options
> open with the 58mm filter size?
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.
>



-- 
David Parsons Photography
http://www.davidparsonsphoto.com

Aloha Photographer Photoblog
http://alohaphotog.blogspot.com/

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: thoughts on 100mm macro...?

[David Parsons]

The biggest difference in coatings is that the rear surface of the
rear lens element is coated to minimize internal reflections between
the rear element and the sensor.

Film lenses didn't have (or need) this coating, since the film
emulsion is not smoothly reflective like the glass filter covering the
sensor is.

On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 9:11 PM, Christine Nielsen  wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:40 PM, P. J. Alling 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>  The D means it's "optimized" for digital.
>>>
>>> 1.  It has special coatings and a revised /special/ optical design to
>>> minimize the faults that digital is err to.  (I think this is mostly
>>> marketing hype, a good lens is a good lens and makes good photos, a bad lens
>>> can still be fun).
>>
>
>
> Interesting.  I've often wondered if the special coatings were "all
> that"...  Thanks for your input.
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.
>



-- 
David Parsons Photography
http://www.davidparsonsphoto.com

Aloha Photographer Photoblog
http://alohaphotog.blogspot.com/

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: thoughts on 100mm macro...?

[Christine Nielsen]

On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Bob Sullivan  wrote:
> Christine,
> The DFA 100mm f2.8 Macro has a 49mm front filter size vs 58mm on the
> older versions.
> This might make a difference if you're planning on using a ringflash
> as 49mm is easier to find.


Oooh... ringflash!  Now there's something I could use...  Not that I
have plans to acquire one (or at least, didn't before reading this
email), but after a quick google, it looks like they often come with
adapters for various filter sizes... Maybe I can still keep my options
open with the 58mm filter size?

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: thoughts on 100mm macro...?

[Christine Nielsen]

> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:40 PM, P. J. Alling 
> wrote:
>>
>>  The D means it's "optimized" for digital.
>>
>> 1.  It has special coatings and a revised /special/ optical design to
>> minimize the faults that digital is err to.  (I think this is mostly
>> marketing hype, a good lens is a good lens and makes good photos, a bad lens
>> can still be fun).
>


Interesting.  I've often wondered if the special coatings were "all
that"...  Thanks for your input.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: thoughts on 100mm macro...?

[Christine Nielsen]

On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 9:05 PM, Christine Nielsen  wrote:
>
> >On the other hand, the FA probably feels a lot more like a "real lens", and 
> >you can drop it on the pavement from a fair height without breaking 
> >anything, or at least that's true for the similar F-version, which I have 
> >(yes, I've tried...)
>
>
> Thanks, Toralf... It does have a pretty solid build, but I think I'll avoid 
> that impact test if at all possible...  :)

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: thoughts on 100mm macro...?

[Bob Sullivan]

Christine,
The DFA 100mm f2.8 Macro has a 49mm front filter size vs 58mm on the
older versions.
This might make a difference if you're planning on using a ringflash
as 49mm is easier to find.
I've shot a lot with the A100mm f2.8 Macro (no autofocus) and quite like it.
It's not suprising to hear good things about the FA 100mm f2.8 Macro.
I carrying around the DFA 100mm f2.8 Macro now.
It's a bit lighter and more compact with very nice image qualities.
I watched Mark Cassino (of Snow Flake fame) shoot with one and made the switch.
I don't know what kind of a discount you got on the FA vs DFA.
The DFA's were discounted for a while as Canada got rid of the
'non-waterproof' stock.
Regards,  Bob S.

On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Christine Nielsen  wrote:
> Greetings, all---
>
> Today, I enabled myself with the Pentax smc FA 100mm 2.8 macro lens.
> Funny thing is,  it happened kind of by accident... I thought I was
> purchasing the DFA 100mm 2.8 macro (the non-WR version), but it turns
> out I overlooked the missing "D" when I placed my order.  Whoops.
>
> Anyway, I picked it up to use for some jewelry shots I'm doing for a
> client. When I saw that it wasn't what I had in mind, I wasn't sure...
> it has a kind of funky look to it, with a deeply recessed lens.   But
> -- I'm really liking it so far.  The images are sharp, and the AF is
> fast.  I think this could be the start of a very nice relationship...
>
> What I wonder is this:  what am I missing out on because of my
> shopping cart mix-up?  (Besides the price difference...)  I'm not sure
> I understand the difference between the DFA & FA designations...  Are
> there other features of either lens that I should consider before I
> declare this one a keeper?
>
> Thanks,
> -c
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.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: thoughts on 100mm macro...?

[Toralf Lund]

Toralf Lund wrote:

Christine Nielsen wrote:

Greetings, all---

Today, I enabled myself with the Pentax smc FA 100mm 2.8 macro lens.
Funny thing is,  it happened kind of by accident... I thought I was
purchasing the DFA 100mm 2.8 macro (the non-WR version), but it turns
out I overlooked the missing "D" when I placed my order.  Whoops. [ 
... ]


What I wonder is this:  what am I missing out on because of my
shopping cart mix-up?  (Besides the price difference...)  I'm not sure
I understand the difference between the DFA & FA designations...  Are
there other features of either lens that I should consider before I
declare this one a keeper?
  
I think the DFA version is supposed to be "optimised for digital" 
(whatever that means - slight modifications of the coating, perhaps), 
but without changes to the basic optical formula, as far as I 
understand. It does not have the focus limiter fix of the FA.

Typing way too fast, again. I meant to say limiter *switch*...

- Toralf
It is much smaller and lighter, which I suppose may be convenient. On 
the other hand, the FA probably feels a lot more like a "real lens", 
and you can drop it on the pavement from a fair height without 
breaking anything, or at least that's true for the similar F-version, 
which I have (yes, I've tried...)


- Toralf


Thanks,
-c

  





--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: thoughts on 100mm macro...?

[P. J. Alling]

 The D means it's "optimized" for digital.

1.  It has special coatings and a revised /special/ optical design to 
minimize the faults that digital is err to.  (I think this is mostly 
marketing hype, a good lens is a good lens and makes good photos, a bad 
lens can still be fun).


2. It used to mean that it had a mechanical aperture ring, and the 
necessary couplings, but alas no more.


That's about it.

On 9/8/2010 3:34 PM, Christine Nielsen wrote:

Greetings, all---

Today, I enabled myself with the Pentax smc FA 100mm 2.8 macro lens.
Funny thing is,  it happened kind of by accident... I thought I was
purchasing the DFA 100mm 2.8 macro (the non-WR version), but it turns
out I overlooked the missing "D" when I placed my order.  Whoops.

Anyway, I picked it up to use for some jewelry shots I'm doing for a
client. When I saw that it wasn't what I had in mind, I wasn't sure...
it has a kind of funky look to it, with a deeply recessed lens.   But
-- I'm really liking it so far.  The images are sharp, and the AF is
fast.  I think this could be the start of a very nice relationship...

What I wonder is this:  what am I missing out on because of my
shopping cart mix-up?  (Besides the price difference...)  I'm not sure
I understand the difference between the DFA&  FA designations...  Are
there other features of either lens that I should consider before I
declare this one a keeper?

Thanks,
-c




--
"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: thoughts on 100mm macro...?

[Toralf Lund]

Christine Nielsen wrote:

Greetings, all---

Today, I enabled myself with the Pentax smc FA 100mm 2.8 macro lens.
Funny thing is,  it happened kind of by accident... I thought I was
purchasing the DFA 100mm 2.8 macro (the non-WR version), but it turns
out I overlooked the missing "D" when I placed my order.  Whoops. [ ... ]

What I wonder is this:  what am I missing out on because of my
shopping cart mix-up?  (Besides the price difference...)  I'm not sure
I understand the difference between the DFA & FA designations...  Are
there other features of either lens that I should consider before I
declare this one a keeper?
  
I think the DFA version is supposed to be "optimised for digital" 
(whatever that means - slight modifications of the coating, perhaps), 
but without changes to the basic optical formula, as far as I 
understand. It does not have the focus limiter fix of the FA. It is much 
smaller and lighter, which I suppose may be convenient. On the other 
hand, the FA probably feels a lot more like a "real lens", and you can 
drop it on the pavement from a fair height without breaking anything, or 
at least that's true for the similar F-version, which I have (yes, I've 
tried...)


- Toralf


Thanks,
-c

  



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[Bob W]

> >
> > Start here, and click through about 8 snaps:
> > 
> 
> Interesting juxtaposition of Morris dancers and this:
> http://www.web-options.com/Pick2008/content/_6217916_large.html
> 

it's all a continuum

> I can't quite figure out what's going on there such that there are
> lights in the shadow ring of one of the hula hoops.
> 

aliens




-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[Larry Colen]

On Jul 3, 2010, at 1:56 AM, Bob W wrote:

>> All my FourThirds and Micro-FourThirds bodies allow me to enable
>> second curtain sync any time I want, with any flash. IIRC, both my
>> Sony R1 and my Canon 10D allowed the same.
>> 
>> The algorithm is very simple: the flash is triggered about 300ms
>> before the second curtain is released. So it obviously works best with
>> exposure times of a half second or longer, but then that's when I'd
>> use second curtain sync anyway.
>> 
> 
> I've found it most effective for my taste at 1/15th second, generally when
> there's already quite a lot of ambient light in the scene. These pictures
> from midsummer a few years ago are my most successful and (I think)
> effective efforts, shot at 1/15th. All shot with an Oly E-1 and Oly flash of
> some sort.
> 
> Start here, and click through about 8 snaps:
> 

Interesting juxtaposition of Morris dancers and this:
http://www.web-options.com/Pick2008/content/_6217916_large.html

I can't quite figure out what's going on there such that there are lights in 
the shadow ring of one of the hula hoops.

> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.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: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[Joseph McAllister]

On Jul 2, 2010, at 13:53 , John Sessoms wrote:

The K-10D and K-20D both allow you to set the on-board flash to  
trailing curtain sync. How difficult would it be for them to make  
the hot-shoe also fire on the trailing curtain when a non-dedicated  
"flash" is installed?


E.G. like with a radio-sync transmitter or Vivitar 285HV? Dedicated  
flash like the AF-540FGZ has its own circuitry to talk to the camera  
and can be set to trailing curtain sync.


Is this something they could do with a firmware update?

Or is it something that would require radical hardware revision?

For that matter what do the dedicated pins on the Pentax shoe tell  
the flash? I know what the big one in the center does, and it's  
obvious which one is ground.



Everything you need to know except the actual format and content of  
the "digital" signal and the "mode" format.


http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/technology/hot-shoe/index.html

Here's a diagram of a circuit to isolate an old high voltage flash  
from the hot shoe about half way down the page. I know, you didn't  
ask, but, it can't hurt to have a copy on your hard drive!


http://www.flickr.com/groups/strobist/discuss/72157607929201242/

And the Hot Shoe and 5P cable pins, in case you wanted to know. Near  
bottom of page.


http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=28607959

Lots and lots of data about the Pentax AFxxxFGZ flashes compared to  
others manufacturers.


http://knol.google.com/k/pentax-p-ttl-hot-shoe-flash-comparison#

also a more technical tome:

http://www.jr-worldwi.de/photo/index.html?ist_DS_internalflash.html

Joseph McAllister
pentax...@mac.com

THE SENILITY PRAYER :
Grant me the senility to forget the people
I never liked anyway,
The good fortune to run into the ones I do, and
The eyesight to tell the difference.


