Re: Dimples
Chihuahuas have us all beat. Jeffery On Oct 30, 2010, at 6:14 PM, eckinator wrote: 2010/10/31 Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net: The dude on the left is hung like a field mouse. better not challenge a rodent when it comes to package to body weight ratio... especially not a rat ]=P -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: DA 35mm f/2.4 impressions
I was thinking that its selling point is that it comes in a variety of colors. Perfect for street work...nobody would dream that a terrorist would be using a tangerine orange camera lens. Jeffery On Oct 31, 2010, at 3:29 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: Dario, It seems to me that this new lens is not for seasoned Pentaxians who already have this focal length covered. Gimme a moment, I have it covered 4.5 times with 4 of my zoom lenses and FA 31. It is very good candidate to start prime life in Pentax land, but it seems that the sentiment is different - buy it or else. Personally, this frustrates me. Boris On 10/31/2010 9:56 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: Worth looking at: http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/118765-da-35mm-2-4-plastic-wonder-dal35-vs-fa35-vs-da35m-vs-a35-many-photos.html Dario -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: This ain't so good
The Saints game is on in 45 min. I don't expect any visitors. The locals here tried to have Halloween pushed up to yesterday. Jeffery On Oct 31, 2010, at 6:17 PM, Bob W wrote: A hundred! That's far too many. You need to start giving them cough medicine and a warning about strangers. We've had over 100 already. Bought about six pounds of candy, and we might run out. Paul On Oct 31, 2010, at 7:02 PM, John Sessoms wrote: Broke down this year and bought maybe 3 lbs Halloween candy, and I haven't had a single trick or treater. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: Talking to Ned Bunnell at the PhotoPlus Expo
Like computers, it's pretty hard to predict what may be antiquated in a few years. I haven't seen a floppy drive in years. I bought my first screw-mount lenses in the late 60's, confident that they would be around a long time. Then Pentax went to bayonet. I switched to Nikon, figuring at least they would keep the same mount. They didn't. Gaa! I fortunately didn't switch to Miranda, Konica, or Minolta. My concern about 4/3 is that it seems that only Olympus is currently sticking with it, but I suspect that they will soon go to m4/3 completely. WordStar dominated word processing in 1984, so that's what I bought. Gaa! Used it with a CPM card in my Apple IIe. Gaa! Switched to a PC and WordPerfect, the dominant word processor in the late 1980's. Gaa! Nothing is sacred. Evolution happens. Jeffery On Nov 1, 2010, at 1:03 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: Dario Bonazza wrote: Boris Liberman wrote: There is something that bothers me slightly. The future is a crystal ball with a lot of fog and little if anything to be seen. I don't think Pentax knows the future, including their future moves beyond the next year, hence worrying now fo possible choices five years from now makes little sense. Use your current gear as long as it fits and move away if/when it can no longer suit your needs. Being concerned about possible choices five years from now actually makes a great deal of sense for someone getting into a camera system and looking at potentially spending several thousand dollars over the course of those years. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: peso - nice guy
Good effects. Hope the PUG has a 2010 theme that includes torn flesh. I like the lighting too. Jeffery On Nov 1, 2010, at 11:36 AM, Sasha Sobol wrote: http://www.flickr.com/photos/sobol/5134425479/ comments and critique welcomer as always -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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.
Dare I use a 50-135 f/2.8 + K-7 to shoot a musical this week?
I have been using faster lenses (77/1.8) for stage productions until now, but want to get a bit closer with a zoom. Do any of you who have this lens feel that it will focus reliably in sometimes dim stage lights with a K-7? Because of the added length, I'm taking a Porter bean bag to use as a rest. What ISO do I dare use indoor under incandescent lighting from floods? I'm shooting it entirely RAW, so I can fiddle with color correction later on the Mac. What say you? Feedback from the intelligentsia is welcomed, gas-baggy or not, whoopee cushion or not, and I won't criticize your reading ability. My only other long telephoto choices are 70-200 2.8 Sigma (10 years old), or a 50-200 Zuiko that I got with my E-1 (but I can use it on my more recent Panasonic. Jeffery Smith About to photography Bat Boy, like my reputation depends on it. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Talking to Ned Bunnell at the PhotoPlus Expo
Pentax seems to be designing lenses for aps-sized sensors to the exclusion of full-sized sensors. Is aps big enough? I guess so. Jeffery On Nov 1, 2010, at 10:04 PM, John Sessoms wrote: From: Steven Desjardins Many on this list want Pentax to produce a FF body. These would all be incompatible with the DA lenses. Apparently it might also be incompatible with the FA lenses, at least in terms of AF That would suck! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: Dare I use a 50-135 f/2.8 + K-7 to shoot a musical this week?