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[paul stenquist]

Thanks Godders. Trailing curtain and cars kind of go together. I don't use it 
often enough.
Paul

On Jul 3, 2010, at 7:12 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 8:20 AM, P N Stenquist  wrote:
>> Trailing curtain synch with K10D and FA 540 flash.
>> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6315560&size=lg
> 
> Nice. :-)
> -- 
> Godfrey
>  godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 8:20 AM, P N Stenquist  wrote:
> Trailing curtain synch with K10D and FA 540 flash.
> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6315560&size=lg

Nice. :-)
-- 
Godfrey
  godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[P N Stenquist]

Thanks Bob.
On Jul 3, 2010, at 11:42 AM, Bob W wrote:



Trailing curtain synch with K10D and FA 540 flash.
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6315560&size=lg


that's a great shot! I watched American Graffiti again on Thursday  
evening,
on French TV. I'd forgotten how good it is, and what a lot of great  
actors
are in it (and I had no idea they all speak such good French!).  
Thought

about you and your cruise shots while I was watching.

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: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[Jos from Holland]

John,  maybe it tells the flash digitally through the communication line 
that it has to use the trailling edge of the triggerpuls of the camera  
for triggering the flash (that would be the same principle as on the Z-1)


If it works like that, your adapter board will be very simple :-)

Greetz, Jos

John Sessoms wrote:
It would be useful to have the camera trigger the hot-shoe/PC on the 
rear curtain so I could use trailing curtain sync with pocket wizard 
type radio slaves.


Obviously, if the AF-540FGZ can do trailing curtain sync when mounted 
on the shoe, some information is being communicated through one of the 
contacts that tells the flash when the trailing curtain begins to 
close. How is the information formatted and what connector does it 
come through? If I knew that, I might be able to bread-board my own 
adapter.









--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[Brendan MacRae]

Here's my K10D/540 combo work with trailing curtain:

http://www.primelensphoto.com/trailing_curtain/index.html

-Brendan



- Original Message 
> From: P N Stenquist 
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List 
> Sent: Sat, July 3, 2010 8:20:21 AM
> Subject: Re: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync
> 
> Trailing curtain synch with K10D and FA 540 
> flash.
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6315560&size=lg
On Jul 3, 
> 2010, at 11:08 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 
> 1:56 AM, Bob W <> href="mailto:p...@web-options.com";>p...@web-options.com> 
> wrote:
>>> All my FourThirds and Micro-FourThirds bodies allow me to 
> enable
>>> second curtain sync any time I want, with any flash. 
> IIRC, both my
>>> Sony R1 and my Canon 10D allowed the 
> same.
>>> 
>>> The algorithm is very simple: the flash 
> is triggered about 300ms
>>> before the second curtain is released. 
> So it obviously works best with
>>> exposure times of a half second 
> or longer, but then that's when I'd
>>> use second curtain sync 
> anyway.
>>> 
>> 
>> I've found it most effective 
> for my taste at 1/15th second, generally when
>> there's already quite 
> a lot of ambient light in the scene. These pictures
>> from midsummer a 
> few years ago are my most successful and (I think)
>> effective 
> efforts, shot at 1/15th. All shot with an Oly E-1 and Oly flash of
>> 
> some sort.
>> 
>> Start here, and click through about 8 
> snaps:
>> 
> <http://www.web-options.com/Pick2008/content/_6207819_large.html>
> 
> 
> Thanks for the photos ... good stuff!
> 
> The trigger lead 
> time is shorter than I wrote. A 125 second flash burn
> is 8 ms and that's 
> a long burn; they probably do trigger with 30 ms
> lead, not 300. 
> :-)
> 
> --Godfrey
>  > href="http://godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com";>godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com
> 
> 
> --PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> > ymailto="mailto:PDML@pdml.net"; 
> href="mailto:PDML@pdml.net";>PDML@pdml.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
> ymailto="mailto:PDML@pdml.net"; 
> href="mailto:PDML@pdml.net";>PDML@pdml.net
> href="http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net"; target=_blank 
> >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: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[Bob W]

> 
> Trailing curtain synch with K10D and FA 540 flash.
> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6315560&size=lg

that's a great shot! I watched American Graffiti again on Thursday evening,
on French TV. I'd forgotten how good it is, and what a lot of great actors
are in it (and I had no idea they all speak such good French!). Thought
about you and your cruise shots while I was watching.

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: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[P N Stenquist]

Trailing curtain synch with K10D and FA 540 flash.
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6315560&size=lg
On Jul 3, 2010, at 11:08 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:


On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 1:56 AM, Bob W  wrote:

All my FourThirds and Micro-FourThirds bodies allow me to enable
second curtain sync any time I want, with any flash. IIRC, both my
Sony R1 and my Canon 10D allowed the same.

The algorithm is very simple: the flash is triggered about 300ms
before the second curtain is released. So it obviously works best  
with

exposure times of a half second or longer, but then that's when I'd
use second curtain sync anyway.



I've found it most effective for my taste at 1/15th second,  
generally when
there's already quite a lot of ambient light in the scene. These  
pictures

from midsummer a few years ago are my most successful and (I think)
effective efforts, shot at 1/15th. All shot with an Oly E-1 and Oly  
flash of

some sort.

Start here, and click through about 8 snaps:



Thanks for the photos ... good stuff!

The trigger lead time is shorter than I wrote. A 125 second flash burn
is 8 ms and that's a long burn; they probably do trigger with 30 ms
lead, not 300. :-)

--
Godfrey
 godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above  
and follow the directions.



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 1:56 AM, Bob W  wrote:
>> All my FourThirds and Micro-FourThirds bodies allow me to enable
>> second curtain sync any time I want, with any flash. IIRC, both my
>> Sony R1 and my Canon 10D allowed the same.
>>
>> The algorithm is very simple: the flash is triggered about 300ms
>> before the second curtain is released. So it obviously works best with
>> exposure times of a half second or longer, but then that's when I'd
>> use second curtain sync anyway.
>>
>
> I've found it most effective for my taste at 1/15th second, generally when
> there's already quite a lot of ambient light in the scene. These pictures
> from midsummer a few years ago are my most successful and (I think)
> effective efforts, shot at 1/15th. All shot with an Oly E-1 and Oly flash of
> some sort.
>
> Start here, and click through about 8 snaps:
> 

Thanks for the photos ... good stuff!

The trigger lead time is shorter than I wrote. A 125 second flash burn
is 8 ms and that's a long burn; they probably do trigger with 30 ms
lead, not 300. :-)

-- 
Godfrey
  godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[John Sessoms]

From: mike wilson

mike wilson wrote:


> John Sessoms wrote:
> 
>> The K-10D and K-20D both allow you to set the on-board flash to 
>> trailing curtain sync. How difficult would it be for them to make the 
>> hot-shoe also fire on the trailing curtain when a non-dedicated 
>> "flash" is installed?

>>
>> E.G. like with a radio-sync transmitter or Vivitar 285HV? Dedicated 
>> flash like the AF-540FGZ has its own circuitry to talk to the camera 
>> and can be set to trailing curtain sync.

>>
>> Is this something they could do with a firmware update?
> 
> 
> Non-dedicated flashes fire when they are told to.  It doesn't mstter 
> whether that is at the beginning, the end or halfway through exposure. 
> On the face of it, some coding telling the camera to fire any connected 
> flash at the end of exposure would be a comparatively simple task.  So 
> simple that I must go and see if it will work already


OK.  With KX and AF280T, it's no go.  Trailing curtain seems to be a 
PTTL-only mode, as the RTF preflashes.  Some illogicality there.. 
There is no trailing curtain mode on the DL2.


> 


The non-dedicated flash fires when the main hot-shoe contact triggers. 
I'm asking how the camera controls when that main hot-shoe contact 
triggers. Could a camera software change make it trigger the main 
hot-shoe/PC contact on the trailing curtain when the on-board flash is 
set to trailing curtain? Or would it require physical changes to the 
wiring inside the camera?


The K10 and the K20 allow you to set the on-board flash to 
trailing-curtain. The AF-500 (which worked with the *ist-D) and the 
AF-540FGZ have trailing curtain sync built into the flash.


On the K10 and the K20, with the on-board flash set to trailing curtain, 
the main hot-shoe pin triggers on the front curtain. Same for the K20's 
PC sync.


Is this main pin trigger on front curtain hard-wired into the camera, or 
is this something that could be changed by a firm-ware update?




--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[John Sessoms]

From: paul stenquist

On Jul 2, 2010, at 7:05 PM, Adam Maas wrote:


> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:53 PM, John Sessoms  wrote:

>> The K-10D and K-20D both allow you to set the on-board flash to trailing
>> curtain sync. How difficult would it be for them to make the hot-shoe also
>> fire on the trailing curtain when a non-dedicated "flash" is installed?
> 
> Very difficult unless certain assumptions about burn time are made,

> which won't be accurate. You need to fire the flash at just about
> exactly the burn time before the shutter closes for trailing curtain
> to work corectly. Most speedlights have a roughly 1ms full-power burn,
> but at low power levels it can be an order of magnitude shorter as
> output is normally controlled by burn duration rather than intensity.
> 
> Olympus did allow this on some OM models, but it only worked because

> of the low sync speed of the camera's (1/60) so that even if the flash
> burn time was much shorter than the assumed ~1ms you don't get much
> exposure after the burn ends. This doesn't work so well with today's
> high sync speeds.
> 

Of course you can shoot trailing curtain synch at low shutter speeds on either 
the K10 or the K20. I get good results shooting trailing synch on the K10, K20 
and K7 at 1/8th or 1/15th.
Paul


But you can only do so with the on-board flash or a dedicated Pentax 
flash like the AF-540FGZ.


The regular hot-shoe contact (or the PC contact on the K20) ONLY sync 
with the front curtain. The trailing curtain sync does not work with the 
AF-540FGZ in wireless mode, you have to use the Hot-shoe Adapter F and 
F5P cable to get it use trailing curtain sync off camera.


I was wondering whether the main contact tripping only on the front 
curtain is hard-wired into the cameras or is it something Pentax could 
change in the firm-ware? Could Pentax tell the camera when the on-board 
flash mode is set for trailing curtain, trip the hot-shoe/PC contact 
with the trailing curtain as well, or would it require a physical change 
to the wiring inside the camera?


It would be useful to have the camera trigger the hot-shoe/PC on the 
rear curtain so I could use trailing curtain sync with pocket wizard 
type radio slaves.


Obviously, if the AF-540FGZ can do trailing curtain sync when mounted on 
the shoe, some information is being communicated through one of the 
contacts that tells the flash when the trailing curtain begins to close.


How is the information formatted and what connector does it come 
through? If I knew that, I might be able to bread-board my own adapter.



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[Jos from Holland]

Last sentence should be read as: I donot know if my K20 has the same 
info in the _flash trigger pulse_.


Jos from Holland wrote:

Hi John,
I think it could be done in _software_ to make it work for any flash, 
but it would require a bit complicated menu to give the camera the 
required information about P-TLL or "center contact only" or expected 
burn time.
In the Z-1 time I measured burntime of several flashes at hand, they 
all were much faster than the 1ms mentioned by Adam. It requires 
additional measures in the design to increase the burntime, I have 
seen that some Metz designs have that.


It could also be in _Hardware_:
In the past I measured the trigger pulse  of my (P)Z-1 (Pentax hi end 
35mm camera).
The trailing edge of the trigger pulse was the right timing 
information for the rear curtain sync.