Thanks Christine. Like you, I'll be the only person in the audience (dress rehearsal), so I'll be able to close in. The shots you posted look great. A far cry from mine from the mid-1990's when I had to use Fuji 800. Jeffery On Nov 1, 2010, at 11:20 PM, Christine Aguila wrote: The DA* 50-135mm should focus reliably for you under the conditions you describe below. As to ISO, I had to shoot stage production photos last August--the play was Hay Fever. I shot ISO 800 for the entire shoot. A bit of noise saturation reduction in Lightroom worked just fine. Here's the link: www.caguila.com/caguila/hayfever . f4 was used with the DA 16-45mm for all shots. I have used the DA* 50-135mm under some really, and I say, really, dark stage situations, shooting really slow. The lens focused reliably, but it was hard to keep steady, but that's my error, not equipment error. For the shoot previously mentioned, it was just me, the director, and the actors on stage. I was not shooting from the audience during performance time, so I was able to get close and didn't need the longer lens. Cheers, Christine - Original Message - From: Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 10:13 PM Subject: Dare I use a 50-135 f/2.8 + K-7 to shoot a musical this week? I have been using faster lenses (77/1.8) for stage productions until now, but want to get a bit closer with a zoom. Do any of you who have this lens feel that it will focus reliably in sometimes dim stage lights with a K-7? Because of the added length, I'm taking a Porter bean bag to use as a rest. What ISO do I dare use indoor under incandescent lighting from floods? I'm shooting it entirely RAW, so I can fiddle with color correction later on the Mac. What say you? Feedback from the intelligentsia is welcomed, gas-baggy or not, whoopee cushion or not, and I won't criticize your reading ability. My only other long telephoto choices are 70-200 2.8 Sigma (10 years old), or a 50-200 Zuiko that I got with my E-1 (but I can use it on my more recent Panasonic. Jeffery Smith About to photography Bat Boy, like my reputation depends on it. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: Dare I use a 50-135 f/2.8 + K-7 to shoot a musical this week?
The Zuiko isn't very fast, so I've used it outdoors for the most part. Indoors, I'd probably have to go with 5.6 at the largest. On Nov 2, 2010, at 1:12 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: If 50-200 Zuiko is fast (like f/2.8), then it could be preferable because ultimately it will give you even closer reach. If you decide to go with K-7, I suggest a battery grip that may help your steadiness. On 11/2/2010 5:13 AM, Jeffery Smith wrote: I have been using faster lenses (77/1.8) for stage productions until now, but want to get a bit closer with a zoom. Do any of you who have this lens feel that it will focus reliably in sometimes dim stage lights with a K-7? Because of the added length, I'm taking a Porter bean bag to use as a rest. What ISO do I dare use indoor under incandescent lighting from floods? I'm shooting it entirely RAW, so I can fiddle with color correction later on the Mac. What say you? Feedback from the intelligentsia is welcomed, gas-baggy or not, whoopee cushion or not, and I won't criticize your reading ability. My only other long telephoto choices are 70-200 2.8 Sigma (10 years old), or a 50-200 Zuiko that I got with my E-1 (but I can use it on my more recent Panasonic. Jeffery Smith About to photography Bat Boy, like my reputation depends on it. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: Dare I use a 50-135 f/2.8 + K-7 to shoot a musical this week?
I have a K-x and used it (for the first time) on the last stage production. I didn't really have any DARK dark scenes, so it worked okay. I know this show will have some serious darkness. Jeffery On Nov 2, 2010, at 3:46 AM, Larry Colen wrote: On Nov 1, 2010, at 8:13 PM, Jeffery Smith wrote: I have been using faster lenses (77/1.8) for stage productions until now, but want to get a bit closer with a zoom. Do any of you who have this lens feel that it will focus reliably in sometimes dim stage lights with a K-7? Because of the added length, I'm taking a Porter bean bag to use as a rest. If any of the cast are wearing black on their costumes, you may be able to use that to tweak the color balance closer to correct. What ISO do I dare use indoor under incandescent lighting from floods? I'm shooting it entirely RAW, so I can fiddle with color correction later on the Mac. What say you? Feedback from the intelligentsia is welcomed, gas-baggy or not, whoopee cushion or not, and I won't criticize your reading ability. My only other long telephoto choices are 70-200 2.8 Sigma (10 years old), or a 50-200 Zuiko that I got with my E-1 (but I can use it on my more recent Panasonic. Do you know anybody with a K-x you can borrow? Jeffery Smith About to photography Bat Boy, like my reputation depends on it. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- 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. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: Dare I use a 50-135 f/2.8 + K-7 to shoot a musical this week?
Good close, sharp shots Paul. I'll probably start with an ISO of 1600 and see how it goes. I've never used the setting that allows me to choose shutter speed and aperture while letting the camera choose the ISO. This seems like a good opportunity to try that feature. Jeffery On Nov 2, 2010, at 5:14 AM, paul stenquist wrote: I can second Christine's recommendation. I've shot performers with the DA* 50-135 and K7 with good results. Many wide open at ISO 6400 in dim lighting. No problem with autofocus or exposure. I believe all of these are either ISO 5000 or 6400, most at f2.8: http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=981706 Paul On Nov 2, 2010, at 12:20 AM, Christine Aguila wrote: The DA* 50-135mm should focus reliably for you under the conditions you describe below. As to ISO, I had to shoot stage production photos last August--the play was Hay Fever. I shot ISO 800 for the entire shoot. A bit of noise saturation reduction in Lightroom worked just fine. Here's the link: www.caguila.com/caguila/hayfever . f4 was used with the DA 16-45mm for all shots. I have used the DA* 50-135mm under some really, and I say, really, dark stage situations, shooting really slow. The lens focused reliably, but it was hard to keep steady, but that's my error, not equipment error. For the shoot previously mentioned, it was just me, the director, and the actors on stage. I was not shooting from the audience during performance time, so I was able to get close and didn't need the longer lens. Cheers, Christine - Original Message - From: Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 10:13 PM Subject: Dare I use a 50-135 f/2.8 + K-7 to shoot a musical this week? I have been using faster lenses (77/1.8) for stage productions until now, but want to get a bit closer with a zoom. Do any of you who have this lens feel that it will focus reliably in sometimes dim stage lights with a K-7? Because of the added length, I'm taking a Porter bean bag to use as a rest. What ISO do I dare use indoor under incandescent lighting from floods? I'm shooting it entirely RAW, so I can fiddle with color correction later on the Mac. What say you? Feedback from the intelligentsia is welcomed, gas-baggy or not, whoopee cushion or not, and I won't criticize your reading ability. My only other long telephoto choices are 70-200 2.8 Sigma (10 years old), or a 50-200 Zuiko that I got with my E-1 (but I can use it on my more recent Panasonic. Jeffery Smith About to photography Bat Boy, like my reputation depends on it. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: On behalf of William Robb
Because it was gratuitously offensive? Because its sole purpose was to offend? If Robb wanted to call him that, he could have done it offlist, but wanted an audience to see it. The audience saw it. If this list were entirely composed of racist, sexist, homophobic members, then that sort have post would have gone either unnoticed or been applauded. But some of what are apparently the idiotic members didn't like it, and nobody applauded. Jeffery -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: On behalf of William Robb
Steve, this wasn't in response to your post. It was in response to the previous ones that saw no fault in the ft post. Our two posts went out at about the same time. Jeffery On Nov 2, 2010, at 9:45 AM, Jeffery Smith wrote: Because it was gratuitously offensive? Because its sole purpose was to offend? If Robb wanted to call him that, he could have done it offlist, but wanted an audience to see it. The audience saw it. If this list were entirely composed of racist, sexist, homophobic members, then that sort have post would have gone either unnoticed or been applauded. But some of what are apparently the idiotic members didn't like it, and nobody applauded. Jeffery -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: On behalf of William Robb
Religion, politics, sexual orientation, and race are not good topics for any forum, and generally ignite a purposeless day or two of hostility. Inasmuch that they have nothing to do with Pentax or photography, they are best avoided. On the other end of the spectrum, there are photography forums that are so closely monitored, one can get a reprimand for bringing up the topic of fountain pens. Just last year, I got a rebuke for asking for opinions on folding bikes on the LUG. Jeffery On Nov 2, 2010, at 10:36 AM, Tom C wrote: I'm not condoning name-calling or derision of any list member, however I didn't find it as gratutiously offensive as you apparently did, and the one called that is certainly public about it. There's been plenty of other deriding comments on the list in the past, including regarding people with religious beliefs. I didn't see list members raising a hoopla about that. Seems a double standard exists. On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: Because it was gratuitously offensive? Because its sole purpose was to offend? If Robb wanted to call him that, he could have done it offlist, but wanted an audience to see it. The audience saw it. If this list were entirely composed of racist, sexist, homophobic members, then that sort have post would have gone either unnoticed or been applauded. But some of what are apparently the idiotic members didn't like it, and nobody applauded. Jeffery -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Dare I use a 50-135 f/2.8 + K-7 to shoot a musical this week?