So the pulse width of the triggerpulse changed with shutterspeed.
And on the flash the decission could be for first or second curtain sync.
I made even a small interface circuit to get rear curtain sync with 
non dedicated flashes.
I donot know if my K20 has the same info in the rear sync. I think it 
would not harm other use if it was there.

When I'll be retired, I might find time to measure this.
Groeten, Jos


John Sessoms wrote:
The K-10D and K-20D both allow you to set the on-board flash to 
trailing curtain sync. How difficult would it be for them to make the 
hot-shoe also fire on the trailing curtain when a non-dedicated 
"flash" is installed?


E.G. like with a radio-sync transmitter or Vivitar 285HV? Dedicated 
flash like the AF-540FGZ has its own circuitry to talk to the camera 
and can be set to trailing curtain sync.


Is this something they could do with a firmware update?

Or is it something that would require radical hardware revision?

For that matter what do the dedicated pins on the Pentax shoe tell 
the flash? I know what the big one in the center does, and it's 
obvious which one is ground.






--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[Jos from Holland]

Hi John,
I think it could be done in _software_ to make it work for any flash, 
but it would require a bit complicated menu to give the camera the 
required information about P-TLL or "center contact only" or expected 
burn time.
In the Z-1 time I measured burntime of several flashes at hand, they all 
were much faster than the 1ms mentioned by Adam. It requires additional 
measures in the design to increase the burntime, I have seen that some 
Metz designs have that.


It could also be in _Hardware_:
In the past I measured the trigger pulse  of my (P)Z-1 (Pentax hi end 
35mm camera).
The trailing edge of the trigger pulse was the right timing information 
for the rear curtain sync.

So the pulse width of the triggerpulse changed with shutterspeed.
And on the flash the decission could be for first or second curtain sync.
I made even a small interface circuit to get rear curtain sync with non 
dedicated flashes.
I donot know if my K20 has the same info in the rear sync. I think it 
would not harm other use if it was there.

When I'll be retired, I might find time to measure this.
Groeten, Jos


John Sessoms wrote:
The K-10D and K-20D both allow you to set the on-board flash to 
trailing curtain sync. How difficult would it be for them to make the 
hot-shoe also fire on the trailing curtain when a non-dedicated 
"flash" is installed?


E.G. like with a radio-sync transmitter or Vivitar 285HV? Dedicated 
flash like the AF-540FGZ has its own circuitry to talk to the camera 
and can be set to trailing curtain sync.


Is this something they could do with a firmware update?

Or is it something that would require radical hardware revision?

For that matter what do the dedicated pins on the Pentax shoe tell the 
flash? I know what the big one in the center does, and it's obvious 
which one is ground.




--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[Bob W]

> All my FourThirds and Micro-FourThirds bodies allow me to enable
> second curtain sync any time I want, with any flash. IIRC, both my
> Sony R1 and my Canon 10D allowed the same.
> 
> The algorithm is very simple: the flash is triggered about 300ms
> before the second curtain is released. So it obviously works best with
> exposure times of a half second or longer, but then that's when I'd
> use second curtain sync anyway.
> 

I've found it most effective for my taste at 1/15th second, generally when
there's already quite a lot of ambient light in the scene. These pictures
from midsummer a few years ago are my most successful and (I think)
effective efforts, shot at 1/15th. All shot with an Oly E-1 and Oly flash of
some sort.

Start here, and click through about 8 snaps:




-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[mike wilson]

mike wilson wrote:


John Sessoms wrote:

The K-10D and K-20D both allow you to set the on-board flash to 
trailing curtain sync. How difficult would it be for them to make the 
hot-shoe also fire on the trailing curtain when a non-dedicated 
"flash" is installed?


E.G. like with a radio-sync transmitter or Vivitar 285HV? Dedicated 
flash like the AF-540FGZ has its own circuitry to talk to the camera 
and can be set to trailing curtain sync.


Is this something they could do with a firmware update?



Non-dedicated flashes fire when they are told to.  It doesn't mstter 
whether that is at the beginning, the end or halfway through exposure. 
On the face of it, some coding telling the camera to fire any connected 
flash at the end of exposure would be a comparatively simple task.  So 
simple that I must go and see if it will work already


OK.  With KX and AF280T, it's no go.  Trailing curtain seems to be a 
PTTL-only mode, as the RTF preflashes.  Some illogicality there.. 
There is no trailing curtain mode on the DL2.






Or is it something that would require radical hardware revision?

For that matter what do the dedicated pins on the Pentax shoe tell the 
flash? I know what the big one in the center does, and it's obvious 
which one is ground.



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[mike wilson]

John Sessoms wrote:
The K-10D and K-20D both allow you to set the on-board flash to trailing 
curtain sync. How difficult would it be for them to make the hot-shoe 
also fire on the trailing curtain when a non-dedicated "flash" is 
installed?


E.G. like with a radio-sync transmitter or Vivitar 285HV? Dedicated 
flash like the AF-540FGZ has its own circuitry to talk to the camera and 
can be set to trailing curtain sync.


Is this something they could do with a firmware update?


Non-dedicated flashes fire when they are told to.  It doesn't mstter 
whether that is at the beginning, the end or halfway through exposure. 
On the face of it, some coding telling the camera to fire any connected 
flash at the end of exposure would be a comparatively simple task.  So 
simple that I must go and see if it will work already




Or is it something that would require radical hardware revision?

For that matter what do the dedicated pins on the Pentax shoe tell the 
flash? I know what the big one in the center does, and it's obvious 
which one is ground.


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

All my FourThirds and Micro-FourThirds bodies allow me to enable
second curtain sync any time I want, with any flash. IIRC, both my
Sony R1 and my Canon 10D allowed the same.

The algorithm is very simple: the flash is triggered about 300ms
before the second curtain is released. So it obviously works best with
exposure times of a half second or longer, but then that's when I'd
use second curtain sync anyway.

On Friday, July 2, 2010, Adam Maas  wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 9:21 PM, paul stenquist  
> wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 2, 2010, at 7:05 PM, Adam Maas wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:53 PM, John Sessoms  wrote:
 The K-10D and K-20D both allow you to set the on-board flash to trailing
 curtain sync. How difficult would it be for them to make the hot-shoe also
 fire on the trailing curtain when a non-dedicated "flash" is installed?
>>>
>>> Very difficult unless certain assumptions about burn time are made,
>>> which won't be accurate. You need to fire the flash at just about
>>> exactly the burn time before the shutter closes for trailing curtain
>>> to work corectly. Most speedlights have a roughly 1ms full-power burn,
>>> but at low power levels it can be an order of magnitude shorter as
>>> output is normally controlled by burn duration rather than intensity.
>>>
>>> Olympus did allow this on some OM models, but it only worked because
>>> of the low sync speed of the camera's (1/60) so that even if the flash
>>> burn time was much shorter than the assumed ~1ms you don't get much
>>> exposure after the burn ends. This doesn't work so well with today's
>>> high sync speeds.
>>>
>> Of course you can shoot trailing curtain synch at low shutter speeds on 
>> either the K10 or the K20. I get good results shooting trailing synch on the 
>> K10, K20 and K7 at 1/8th or 1/15th.
>> Paul
>>> -Adam
>
> low shutter speeds work better for non-dedicated flash and rear
> curtain sync, it's at high sync speeds where the problem occurs becaue
> the burn time is a much larger portion of the period the shutter is
> open so a short duration burn triggered early nets you mid-curtain
> sync rather than rear-curtain sync. With a dedicated flash it's a
> non-issue because the burn time can be predicted and the flash
> triggered at the right moment so it cuts off just before the shutter
> closes.
>
> -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.
>

-- 
Godfrey
  godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[Adam Maas]

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 9:21 PM, paul stenquist  wrote:
>
> On Jul 2, 2010, at 7:05 PM, Adam Maas wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:53 PM, John Sessoms  wrote:
>>> The K-10D and K-20D both allow you to set the on-board flash to trailing
>>> curtain sync. How difficult would it be for them to make the hot-shoe also
>>> fire on the trailing curtain when a non-dedicated "flash" is installed?
>>
>> Very difficult unless certain assumptions about burn time are made,
>> which won't be accurate. You need to fire the flash at just about
>> exactly the burn time before the shutter closes for trailing curtain
>> to work corectly. Most speedlights have a roughly 1ms full-power burn,
>> but at low power levels it can be an order of magnitude shorter as
>> output is normally controlled by burn duration rather than intensity.
>>
>> Olympus did allow this on some OM models, but it only worked because
>> of the low sync speed of the camera's (1/60) so that even if the flash
>> burn time was much shorter than the assumed ~1ms you don't get much
>> exposure after the burn ends. This doesn't work so well with today's
>> high sync speeds.
>>
> Of course you can shoot trailing curtain synch at low shutter speeds on 
> either the K10 or the K20. I get good results shooting trailing synch on the 
> K10, K20 and K7 at 1/8th or 1/15th.
> Paul
>> -Adam

low shutter speeds work better for non-dedicated flash and rear
curtain sync, it's at high sync speeds where the problem occurs becaue
the burn time is a much larger portion of the period the shutter is
open so a short duration burn triggered early nets you mid-curtain
sync rather than rear-curtain sync. With a dedicated flash it's a
non-issue because the burn time can be predicted and the flash
triggered at the right moment so it cuts off just before the shutter
closes.

-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: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[paul stenquist]

On Jul 2, 2010, at 7:05 PM, Adam Maas wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:53 PM, John Sessoms  wrote:
>> The K-10D and K-20D both allow you to set the on-board flash to trailing
>> curtain sync. How difficult would it be for them to make the hot-shoe also
>> fire on the trailing curtain when a non-dedicated "flash" is installed?
> 
> Very difficult unless certain assumptions about burn time are made,
> which won't be accurate. You need to fire the flash at just about
> exactly the burn time before the shutter closes for trailing curtain
> to work corectly. Most speedlights have a roughly 1ms full-power burn,
> but at low power levels it can be an order of magnitude shorter as
> output is normally controlled by burn duration rather than intensity.
> 
> Olympus did allow this on some OM models, but it only worked because
> of the low sync speed of the camera's (1/60) so that even if the flash
> burn time was much shorter than the assumed ~1ms you don't get much
> exposure after the burn ends. This doesn't work so well with today's
> high sync speeds.
> 
Of course you can shoot trailing curtain synch at low shutter speeds on either 
the K10 or the K20. I get good results shooting trailing synch on the K10, K20 
and K7 at 1/8th or 1/15th.
Paul
> -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.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.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: Thoughts on Trailing Curtain Sync

[Adam Maas]

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:53 PM, John Sessoms  wrote:
> The K-10D and K-20D both allow you to set the on-board flash to trailing
> curtain sync. How difficult would it be for them to make the hot-shoe also
> fire on the trailing curtain when a non-dedicated "flash" is installed?

Very difficult unless certain assumptions about burn time are made,
which won't be accurate. You need to fire the flash at just about
exactly the burn time before the shutter closes for trailing curtain
to work corectly. Most speedlights have a roughly 1ms full-power burn,
but at low power levels it can be an order of magnitude shorter as
output is normally controlled by burn duration rather than intensity.

Olympus did allow this on some OM models, but it only worked because
of the low sync speed of the camera's (1/60) so that even if the flash
burn time was much shorter than the assumed ~1ms you don't get much
exposure after the burn ends. This doesn't work so well with today's
high sync speeds.