Tomorrow night. I'll have something posted soon after. I'm going to try a PAW again, to get my butt out of the house and shooting. With digital, there's not excuse not to have a Picture A Day no less than a Picture A Week. Jeffery Jeffery On Nov 2, 2010, at 10:59 AM, John Sessoms wrote: Who Dares Wins I say Go for it! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: On behalf of William Robb
Hey! Everyone should pack heat! To protect ourselves against Oh, never mind. Jeffery On Nov 2, 2010, at 11:18 AM, Charles Robinson wrote: On Nov 2, 2010, at 10:52, Jeffery Smith wrote: Religion, politics, sexual orientation, and race are not good topics for any forum, and generally ignite a purposeless day or two of hostility. Inasmuch that they have nothing to do with Pentax or photography, they are best avoided. You forgot guns! -Charles -- Charles Robinson - charl...@visi.com Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: On behalf of William Robb
What?! The rest of the world isn't following our lead?! Jeffery On Nov 2, 2010, at 11:51 AM, Tim Øsleby wrote: Pardon me for pointing at the obviouis. But this aint USA, it is PDML, a multicultural email list. So. There is no THE Constitution here, at least not as I am aware off. For the record: I'm not atacking the constitution. You Tom, and others may, may practise the constitution as mush as you like, but please don't take it for granted here. Doing so, could be interpreted as, how do I put this? A bit self centered? -- MaritimTim http://maritimtim.blogspot.com/ 2010/11/2 Tom C caka...@gmail.com: It was Godfrey's consititutional right to act in such a way to provoke Bill, who exercised his constititional right to use a word that some found offensive, who then tried to suppress that constitutional right. On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 12:05 PM, eckinator eckina...@gmail.com wrote: 2010/11/2 Tom C caka...@gmail.com: Seems a double standard exists. instead you /could/ - note: not /should/ - be glad that someone cares. by the way the idiots who care are the same people who are respecting your exercise of your constitutional right to call them idiots as a matter of opinion - as you can see noone took offense at that. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: On behalf of William Robb
Or vigilante group. Down here in the lower 48, we're far more concerned about the cell phone images of Brett Favre's pee pee. Jeffery On Nov 2, 2010, at 2:39 PM, Tom C wrote: The one with the closest prison or firing squad takes precedence. It's called the Law of Proximity. On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 3:25 PM, Scott Loveless sdlovel...@gmail.com wrote: I guess a more applicable question might be if J. Random Foreigner writes something that could be considered illegal speech in his own country, but sends it to a list server in a country where his words would be protected, who's laws apply? Or rather, who's laws should apply? -- Scott (IANAL) Loveless -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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.
I just voted!
Hope you the other Yankees got out there and voted, though I did feel like I was playing pin the tail on the donkey in that voting booth. Jeffery -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I just voted!
Thanks for the video, Bob. I feel much better about who I voted for down here. My guy can actually...talk. Jeffery On Nov 2, 2010, at 3:40 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote: I voted today too, and as the last two governors of Illinois are convicted felons, I voted carefully. Here is a little viral video about the one I didn't vote for. http://www.quinnforillinois.com/content/internet-sensation-glee-ad-over-10-hits This political system is not functioning too well. :-( Regards, Bob S. On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: Hope you the other Yankees got out there and voted, though I did feel like I was playing pin the tail on the donkey in that voting booth. Jeffery -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K-5 here, high iso samples
Indeed. A couple more quantum leaps in noise control and maybe we can relegate anti-shake to the history books. Just set the shutter speed at 1/8,000. Jeffery On Nov 2, 2010, at 6:42 PM, Steven Desjardins wrote: iso 12800. I find it amazing that you even get a usable image, and that one is pretty good. The portrait is a bit noisy full crop, but looks fine as a normal image. On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 6:43 PM, Christine Aguila cagu...@earthlink.net wrote: Hi Paul: Looks good. I'm VERY interested in low light auto focus performance of the K5. Would very much like to hear your views on this topic. Cheers, Christine from Chicago -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: On behalf of William Robb
Now, that's the third bladder-like object used to describe someone that I have seen on this forum in the past week. (1) [pompous] gas bag (2) whoopee cushion (3) douche bag Amy I missing any? g Jeffery On Nov 3, 2010, at 7:48 AM, Doug Franklin wrote: On 2010-11-03 4:40, Larry Colen wrote: On the subject of bigotry, here is George Takei's commentary on Clint McCance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UACK93xF-FE Larry the Cable Guy Now I don't care who you are, that's funny! /Larry the Cable Guy -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: On behalf of William Robb
Try extraditing someone from Canada to the US. It's a PITA. We had a hell of a time getting Charles Ng to come home. Jeffery On Nov 3, 2010, at 7:58 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: Oh, it is then that you and I were looking at it from different angles. I wasn't worried about Doug, as he was not the one saying nasty things. I thought about the punishability of the non-U.S. citizen misbehaving on the list so that such a question might arise. Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: On behalf of William Robb
I agree that ad hominem attacks should be strongly discouraged. If someone wishes to attack another personally, he should do it off-list. As they say in saloons, take it outside, guys. When ad hominem attacks happen on-list, they invariably disrupt the forum and the function for which this list was made (discussion of Pentax photography). Jeffery On Nov 3, 2010, at 8:13 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: On 11/3/2010 3:05 PM, Jeffery Smith wrote: Try extraditing someone from Canada to the US. It's a PITA. We had a hell of a time getting Charles Ng to come home. Jeffery Well, I really don't want to get any deeper into this other than repeating myself that either we have to have some kind of rules (mostly I think, it will be honor bound) of this community, or this whole discussion is not worth the recycled electrons... Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K-5 at ISO 1600
That ISO performance is the great equalizer. One rarely sees that ISO coupled with a relatively slow shutter speed and a relatively large aperture. It would be great for low light shots and shadowed shots in street photography. Jeffery On Nov 3, 2010, at 10:36 AM, P N Stenquist wrote: While testing the camera at 6400 and beyond is fun, good results at ISO 800 and 1600 are much more important for my work. I shot this little garden nymph at ISO 1600 with the DA* 50-135 at dusk yesterday. I converted in my normal fashion with a bit of fill light and curve adjustment. It's sharpened a bit post conversion with PhotoShop's Smart Sharpen Gaussian. http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=11894538 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: OT - Atomic Bomb Test Photographs
Gaaa! Nuclear, not new-cue-lar! Oh well, Carter and Bush II couldn't pronounce it either. Jeffery On Nov 3, 2010, at 3:39 PM, Cotty wrote: Wondrous, shocking, frightening, all at once. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/09/14/science/20100914_atom.html -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche -- http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: sorting, storing carrying filters
I finally bought one of the multidrawer tool chests for most of my photo equipment (such as those used by car mechanics, sold at Sears). The drawers are fairly shallow, and I can lock the chest inasmuch as I'm in a high crime area. Jeffery On Nov 3, 2010, at 6:09 PM, Larry Colen wrote: Over the years, I've accreted a fair number of filters, in a variety of size. I mostly keep them stuffed in a drawer, and when I can, I keep them in the little plastic case they came in. Is there a good, preferably economical, way to keep them sorted and safely stored? Likewise, what about carrying the ones I might need for a day of shooting with me? -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
The K-5 vs K-x vs K-7