-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: thoughts, questions, a story ...

[Gabriel Cain]

Adam Maas wrote:
> Interestingly enough, I know a number of people who started shooting 
> digital who are now shooting film as well. It's an experience for them, 
> and I've noticed that their shooting typically improves noticably 
> (probably due to them taking extra care with the limited number of film 
> exposures per roll).

This is exactly what I've done.  I started off with a Fuji Finepix 2800 a
while back, and then later a Nikon Coolpix 5400.  But I never really
composed well, or took *good* pictures.  Moderate pictures.

So I set myself a goal.  I decided that I'd learn to take better pictures.
And I figured that I could accomplish that by training myself.  So what I
did was I bought a K1000 off E-Bay, and a 50mm/f1.7 from a local used gear
dealer.   I also picked up a copy of "Photography" by London and Upton.
Together, I used those tools to learn, to improve my skill, and to really
come to understand all the elements of taking a picture.  Of time, aperture,
and film sensitivity.

So the result from that is that I've gained a much stronger technical basis
to work from.  This lead also to me choosing to explore my own development
of B&W film.  I haven't yet done my own prints -- I instead purchased a film
scanner (the K/M Dual Scan 4) and pursued a digital work-flow.  I found this
to be quite appealing, and efficient for me.

What this has lead to has been a strong sense of Art in making photographs
with physical media.  It's a hoot to take a strip of plastic with chemicals
on it, put it in to the magic box, pull it out, dunk it into a potion, and
get back a visible representation of the world. :)  Magic! :^)

But I also like digital; it's easy, and it's convenient.  And shake
reduction is nice.  It's also cool to be able to take someone's picture on
the street and show them how they're perceived.

I think I'll continue to use both until film isn't available anymore.  I'm a
little lucky in that regard; since I live in Seattle, there are a options
for professional gear -- Glazers for film and tools, and Ivey Imaging for
the development of slide film.  I can drop off the slide film in the morning
and pick it up on my way home.

So, that's my experience.

Gabriel

-- 
Gabriel Cain
Artist / Photographer / Consultant  P.O.Box 15605   
http://gabrielcain.com  Seattle, WA 98115


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: thoughts, questions, a story ...

[Mark Dalal]

From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> Once that bunch headed out, I pulled out the laptop and started
> poking at some more photos from the NY trip and from my junta to
> Nashville, TN. I also pulled out the Pentax 645 and started fooling
> with it, framing a composition of the tables and chairs across the
> aisle from where I was sitting. There was a college student sitting
> at the table behind me.
>
> "Excuse me, is that some kind of video camera?"
> "No. It's a medium format SLR camera. Still photos."
> "Where's the display screen?"
> "It doesn't have one ... it takes a 6cm wide strip of roll film."
> pause ... "Wow. It looks big and heavy. Why would anyone use film
> when there are such good digital cameras on the market today?"
>
> The fact of the question is more important than any answer I might
> come up with. Here we have a college student, maybe 20-22 years old,
> who cannot see the point. We talked for a while about the photos on
> the wall, about rendering and black&white vs color, about all kinds
> of stuff, but in the end I could see that the notion of why one would
> expose film, play with chemistry, etc just to take a picture was
> simply incomprehensible to him. Cameras, even photography before the
> present world of digital cameras simply is not a part of his
> consciousness.

It can be easy to lament after reading a story like this. I wouldn't...

The Art of Photography...this college kid probably grew up with parents who 
had point & shoots around and took poor pictures of various events. If his 
mom or dad had a Hasselblad and a home darkroom where they invited him to 
print, he might have connected to the magic of it. But he thinks, much like 
alot of folks who grew with B&W film, about the Utility of Photography. From 
that perspective, why would you mess with a large film camera and 
development and printing? This is nothing new...my parents and quite 
frankly, all of their friends, see it the same way as this college kid. This 
is true despite the fact that when we compare childhood photos, they have 
wonderfully sharp and preserved B&W prints and I have incredibly poor, fuzzy 
and faded color prints. This kids mindset has been present for a long time 
and we have a ton of cameras to prove it. The difference is that the digital 
cameras now are a pretty viable option.

Evolution...I can see this conversation taking place 100 years ago during 
the dawn of cars and the death of the horsedrawn carriage. I don't think 
anyone on this list would give up their vehicles to go back. But maybe 100 
years ago, one might held on to it given all the issues of owning a car. But 
in due time, cars got alot better and now we drool over the ones that Paul 
posts on the list.

So I guess I don't have a strange feeling about this story. It's expected. 
I'm eager for digital to continue to improve.

Mark 



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: thoughts, questions, a story ...

[Kostas Kavoussanakis]

On Tue, 16 Jan 2007, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

> A strange feeling. I still have three exposures to go on that roll 
> of film.

Nice story, well written. Thanks Godfrey.

I am wondering if I can still write my name on paper. Sure, I can type 
it, see below :-) Never had good hand-writing anyway.

On the flip, I found a new lab (as the old one shut) to print large 
B&W on an enlarger (Ilfords still do my prints mail-order) so life is 
good again.

Kostas

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: thoughts, questions, a story ...

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi"
Subject: thoughts, questions, a story ...


> Yesterday I had a few errands to run but also wanted to just get out
> of the house for a bit. So I threw the laptop into the Timbuk2 and
> added, with a moment's thought, the Pentax 645 fitted with the 45mm
> lens. I still had half a roll of film in it unexposed from the
> November trip around the US, maybe I'd use it up.
>
> I did my errands and ended up at the coffee shop down the street, the
> Starbux where I have my photos hanging. Reminded me that I best get
> off my butt and get the next set ready to hang; I've been kinda
> bogged down and in a funk with getting the work finished the past
> week or so.
>
> A couple of the folks I see there all the time were there so we
> engaged in some conversation ... a lot to do with politics and such.
> I had  a print of the portrait I'd done of one of them in my bag so I
> gave it to him as a gift ... he's the neat geezer in
>http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/32.htm
> and a lot of fun to chat with.
>
> Once that bunch headed out, I pulled out the laptop and started
> poking at some more photos from the NY trip and from my junta to
> Nashville, TN. I also pulled out the Pentax 645 and started fooling
> with it, framing a composition of the tables and chairs across the
> aisle from where I was sitting. There was a college student sitting
> at the table behind me.
>
> "Excuse me, is that some kind of video camera?"
> "No. It's a medium format SLR camera. Still photos."
> "Where's the display screen?"
> "It doesn't have one ... it takes a 6cm wide strip of roll film."
> pause ... "Wow. It looks big and heavy. Why would anyone use film
> when there are such good digital cameras on the market today?"
>
> The fact of the question is more important than any answer I might
> come up with. Here we have a college student, maybe 20-22 years old,
> who cannot see the point. We talked for a while about the photos on
> the wall, about rendering and black&white vs color, about all kinds
> of stuff, but in the end I could see that the notion of why one would
> expose film, play with chemistry, etc just to take a picture was
> simply incomprehensible to him. Cameras, even photography before the
> present world of digital cameras simply is not a part of his
> consciousness.
>
> Later that evening, I was talking to my brother. One of his friends
> is getting ready to move with his family because his wife has
> accepted a new position in another state. "He used to drive the truck
> that went from photolab to photolab, delivering chemistry and picking
> up the waste chemicals for silver reclamation. Used to be ten of them
> running all day, every day. Now there's not enough business to fund
> more than one person on a twice a week circuit through the labs."
>
> A strange feeling. I still have three exposures to go on that roll of
> film.

I was at the lab i used to work at picking up a roll of film. Asked what the 
volume was like this year compared to last.
Donna hadn't run the numbers yet, but had the feeling her film volume was 
down some 50% from last year, and the post Christmas processing rush didn't 
happen this year.
I think it was three years ago that I gave film five more years.
It's right on track.

William Robb 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: thoughts, questions, a story ...

[David J Brooks]

It is strange, and errie at the same time.

Up until a year ago, i had little difficulty in buying, developing and  
getting prints of B&W film.

Now its a 1 1/2 hour trip and more expensive, due to more gas, and  
higher rates by the "new guy".

Digital P&s have been out long enough, that your 20 year old student,  
probably had one for his first school camera, as opposed to the K1000  
etc most of us might have had.

It the 24/7 instant information age, which i absolutly hate, and thats  
they way they want it. Take the dam shot, lets have a look and laugh  
at ourselves.

Oh and BTW, i had my 6x7 out on a walk around on my way to the hunt  
camp for Thanksgiving weekend. Boy didi i get looks.:-)

Dave

Quoting Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

>
> Later that evening, I was talking to my brother. One of his friends
> is getting ready to move with his family because his wife has
> accepted a new position in another state. "He used to drive the truck
> that went from photolab to photolab, delivering chemistry and picking
> up the waste chemicals for silver reclamation. Used to be ten of them
> running all day, every day. Now there's not enough business to fund
> more than one person on a twice a week circuit through the labs."
>
> A strange feeling. I still have three exposures to go on that roll of
> film.
>
> Godfrey
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>



Equine Photography in York Region

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: thoughts, questions, a story ...

[Adam Maas]

Interestingly enough, I know a number of people who started shooting 
digital who are now shooting film as well. It's an experience for them, 
and I've noticed that their shooting typically improves noticably 
(probably due to them taking extra care with the limited number of film 
exposures per roll).

-Adam


Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> Yesterday I had a few errands to run but also wanted to just get out  
> of the house for a bit. So I threw the laptop into the Timbuk2 and  
> added, with a moment's thought, the Pentax 645 fitted with the 45mm  
> lens. I still had half a roll of film in it unexposed from the  
> November trip around the US, maybe I'd use it up.
> 
> I did my errands and ended up at the coffee shop down the street, the  
> Starbux where I have my photos hanging. Reminded me that I best get  
> off my butt and get the next set ready to hang; I've been kinda  
> bogged down and in a funk with getting the work finished the past  
> week or so.
> 
> A couple of the folks I see there all the time were there so we  
> engaged in some conversation ... a lot to do with politics and such.  
> I had  a print of the portrait I'd done of one of them in my bag so I  
> gave it to him as a gift ... he's the neat geezer in
> http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/32.htm
> and a lot of fun to chat with.
> 
> Once that bunch headed out, I pulled out the laptop and started  
> poking at some more photos from the NY trip and from my junta to  
> Nashville, TN. I also pulled out the Pentax 645 and started fooling  
> with it, framing a composition of the tables and chairs across the  
> aisle from where I was sitting. There was a college student sitting  
> at the table behind me.
> 
> "Excuse me, is that some kind of video camera?"
> "No. It's a medium format SLR camera. Still photos."
> "Where's the display screen?"
> "It doesn't have one ... it takes a 6cm wide strip of roll film."
> pause ... "Wow. It looks big and heavy. Why would anyone use film  
> when there are such good digital cameras on the market today?"
> 
> The fact of the question is more important than any answer I might  
> come up with. Here we have a college student, maybe 20-22 years old,  
> who cannot see the point. We talked for a while about the photos on  
> the wall, about rendering and black&white vs color, about all kinds  
> of stuff, but in the end I could see that the notion of why one would  
> expose film, play with chemistry, etc just to take a picture was  
> simply incomprehensible to him. Cameras, even photography before the  
> present world of digital cameras simply is not a part of his  
> consciousness.
> 
> Later that evening, I was talking to my brother. One of his friends  
> is getting ready to move with his family because his wife has  
> accepted a new position in another state. "He used to drive the truck  
> that went from photolab to photolab, delivering chemistry and picking  
> up the waste chemicals for silver reclamation. Used to be ten of them  
> running all day, every day. Now there's not enough business to fund  
> more than one person on a twice a week circuit through the labs."
> 
> A strange feeling. I still have three exposures to go on that roll of  
> film.
> 
> Godfrey
> 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: thoughts from the road

[Cotty]

On 17/11/06, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed:

>We are subject to language scrutiny these days. Can't afford to get  
>sloppy.

..ier.


;-)))

-- 


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

Re: thoughts from the road

[Paul Stenquist]

I meant to say:
Good to hear you're enjoying the road trip.

We are subject to language scrutiny these days. Can't afford to get  
sloppy.
Paul
On Nov 17, 2006, at 9:49 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:

> Good to hear your enjoying the road trip. Wish I was there. Looking
> forward to your pics.
> Paul
> On Nov 17, 2006, at 8:58 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
>
>> i'm in salt lake city now.
>> stopped for a dinner break and the place has wi-fi ... hehehe
>>
>> on hybrid-electric-spaceship-gizmo-car:
>> Freekin' great. I just filled up for the second time and I'm nearly
>> 1/3 of the way across the US. No problems whatever climbing the
>> Sierra-Nevada mountains ... plenty of power, did better than my Land
>> Rover or MR2 ever did. Unless the road surface is really crappy, it
>> is almost eerily quiet and just whooshes along while you listen to
>> the radio or your own music, diddle with the info display. very
>> comfy, holds a huge amount of stuff. So far, perfect marks.
>>
>> -
>> I got on the road to go east more than a day later than I'd hoped so
>> my run east is a bit rushed for the slow dawdle to do photography
>> that I'd prefer. However, I did grab the loaner Pentax 645 in
>> addition to the DS kit on the way out the door and pulled out the 645
>> for the first couple of real exposures with film loaded a little
>> while ago. My, what a nice camera to shoot with!
>>
>> more when. trying to make Colorado tonight so i better hustle my  
>> butt.
>>
>> usw
>> Godfrey
>>
>> -- 
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>
>
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: thoughts from the road

[Paul Stenquist]

Good to hear your enjoying the road trip. Wish I was there. Looking  
forward to your pics.
Paul
On Nov 17, 2006, at 8:58 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

> i'm in salt lake city now.
> stopped for a dinner break and the place has wi-fi ... hehehe
>
> on hybrid-electric-spaceship-gizmo-car:
> Freekin' great. I just filled up for the second time and I'm nearly
> 1/3 of the way across the US. No problems whatever climbing the
> Sierra-Nevada mountains ... plenty of power, did better than my Land
> Rover or MR2 ever did. Unless the road surface is really crappy, it
> is almost eerily quiet and just whooshes along while you listen to
> the radio or your own music, diddle with the info display. very
> comfy, holds a huge amount of stuff. So far, perfect marks.
>
> -
> I got on the road to go east more than a day later than I'd hoped so
> my run east is a bit rushed for the slow dawdle to do photography
> that I'd prefer. However, I did grab the loaner Pentax 645 in
> addition to the DS kit on the way out the door and pulled out the 645
> for the first couple of real exposures with film loaded a little
> while ago. My, what a nice camera to shoot with!
>
> more when. trying to make Colorado tonight so i better hustle my butt.
>
> usw
> Godfrey
>
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Oct 16, 2006, at 5:13 PM, Gonz wrote:

>> Kinda like 35mm SLR cameras since 1982, in my opinion. I never found
>> anything that did a substantially better job than my Nikon FM/FE2/F3
>> SLRs or Leica M6 in 35mm.
>>
>
> Exactly.  No real progress.  It seems like sensors are reaching the  
> zone
> of diminishing returns.

And, I forgot to add, that level of quality was enough for a massive  
amount of professional quality work. If you need more quality than  
that, you need a larger format ... at a highly increased price. And  
the same will be true of digital sensor cameras.

Godfrey



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format

[Gonz]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Oct 16, 2006, at 1:34 AM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
> 
> 
>>On 16/10/06, Gonz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>There might be some improvements to the hardware, i.e. faster and  
>>>more
>>>accurate autofocus, wireless, etc.  But the only real direction I can
>>>see is software.  I.e. focus fix after the fact, software guided
>>>panoramic stitching in camera, automatic coordination with online  
>>>album
>>>programs and web sites, etc.
>>
>>IOW mainly fluff, not much of consequence in store for the serious  
>>photographer.
> 
> 
> Kinda like 35mm SLR cameras since 1982, in my opinion. I never found  
> anything that did a substantially better job than my Nikon FM/FE2/F3  
> SLRs or Leica M6 in 35mm.
> 

Exactly.  No real progress.  It seems like sensors are reaching the zone 
of diminishing returns.

> Godfrey
> 
> 
> 

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey

[Gonz]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 16/10/06, Gonz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> 
>>There might be some improvements to the hardware, i.e. faster and more
>>accurate autofocus, wireless, etc.  But the only real direction I can
>>see is software.  I.e. focus fix after the fact, software guided
>>panoramic stitching in camera, automatic coordination with online album
>>programs and web sites, etc.
> 
> 
> IOW mainly fluff, not much of consequence in store for the serious 
> photographer.
> 

Yes not much.  But one direction they could go in now that the specs are 
maturing is a complete system: body + accessories.  I.e. a body with 
interchangeable viewfinders, screens, backs including specialized 
sensors for IR, B&W, High ISO/lower resolution (for sports), High 
resolution/Low ISO (for studio), FF or APS, etc.  Now that would be a 
neat system.


rg

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Oct 16, 2006, at 1:34 AM, Digital Image Studio wrote:

> On 16/10/06, Gonz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> There might be some improvements to the hardware, i.e. faster and  
>> more
>> accurate autofocus, wireless, etc.  But the only real direction I can
>> see is software.  I.e. focus fix after the fact, software guided
>> panoramic stitching in camera, automatic coordination with online  
>> album
>> programs and web sites, etc.
>
> IOW mainly fluff, not much of consequence in store for the serious  
> photographer.

Kinda like 35mm SLR cameras since 1982, in my opinion. I never found  
anything that did a substantially better job than my Nikon FM/FE2/F3  
SLRs or Leica M6 in 35mm.

Godfrey



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey

[Digital Image Studio]

On 16/10/06, Gonz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> There might be some improvements to the hardware, i.e. faster and more
> accurate autofocus, wireless, etc.  But the only real direction I can
> see is software.  I.e. focus fix after the fact, software guided
> panoramic stitching in camera, automatic coordination with online album
> programs and web sites, etc.

IOW mainly fluff, not much of consequence in store for the serious photographer.

-- 
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey

[Gonz]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What I'm
> interested to see is how the manufacturers will sell the next gen
> cameras give than in all reality APS sized sensors are at 12MP IOW as
> dense as is practical WRT lens technology and minimum photo site size.
> Should be interesting.
> 

thats the 12million dollar question.

There might be some improvements to the hardware, i.e. faster and more 
accurate autofocus, wireless, etc.  But the only real direction I can 
see is software.  I.e. focus fix after the fact, software guided 
panoramic stitching in camera, automatic coordination with online album 
programs and web sites, etc.

rg

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format. (Olympus E)

[John Celio]

>> By rights, they should have introduced a whole new lens line with a
>> shorter register difference. I imagine that they both knew how that
>> would have gone over with the present user base, and didn't have the
>> financial resources to do it.
>> A compromise on several levels.
>
> Didn't Olympus do that with the 4/3? How are they doing?

The store I worked at was doing a lot of good business with the Olympus 
system.  This was at least partly because Olympus has, ever since the E-1 
came out, been trying to do most of their business with specialty shops and 
smaller chains, as opposed to big box stores and internet-only retailers.

Another reason was because Olympus' original line of 4/3 lenses (14-54mm, 
50-200mm, etc) and their current pro-end lenses are really good.  I mean 
REALLY good.  A large chunk of my coworkers, at the time the E-1 came out, 
switched to the E system because of the lenses.  There were dozens of 12x18 
prints floating around the store from various people's E-1s, and we used 
those shots to sell the system.  The E system got off to a hell of a start, 
from our perspective.

The problem with the E system, as others have pointed out, is noise. 
Olympus and their partners haven't been able to come up with a good solution 
to the noise problem presented by their chosen sensor, and so haven't come 
out with a pro body to replace the E-1, even though E system owners have 
been clamoring for one for ages now.  They keep telling us, "next year, 
we'll have the new pro model ready," but nothing has come out.  At this 
point, I'll believe it when I see it.

John Celio

--

http://www.neovenator.com

AIM: Neopifex

"Hey, I'm an artist.  I can do whatever I want and pretend I'm making a 
statement." 



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Mark Roberts"
Subject: Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey


>
> Haven't they already stoped manufacturing film SLR's? I know there
> three currently on their web site, but I was under the impression they
> were just selling off stock that has been already built. If they're
> still actually building anything, I'd guess it would be the ZX-M
> "student camera".

Poor wording on my part.
Selling of course.

William Robb 



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey

[Mark Roberts]

William Robb wrote:

>Lenses that cover the 35mm frame will likely be phased out as soon as 
>Pentax stops making film SLR cameras altogether.

Haven't they already stoped manufacturing film SLR's? I know there 
three currently on their web site, but I was under the impression they 
were just selling off stock that has been already built. If they're 
still actually building anything, I'd guess it would be the ZX-M 
"student camera".


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Adam Maas"
Subject: Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey



> An interesting idea would be to keep the mount, shorten the register 
> and
> sell an AF extension tube for older lenses that makes up the 
> difference.
> Best of both worlds.

Good idea.
In practice, probably they would lose the AF to limit functionality and 
encourage sales of the new format lenses...

William Robb 



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey

[P. J. Alling]

I wouldn't say fail, it depends on your definition of success.  After 
all it's from the same people who brought us instamatic 126, 110, aps 
cartridge and disk film.  It was just meant to be redundant in 15-20 
years, too bad the digital world moves so much faster.

Digital Image Studio wrote:

>On 14/10/06, Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Didn't Olympus do that with the 4/3? How are they doing?
>>
>>
>
>Maintaining the K mount (to a degree) means that Pentax can crawl back
>to a 36x24mm sensor body if APS sensor line runs out of steam. 4/3 was
>destined to fail from the start (and I think I said as much).
>
>  
>


-- 
Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler.

--Albert Einstein



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey

[P. J. Alling]

Not all that well, they're even further behind in producing a high mp 
replacement for their original pro/flagship model than Pentax is.  Rumor 
is that they're having noise problems with that little sensor that are 
un-acceptable on a Pro body when they try to pack it with 10mp or more.

Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:

>On Sat, 14 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote:
>
>  
>
>>From: "Digital Image Studio"
>>Subject: Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>On 14/10/06, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>  
>>>
>>>Then the legacy will be a register distance that was designed to
>>>accommodate 35mm FF image area and lenses that mos likely aren't
>>>optimal for the APS DSLR format. IE one big compromise. What I'm
>>>interested to see is how the manufacturers will sell the next gen
>>>cameras give than in all reality APS sized sensors are at 12MP IOW as
>>>dense as is practical WRT lens technology and minimum photo site size.
>>>Should be interesting.
>>>  
>>>
>>By rights, they should have introduced a whole new lens line with a
>>shorter register difference. I imagine that they both knew how that
>>would have gone over with the present user base, and didn't have the
>>financial resources to do it.
>>A compromise on several levels.
>>
>>
>
>Didn't Olympus do that with the 4/3? How are they doing?
>
>Kostas
>
>  
>


-- 
Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler.

--Albert Einstein



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey

[Thibouille]

Olympus has no previous owners to maintain.
Forget about OM serie, too old. So theycould do what they wanted to.
They made mistakes IMO but they were more free to move.

2006/10/14, Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote:
>
> > From: "Digital Image Studio"
> > Subject: Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey
> >
> >
> >> On 14/10/06, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Then the legacy will be a register distance that was designed to
> >> accommodate 35mm FF image area and lenses that mos likely aren't
> >> optimal for the APS DSLR format. IE one big compromise. What I'm
> >> interested to see is how the manufacturers will sell the next gen
> >> cameras give than in all reality APS sized sensors are at 12MP IOW as
> >> dense as is practical WRT lens technology and minimum photo site size.
> >> Should be interesting.
> >
> > By rights, they should have introduced a whole new lens line with a
> > shorter register difference. I imagine that they both knew how that
> > would have gone over with the present user base, and didn't have the
> > financial resources to do it.
> > A compromise on several levels.
>
> Didn't Olympus do that with the 4/3? How are they doing?
>
> Kostas
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>


-- 

Thibault Massart aka Thibouille
--
*ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ...

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey

[Adam Maas]

William Robb wrote:
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Digital Image Studio"
> Subject: Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey
> 
> 
>> On 14/10/06, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
> 
>> Then the legacy will be a register distance that was designed to
>> accommodate 35mm FF image area and lenses that mos likely aren't
>> optimal for the APS DSLR format. IE one big compromise. What I'm
>> interested to see is how the manufacturers will sell the next gen
>> cameras give than in all reality APS sized sensors are at 12MP IOW as
>> dense as is practical WRT lens technology and minimum photo site size.
>> Should be interesting.
> 
> By rights, they should have introduced a whole new lens line with a 
> shorter register difference. I imagine that they both knew how that 
> would have gone over with the present user base, and didn't have the 
> financial resources to do it.
> A compromise on several levels.
> 
> William Robb 
> 

An interesting idea would be to keep the mount, shorten the register and 
sell an AF extension tube for older lenses that makes up the difference. 
Best of both worlds.

-Adam


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey

[Adam Maas]

Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote:
> 
>> From: "Digital Image Studio"
>> Subject: Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey
>>
>>
>>> On 14/10/06, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Then the legacy will be a register distance that was designed to
>>> accommodate 35mm FF image area and lenses that mos likely aren't
>>> optimal for the APS DSLR format. IE one big compromise. What I'm
>>> interested to see is how the manufacturers will sell the next gen
>>> cameras give than in all reality APS sized sensors are at 12MP IOW as
>>> dense as is practical WRT lens technology and minimum photo site size.
>>> Should be interesting.
>> By rights, they should have introduced a whole new lens line with a
>> shorter register difference. I imagine that they both knew how that
>> would have gone over with the present user base, and didn't have the
>> financial resources to do it.
>> A compromise on several levels.
> 
> Didn't Olympus do that with the 4/3? How are they doing?
> 
> Kostas
> 

Oly is not doing well, Panasonic seems to have a better handle on it 
though (Considering they're introducing the first fast normal prime with 
Leica only now). The main issue with 4/3rds is sensor noise, the smaller 
sensor just doesn't have the noise performance of the larger DX sensors 
at similar MP. And that was compounded by using relatively high nosie 
Kodak and Panasonic sensors.

-Adam

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey

[P. J. Alling]

I like to use 16x24 actually a bit smaller for Pentax sensors a tiny bit 
bigger for actual film APS.  But close enough.

William Robb wrote:

>- Original Message - 
>From: "David Savage"
>Subject: Re: The JCO survey
>
>
>  
>
>>And this is the point some are try to help you understand. Pentax
>>makes more profit from new users (& long time users) who buy new
>>products & accessories, as apposed to the minimal profit they make
>>from longtime users who only want a body that fully supports their old
>>K/M lenses.
>>
>>
>
>If one were to be technically accurate, then one would understand that 
>an APS-C sized digital sensor represents a different format from 35mm 
>film.
>The different format being 18x27mm (or whatever, I'm not going to go 
>look it up).
>This is as big a jump as going from the 24x36 film format to 645, or 
>from 645 to 6x7.
>I know it is nice that full frame legacy film lenses can be used on the 
>new format, but really, the small image circle DA lenses are actually 
>the ones designed for the new format.
>Lenses that cover the 35mm frame will likely be phased out as soon as 
>Pentax stops making film SLR cameras altogether.
>
>William Robb 
>
>
>
>  
>


-- 
Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler.

--Albert Einstein



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey

[Adam Maas]

William Robb wrote:
> - Original Message - 
> From: "David Savage"
> Subject: Re: The JCO survey
> 
> 
>> And this is the point some are try to help you understand. Pentax
>> makes more profit from new users (& long time users) who buy new
>> products & accessories, as apposed to the minimal profit they make
>> from longtime users who only want a body that fully supports their old
>> K/M lenses.
> 
> If one were to be technically accurate, then one would understand that 
> an APS-C sized digital sensor represents a different format from 35mm 
> film.
> The different format being 18x27mm (or whatever, I'm not going to go 
> look it up).
> This is as big a jump as going from the 24x36 film format to 645, or 
> from 645 to 6x7.
> I know it is nice that full frame legacy film lenses can be used on the 
> new format, but really, the small image circle DA lenses are actually 
> the ones designed for the new format.
> Lenses that cover the 35mm frame will likely be phased out as soon as 
> Pentax stops making film SLR cameras altogether.
> 
> William Robb 
> 

They did, and they are. Most of the FA lenses are out of production at 
this point, and Pentax is only selling New Old Stock film bodies.

-Adam


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey

[Digital Image Studio]

On 14/10/06, Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Didn't Olympus do that with the 4/3? How are they doing?

Maintaining the K mount (to a degree) means that Pentax can crawl back
to a 36x24mm sensor body if APS sensor line runs out of steam. 4/3 was
destined to fail from the start (and I think I said as much).

-- 
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey

[Kostas Kavoussanakis]

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote:

> From: "Digital Image Studio"
> Subject: Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey
>
>
>> On 14/10/06, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Then the legacy will be a register distance that was designed to
>> accommodate 35mm FF image area and lenses that mos likely aren't
>> optimal for the APS DSLR format. IE one big compromise. What I'm
>> interested to see is how the manufacturers will sell the next gen
>> cameras give than in all reality APS sized sensors are at 12MP IOW as
>> dense as is practical WRT lens technology and minimum photo site size.
>> Should be interesting.
>
> By rights, they should have introduced a whole new lens line with a
> shorter register difference. I imagine that they both knew how that
> would have gone over with the present user base, and didn't have the
> financial resources to do it.
> A compromise on several levels.

Didn't Olympus do that with the 4/3? How are they doing?

Kostas

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Digital Image Studio"
Subject: Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey


> On 14/10/06, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>

>
> Then the legacy will be a register distance that was designed to
> accommodate 35mm FF image area and lenses that mos likely aren't
> optimal for the APS DSLR format. IE one big compromise. What I'm
> interested to see is how the manufacturers will sell the next gen
> cameras give than in all reality APS sized sensors are at 12MP IOW as
> dense as is practical WRT lens technology and minimum photo site size.
> Should be interesting.

By rights, they should have introduced a whole new lens line with a 
shorter register difference. I imagine that they both knew how that 
would have gone over with the present user base, and didn't have the 
financial resources to do it.
A compromise on several levels.

William Robb 



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey

[Digital Image Studio]

On 14/10/06, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> If one were to be technically accurate, then one would understand that
> an APS-C sized digital sensor represents a different format from 35mm
> film.
> The different format being 18x27mm (or whatever, I'm not going to go
> look it up).
> This is as big a jump as going from the 24x36 film format to 645, or
> from 645 to 6x7.
> I know it is nice that full frame legacy film lenses can be used on the
> new format, but really, the small image circle DA lenses are actually
> the ones designed for the new format.
> Lenses that cover the 35mm frame will likely be phased out as soon as
> Pentax stops making film SLR cameras altogether.

Then the legacy will be a register distance that was designed to
accommodate 35mm FF image area and lenses that mos likely aren't
optimal for the APS DSLR format. IE one big compromise. What I'm
interested to see is how the manufacturers will sell the next gen
cameras give than in all reality APS sized sensors are at 12MP IOW as
dense as is practical WRT lens technology and minimum photo site size.
Should be interesting.

-- 
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey

[David Savage]

On 10/14/06, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Lenses that cover the 35mm frame will likely be phased out as soon as
> Pentax stops making film SLR cameras altogether.

Don't forget the D-FA 200 & 300 on the lens "Roadmap"

I still have hopes for a future Pentax full frame body.

Dave

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

RE: Thoughts on cameras, and a PESO (was Re: OT Nother test)

[Tim Øsleby]

Insulting in a friendly way or not. The first time I noticed this thing was
quite a story. I was very confused about something he said, and _then_ he
addressed me with this. 
It made me _very_ discombulated ;-)
I responded in a rather unleashed tone. 

This _is_ a strange place to hang around. 
A lot of trolls. This is how I look 
http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bildegalleri/vis_bilde.cgi?id=183414


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
 
Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)

> -Original Message-
> From: Gabriel Cain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 11. april 2006 18:28
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Thoughts on cameras, and a PESO (was Re: OT Nother test)
> 
> 
> It seemed pretty apt for my 20D comment. ;^)  I didn't take it as an
> insult.
>  Or not more than a friendly one, anyway.
> 
> Gabriel
> 
> graywolf wrote:
> > Means "confused"
> >
> >
> > discombobulate
> >
> > discombobulate (dîs´kem-bòb´ye-lât´) verb, transitive
> > discombobulated, discombobulating, discombobulates
> >
> > To throw into a state of confusion. See synonyms at confuse.
> >
> >  [Perhaps alteration of discompose.]
> > - dis´combob´ula´tion noun
> >
> > The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition
> > copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version
> > licensed from INSO Corporation; further reproduction and distribution
> > restricted in accordance with the Copyright Law of the United States.
> > All rights reserved.
> 

Re: Thoughts on cameras, and a PESO (was Re: OT Nother test)

[Gabriel Cain]

It seemed pretty apt for my 20D comment. ;^)  I didn't take it as an insult.
 Or not more than a friendly one, anyway.

Gabriel

graywolf wrote:
> Means "confused"
> 
> 
> discombobulate
> 
> discombobulate (dîs´kem-bòb´ye-lât´) verb, transitive
> discombobulated, discombobulating, discombobulates
> 
> To throw into a state of confusion. See synonyms at confuse.
> 
>  [Perhaps alteration of discompose.]
> - dis´combob´ula´tion noun
> 
> The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition
> copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version
> licensed from INSO Corporation; further reproduction and distribution
> restricted in accordance with the Copyright Law of the United States.
> All rights reserved.

Re: Thoughts on cameras, and a PESO (was Re: OT Nother test)

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Apr 11, 2006, at 7:42 AM, mike wilson spake thus:

It's a real but anachronistic and/or vernacular word.  It means  
disorientated.


"Discomfitted" and "disconcerted" are other elements of being  
discombobulated. I've always just ignored it as it means as much as  
"spake thus" in the context of the quote tag above, that is: nothing.  
The intent is a humorous aside.


Godfrey

Re: Thoughts on cameras, and a PESO (was Re: OT Nother test)

[graywolf]

Means "confused"


discombobulate

discombobulate (dîs´kem-bòb´ye-lât´) verb, transitive
discombobulated, discombobulating, discombobulates

To throw into a state of confusion. See synonyms at confuse.

 [Perhaps alteration of discompose.]
- dis´combob´ula´tion noun

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition 
copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version 
licensed from INSO Corporation; further reproduction and distribution 
restricted in accordance with the Copyright Law of the United States. 
All rights reserved.



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


mike wilson wrote:

It's a real but anachronistic and/or vernacular word.  It means disorientated.




From: Tim Øsleby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 2006/04/11 Tue PM 01:25:52 GMT
To: 
Subject: RE: Thoughts on cameras, and a PESO (was Re: OT Nother test)

Sorry. Forgot, Cotty never makes jokes, that’s part of his "act" ;-)

Seriously, Cotty. Are you serious? As I read your heading it is a "friendly"
insult. Have I got it completely wrong?


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)

Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)




-Original Message-
From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 11. april 2006 09:25
To: pentax list
Subject: Re: Thoughts on cameras, and a PESO (was Re: OT Nother test)

On 11/4/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:



If you havn't noticed


On 10/4/06, Gabriel Cain, discombobulated, unleashed:


is a regular joke (I believe) from Cotty.


No joke!




Cheers,
 Cotty


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












-
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software 
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information

Re: RE: Thoughts on cameras, and a PESO (was Re: OT Nother test)

[mike wilson]

It's a real but anachronistic and/or vernacular word.  It means disorientated.


> 
> From: Tim Øsleby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2006/04/11 Tue PM 01:25:52 GMT
> To: 
> Subject: RE: Thoughts on cameras, and a PESO (was Re: OT Nother test)
> 
> Sorry. Forgot, Cotty never makes jokes, that’s part of his "act" ;-)
> 
> Seriously, Cotty. Are you serious? As I read your heading it is a "friendly"
> insult. Have I got it completely wrong?
> 
> 
> Tim
> Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
>  
> Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
> (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: 11. april 2006 09:25
> > To: pentax list
> > Subject: Re: Thoughts on cameras, and a PESO (was Re: OT Nother test)
> > 
> > On 11/4/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:
> > 
> > >If you havn't noticed
> > >> On 10/4/06, Gabriel Cain, discombobulated, unleashed:
> > >is a regular joke (I believe) from Cotty.
> > 
> > No joke!
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Cheers,
> >   Cotty
> > 
> > 
> > ___/\__
> > ||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
> > ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
> > _
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


-
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software 
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information

RE: Thoughts on cameras, and a PESO (was Re: OT Nother test)

[Shel Belinkoff]

I've always found the comment to be somewhat insulting and not at all
funny.  I've mentioned it to Cotty, but hey, he likes it and no one else
has complained, so WTF.  Now there's two of us ... not that that will
change anything.

Shel



> [Original Message]
> From: Tim Øsleby 

> Seriously, Cotty. Are you serious? As I read your heading it is a
"friendly"
> insult. Have I got it completely wrong?

RE: Thoughts on cameras, and a PESO (was Re: OT Nother test)

[Tim Øsleby]

Sorry. Forgot, Cotty never makes jokes, that’s part of his "act" ;-)

Seriously, Cotty. Are you serious? As I read your heading it is a "friendly"
insult. Have I got it completely wrong?


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
 
Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)

> -Original Message-
> From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 11. april 2006 09:25
> To: pentax list
> Subject: Re: Thoughts on cameras, and a PESO (was Re: OT Nother test)
> 
> On 11/4/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:
> 
> >If you havn't noticed
> >> On 10/4/06, Gabriel Cain, discombobulated, unleashed:
> >is a regular joke (I believe) from Cotty.
> 
> No joke!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers,
>   Cotty
> 
> 
> ___/\__
> ||   (O)   | People, Places, Pastiche
> ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
> _
> 
> 
> 

Re: Thoughts on cameras, and a PESO (was Re: OT Nother test)

[Cotty]

On 11/4/06, Tim Øsleby, discombobulated, unleashed:

>If you havn't noticed
>> On 10/4/06, Gabriel Cain, discombobulated, unleashed:
>is a regular joke (I believe) from Cotty.

No joke!




Cheers,
  Cotty


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

RE: Thoughts on cameras, and a PESO (was Re: OT Nother test)

[Tim Øsleby]

If you havn't noticed
> On 10/4/06, Gabriel Cain, discombobulated, unleashed:
is a regular joke (I believe) from Cotty.
You will also get used to my odd misspellings ;-)

Welcome on board BTW


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
 
Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)

> -Original Message-
> From: Gabriel Cain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 10. april 2006 18:56
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: Thoughts on cameras, and a PESO (was Re: OT Nother test)
> 
> Cotty wrote:
> > On 10/4/06, Gabriel Cain, discombobulated, unleashed:
> >
> > That's the 5D or the 1Ds Gabe.
> 
> *face palm*  That's true.   Very discombobulated.
> 
> Gabriel
> 

Re: Thoughts on cameras, and a PESO (was Re: OT Nother test)

[Gabriel Cain]

Cotty wrote:
> On 10/4/06, Gabriel Cain, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
> That's the 5D or the 1Ds Gabe.

*face palm*  That's true.   Very discombobulated.

Gabriel

Re: Thoughts on cameras, and a PESO (was Re: OT Nother test)

[Cotty]

On 10/4/06, Gabriel Cain, discombobulated, unleashed:

>notably the 20D 
>with a full 36mm x 24mm sensor

That's the 5D or the 1Ds Gabe.




Cheers,
  Cotty


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

Re: Thoughts on Russian K-mounts, any?

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

I have one and enjoy its curvilinear distortion. I also have the  
DA14, which I prefer for most of my ultrawide work, but the Zeni is a  
very very good lens for something that costs $140 or less, new. Two  
of my favorites so far:


  http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/25p.htm
  http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/46.htm

Godfrey

On Mar 25, 2006, at 12:36 PM, Roman wrote:

Anyone has any experience with Zenitar 16mm/f2.8 K-Mount fisheye  
lense?


http://www.rugift.com/photocameras/zenitar_k_fisheye_lens.htm

Peace,

--
home 

Re: Thoughts on Russian K-mounts, any?

[Mishka]

i tried 20mm/2.5 and didn't particularly liked it, although, for thr money
it's hard to beat. It flares easily, large (82mm) and very heavy
(allmetal build),
and QC is so-so.
mine was quite sharp though.

best,
mishka.

On 3/25/06, Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Anyone has any experience with Zenitar 16mm/f2.8 K-Mount fisheye lense?
>
> > http://www.rugift.com/photocameras/zenitar_k_fisheye_lens.htm
>
> Nothing against the Zenitar 16/2.6 fisheye, but there ~are~ other Russian
> K-mount lenses.  So, in the spirit of the thread's title, are there any
> "thoughts on [other] Russian K-mounts"?
>
> Fred
>
>

Re: Thoughts on Russian K-mounts, any?

[Fred]

> Anyone has any experience with Zenitar 16mm/f2.8 K-Mount fisheye lense?

> http://www.rugift.com/photocameras/zenitar_k_fisheye_lens.htm

Nothing against the Zenitar 16/2.6 fisheye, but there ~are~ other Russian
K-mount lenses.  So, in the spirit of the thread's title, are there any
"thoughts on [other] Russian K-mounts"?

Fred

Re: Thoughts on Russian K-mounts, any?

[Russell Kerstetter]

http://photonotes.org/reviews/zenitar-fisheye/

Re: Thoughts on Russian K-mounts, any?

[Mishka]

i used to have one. it's great on film, and pretty much useless on D.
best,
mishka

On 3/25/06, Roman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anyone has any experience with Zenitar 16mm/f2.8 K-Mount fisheye lense?
>
> http://www.rugift.com/photocameras/zenitar_k_fisheye_lens.htm
>
> Peace,
>
> --
> home 
>
>

Re: Thoughts on Russian K-mounts, any?

[David J Brooks]

Exactly why i bought it Mark.

$180 Canadian for my P mount. Keep it out of the sun and its great,

Dave

Quoting Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


Toine wrote:


Here's a sample:
http://360.leende.net/zenitar/test.jpg
I don't have a similar shot from the 16-45. Contrast of the 16-45 is
better and the zenitar is non SMC. The zenitar price is :)


I've played with Frank's Zenitar 16mm fisheye and I'll confirm this
general assessment. Flares easily and it's a bit low in contrast, but
how can you complain given what it costs? What a fun lens! Can't beat
it for the price.







Equine Photography in York Region

Re: Thoughts on Russian K-mounts, any?

[David J Brooks]

Yes.
I bought mine from this company. Good to deal with. Sent my 16mm by 
airmail. Three weeks to my house.


I recommend this outfit, They didi a good deal with me.

Dave

Quoting Roman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


Anyone has any experience with Zenitar 16mm/f2.8 K-Mount fisheye lense?

http://www.rugift.com/photocameras/zenitar_k_fisheye_lens.htm

Peace,

--
home 






Equine Photography in York Region

Re: Thoughts on Russian K-mounts, any?

[Mark Roberts]

Toine wrote:

>Here's a sample:
>http://360.leende.net/zenitar/test.jpg
>I don't have a similar shot from the 16-45. Contrast of the 16-45 is
>better and the zenitar is non SMC. The zenitar price is :)

I've played with Frank's Zenitar 16mm fisheye and I'll confirm this
general assessment. Flares easily and it's a bit low in contrast, but
how can you complain given what it costs? What a fun lens! Can't beat
it for the price.
 

Re: Thoughts on Russian K-mounts, any?

[Bertil Holmberg]

Some thoughts and links here – http://mac.tidings.nu/PinkyPentax/ 
Z16mmFE.shtml


Regards,
Bertil

Re: Thoughts on Russian K-mounts, any?

[Toine]

Here's a sample:
http://360.leende.net/zenitar/test.jpg
I don't have a similar shot from the 16-45. Contrast of the 16-45 is
better and the zenitar is non SMC. The zenitar price is :)

On 3/25/06, Toine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes I have one. On the D the FOV of a defished zenitar and rectilinear
> 16 mm on the 16-45 are almost identical. The 16-45 is much much
> better.
> The zenitar fisheye effect is only of interest on analog bodies.
> Toine
>
> On 3/25/06, Roman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Anyone has any experience with Zenitar 16mm/f2.8 K-Mount fisheye lense?
> >
> > http://www.rugift.com/photocameras/zenitar_k_fisheye_lens.htm
> >
> > Peace,
> >
> > --
> > home 
> >
> >
>

Re: Thoughts on Russian K-mounts, any?

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Roman"

Subject: Thoughts on Russian K-mounts, any?



Anyone has any experience with Zenitar 16mm/f2.8 K-Mount fisheye lense?


I had one for a while. It's actually quite a good lens. I think Frank has it 
now.


William Robb 

Re: Thoughts on Russian K-mounts, any?

[Toine]

Yes I have one. On the D the FOV of a defished zenitar and rectilinear
16 mm on the 16-45 are almost identical. The 16-45 is much much
better.
The zenitar fisheye effect is only of interest on analog bodies.
Toine

On 3/25/06, Roman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anyone has any experience with Zenitar 16mm/f2.8 K-Mount fisheye lense?
>
> http://www.rugift.com/photocameras/zenitar_k_fisheye_lens.htm
>
> Peace,
>
> --
> home 
>
>

Re: Thoughts on Russian K-mounts, any?

[Adam Maas]

Roman wrote:


Anyone has any experience with Zenitar 16mm/f2.8 K-Mount fisheye lense?

http://www.rugift.com/photocameras/zenitar_k_fisheye_lens.htm

Peace,

Dave Brooks and Frank both have it, I've seen some excellent stuff from 
both of them.


-Adam

Re: Thoughts on the FAJ 18-35mm?

[Adam Maas]

However, for the same money, the 18-55 is a better lens. Unless you also 
want a ultra-wide zoom with no aperture ring for a film body (the 18-55 
on covers 24-55 on a film body).


-Adam


John Forbes wrote:

No, it's not really that bad.  For the price it's pretty good, and 
might  even exceed your expectations.  However, at that price, your 
expectations  should not be sky high!


John





On Tue, 03 Jan 2006 10:42:57 -, Yuan-Juhn Chiao 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  wrote:



Hi,

I'm a newcomer to the DSLR world having recently
bought a used *istDS body along with a SMC-A 50/1.7.
Luckily, thanks to this mailing list and its archives
as well as the Pentax DSLR forum on DPReview, many
helpful comments have guided my equipment selection.

Right now, I'm looking for a decent budget wide-angle
zoom to cover. I would spring for the 16-45, but at
430 Euros, it's simply too much. I could obtain the
original *istD kit lens (FAJ 18-35) new for around 100
Euros, around the cost of the current DS kit lens.


From what I've read so far on the 18-35, the consensus


seems rather negative. Is it really that bad?  What
are some possible alternatives in the same price
range?

Would appreciate any insights or comments!

-YJ







   
__

Yahoo! for Good - Make a difference this year.
http://brand.yahoo.com/cybergivingweek2005/

Re: Thoughts on the FAJ 18-35mm?

[John Forbes]

No, it's not really that bad.  For the price it's pretty good, and might  
even exceed your expectations.  However, at that price, your expectations  
should not be sky high!


John





On Tue, 03 Jan 2006 10:42:57 -, Yuan-Juhn Chiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
wrote:



Hi,

I'm a newcomer to the DSLR world having recently
bought a used *istDS body along with a SMC-A 50/1.7.
Luckily, thanks to this mailing list and its archives
as well as the Pentax DSLR forum on DPReview, many
helpful comments have guided my equipment selection.

Right now, I'm looking for a decent budget wide-angle
zoom to cover. I would spring for the 16-45, but at
430 Euros, it's simply too much. I could obtain the
original *istD kit lens (FAJ 18-35) new for around 100
Euros, around the cost of the current DS kit lens.

From what I've read so far on the 18-35, the consensus

seems rather negative. Is it really that bad?  What
are some possible alternatives in the same price
range?

Would appreciate any insights or comments!

-YJ








__
Yahoo! for Good - Make a difference this year.
http://brand.yahoo.com/cybergivingweek2005/









--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

Re: Thoughts on the FAJ 18-35mm?

[Sylwester Pietrzyk]

Yuan-Juhn Chiao wrote on 03.01.06 11:42:

> Right now, I'm looking for a decent budget wide-angle
> zoom to cover. I would spring for the 16-45, but at
> 430 Euros, it's simply too much. I could obtain the
> original *istD kit lens (FAJ 18-35) new for around 100
> Euros, around the cost of the current DS kit lens.
>> From what I've read so far on the 18-35, the consensus
> seems rather negative. Is it really that bad?  What
> are some possible alternatives in the same price
> range?
> 
> Would appreciate any insights or comments!
If you plan to use it only on digital, then look rather for DA 18-55 - more
uniwersal, better build quality, smaller (filter 52 mm) and with QSF (Quick
Shift Focus - enables you to manually tweak focus afer AF.

-- 
Balance is the ultimate good...

Best Regards
Sylwek

RE: Thoughts on Sunpak flashes?

[Jens Bladt]

Darn...
I didn't know there was different AF280T versions, when purchased mine
(ebay). Perhaps I should try to get a later version. It's is anoying that I
can't hit the cieling, while shooting downwards (to catch my grandaughter in
a chair, bed or whatever). I used to use the AF280T on my SONY F717 - and I
will probably use it on my *ist D (which is in the mail, says FOTO-PORST,
Berlin). I have a Metz 32 Z-2 that can do this, but I prefer to use the
Pentax.
Jens

Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt


-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Peter J. Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 24. august 2004 03:44
Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Emne: Re: Thoughts on Sunpak flashes?


Later versions work exactly that way, I have an earlier version that
only rotates 90° left or right for 180° of motion.

William Robb wrote:

>- Original Message -
>From: "Jens Bladt"
>Subject: RE: Thoughts on Sunpak flashes?
>
>
>
>
>
>>The only "problem with the AF280T is that it can't shoot in
>>
>>
>opposite
>
>
>>direction of the lens (which I use when shooting downwards,
>>
>>
>pointing the
>
>
>>camera at the cieling above and behind the camera). I have to use a
>>
>>
>Metz
>
>
>>flash for that.
>>
>>
>
>I am pretty sure the 280T rotates 180º one way, and 90º the other.
>Mine is out on extended loan at the moment so I can't confirm.
>
>William Robb
>
>
>
>
>


--
Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is a virtue. Fleas are
interested in dogs.
P. J. O'Rourke

Re: Thoughts on Sunpak flashes?

[Peter J. Alling]

Later versions work exactly that way, I have an earlier version that 
only rotates 90° left or right for 180° of motion.

William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - 
From: "Jens Bladt"
Subject: RE: Thoughts on Sunpak flashes?


 

The only "problem with the AF280T is that it can't shoot in
   

opposite
 

direction of the lens (which I use when shooting downwards,
   

pointing the
 

camera at the cieling above and behind the camera). I have to use a
   

Metz
 

flash for that.
   

I am pretty sure the 280T rotates 180º one way, and 90º the other.
Mine is out on extended loan at the moment so I can't confirm.
William Robb

 


--
Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is a virtue. Fleas are interested 
in dogs.
   P. J. O'Rourke

Re: Thoughts on Sunpak flashes?

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Jens Bladt"
Subject: RE: Thoughts on Sunpak flashes?



>
> The only "problem with the AF280T is that it can't shoot in
opposite
> direction of the lens (which I use when shooting downwards,
pointing the
> camera at the cieling above and behind the camera). I have to use a
Metz
> flash for that.

I am pretty sure the 280T rotates 180º one way, and 90º the other.
Mine is out on extended loan at the moment so I can't confirm.

William Robb

RE: Thoughts on Sunpak flashes?

[Jens Bladt]

It does. Why wouldn't it. Through The Lens metering. A very fine flash.
I prefere Pentax and Metz flashes over any other brand. Because of built
quality and design. They will outlast anything, even the camera.

It is annoying that Pentax didn't make flashes quite as compatibe as lenses
or as versatile as Metz flashes/adapters.
Best for PZ-1 is the AF500FTZ, I believe.
MZ-S: AF360FGZ ??
MZ 5n, don't know...

The only "problem with the AF280T is that it can't shoot in opposite
direction of the lens (which I use when shooting downwards, pointing the
camera at the cieling above and behind the camera). I have to use a Metz
flash for that.
Jens

Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt


-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 23. august 2004 13:33
Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Emne: Re: Thoughts on Sunpak flashes?


Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>On Sun, 22 Aug 2004, Sid Barras wrote:
>
>> I'm without a flash for my MZ S. (Or the PZ 1 and the MZ 5n either) --
that
>> is, unless the 280T works with the AF models. But I don't think so.
>
>It does:
>
>http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/technology/hot-shoe/index.html
>
>And I believe that TTL will work too.

Yes, the AF280T does TTL quite nicely with modern AF bodies.
Here's one example taken with the MZ-S, FA*24/2.0 and AF280T with the
flash set to about 1.5 stops below ambient:
http://www.robertstech.com/graphics/pages/7d303103.htm

--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: Thoughts on Sunpak flashes?

[Mark Roberts]

Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>On Sun, 22 Aug 2004, Sid Barras wrote:
>
>> I'm without a flash for my MZ S. (Or the PZ 1 and the MZ 5n either) -- that
>> is, unless the 280T works with the AF models. But I don't think so.
>
>It does:
>
>http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/technology/hot-shoe/index.html
>
>And I believe that TTL will work too.

Yes, the AF280T does TTL quite nicely with modern AF bodies.
Here's one example taken with the MZ-S, FA*24/2.0 and AF280T with the
flash set to about 1.5 stops below ambient:
http://www.robertstech.com/graphics/pages/7d303103.htm

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: Thoughts on PAWs

[Shel Belinkoff]

Hi,

To be fair, it wasn't my idea.  It's been going on over at
the Leica lists for some time.  I just mentioned it here
thinking it might be an enjoyable option for some folks.

shel

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> As a side effect, seeing everyone's pics is certainly increasing my
> motivation about taking some of my own again.
> 
> This was a good idea, shel, thanks!
> 
> Marnie aka Doe   It reminds me what I really like about photography, not the
> technical aspects, the results. :-)

Re: Thoughts on the FA* 28-70 F2.8

[Joseph Tainter]

Mark, look in your owner's manual at the lenses listed toward the back. 
See whether it includes some of the more recent lenses, such as the 
limiteds (and which limiteds). the FA 24-90, the new FA 28-105, etc. 
When I recently bought a new FA* 24 f2.0, the list of lenses in the 
manual told me that my lens had probably been manufactured 5 or 6 years 
ago, then warehoused. We had a little discussion on this on the list a 
while back. For specialty lenses, it is more economical to produce a 
bunch and warehouse them, than to start and stop production many times. 
By looking at the other lenses listed in your manual, you can get an 
idea of when your lens was manufactured. It may help to consult Boz's site.

Let us know what you find.

Joe

Re: thoughts on the 77mm limited lens

[Alexander Krohe]

>> Hi Alan,
>> I disagree with almost everything you say about the
43mm ltd. Actually, the 43mm ltld. is a really special
lens. The question is rather if you like it's
characteristics or not. But that is a totally
different matter ...
>>
>Guess I just can't stand the bright-edge bokeh of the
43. :)
>
>regards,
>Alan Chan

I think this is a feature, not a fault :-)
In fact the out of focus part are clearly separated
from the sharp part for such a wide lens (some of your
examples show this). IMO the intense colors of the out
of focus images are a hallmark of the 43mm ltd lens
and contribute to the the 3D-effect Pål is so
enthusiastic about. 
However, it is quite a difference to the "milky",
softy and low contrast out of focus images of the 1.4
and 1.2 50mm lenses. Which one is better? It depends
... 

All the best, 
Alexander



__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

Re: thoughts on the 77mm limited lens

[Andre Langevin]

 > I know which one for Cartier-Bresson, but what about Winnogrand 
and Salgado?

Winogrand used a 28mm almost always, and Salgado, when I heard him
interviewed, said he used a 28, 35, and a 60.

--Mike

Thanks Mike.  I did a rapid check on the web yesterday but could not 
find the answer for Salgado.  For Winogrand, I read that after using 
a 50mm in the 40s (like HCB), he progressively went for the 28 during 
the fifties.  Then he must be one of the first, if not the first, to 
"strech" his view angle in a systematic way.  It looks like his 28mm 
was a Canon.

Andre
--