I shot a few hundred frames last night at a dress rehearsal. Took a K-7 and K-x with me, with a 77 1.8 lens and 50-135 2.8 lens. There were MANY people on the stage so both lenses ended up being a bit too long. But both had some problems with the dramatic lighting conditions. When I tried using 1600 ISO, the camera tended to blow out highlights (the singers' faces). I did try a few at 3200. The zoom was awkward to use under such low light, so the next time I will take the three limited lenses (31/43/77) and leave the long ordnance at home. But I kept saying to myself I wish I had the K-5 for this. I could tell on my LCD that this high ISO frames were noisy. Just how I can handle that in PhotoShop/Bridge will tell me whether or not I have to get a K-5 before the next theater production. So, I'm keeping a close eye on these K-5 posts from early users. Jeffery By the way, why does the hood of the 35-150 zoom have a square tab that is removable? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The K-5 vs K-x vs K-7
I'm going to start editing tonight. I'll give the Topaz a look. I really need a new Mac (mine is 4 years old). Jeffery On Nov 4, 2010, at 11:59 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: Jeffery, The removable square tab is so that when a polarizing filter is mounted you can adjust it. Lightroom 3 has some good noise reduction algorithms and Boris mentioned liking Topaz. Regards, Bob S. On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: I shot a few hundred frames last night at a dress rehearsal. Took a K-7 and K-x with me, with a 77 1.8 lens and 50-135 2.8 lens. There were MANY people on the stage so both lenses ended up being a bit too long. But both had some problems with the dramatic lighting conditions. When I tried using 1600 ISO, the camera tended to blow out highlights (the singers' faces). I did try a few at 3200. The zoom was awkward to use under such low light, so the next time I will take the three limited lenses (31/43/77) and leave the long ordnance at home. But I kept saying to myself I wish I had the K-5 for this. I could tell on my LCD that this high ISO frames were noisy. Just how I can handle that in PhotoShop/Bridge will tell me whether or not I have to get a K-5 before the next theater production. So, I'm keeping a close eye on these K-5 posts from early users. Jeffery By the way, why does the hood of the 35-150 zoom have a square tab that is removable? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The K-5 vs K-x vs K-7
My Mac seems to struggle (run very slowly) with Lightroom and Aperture, so I've sort of avoided them until a get a screamer of a new computer. I give Topaz a run for the money this weekend when I edit 400-some shots. What I'm not looking forward to is removing a microphone from the side of the face of nearly everyone in the muscical. Jeffery On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:43 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: On 11/4/2010 7:22 PM, Jeffery Smith wrote: I'm going to start editing tonight. I'll give the Topaz a look. I really need a new Mac (mine is 4 years old). Jeffery Jeffery, Topaz is giving you full (no watermarks, reduced size, etc) 30 days trial. I tried - it seems to be doing noticeably better job than LightRoom 3.2, though it is also very good compared to LR 2.x. So, I'm gonna buy it. Your mileage may obviously be different. Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The K-5 vs K-x vs K-7
Doubling the memory in it would probably make a big difference. I think it is 2gb. I'm a novice with Macs (I did all sorts of hardware upgrades on my first few PCs). The Apple Store down here could do it, but they are nested in the most overcrowded mall in the metropolitan New Orleans area, so I would have to walk half a mile wit a huge computer under my arm. What I NEED to do is scour YouTube for a video on how to increase your memory in a Mac. Jeffery On Nov 4, 2010, at 1:30 PM, Mat Maessen wrote: On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 2:19 PM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: My Mac seems to struggle (run very slowly) with Lightroom and Aperture, so I've sort of avoided them until a get a screamer of a new computer. I give Topaz a run for the money this weekend when I edit 400-some shots. How much memory do you have in it? That may be all you need to make it run quite a bit faster. Cheaper than a new computer. -Mat -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: OT - Atomic Bomb Test Photographs
As a full time biologist, they use it when talking about the nucleus of an atom and also as the nucleus of a cell. My cell physiology professor from 1970 used to blow a gasket when a student asked about the nuculus. The Dean of Allied Health at my college can't pronounce it either, so he just says Nuke Med for nuclear medicine. The worst, though, was the Nuclear Medicine Department at Tulane Medical School. They ordered a sign for the door, and it came back as Unclear Medicine Lab. They thought it was cute, and kept it on the door. Jeffery On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:48 PM, Miserere wrote: On 3 November 2010 17:22, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: Gaaa! Nuclear, not new-cue-lar! Oh well, Carter and Bush II couldn't pronounce it either. Jeffery As a one-time nuclear physicist (sort of), this is a pet peeve of mine. We should get one of these T-shirts, Jeff: http://rlv.zcache.com/nucular_is_now_pronounced_nuclear_tshirt-p2350035787086046633370_400.jpg Men's version, of course. As for the photos, they frighten me... --M. -- \/\/o/\/\ -- http://WorldOfMiserere.com http://EnticingTheLight.com A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: Boris Peso #47 - Topaz Cat (technical)
That works for me, Boris! I'll wait for the K-3(?) to upgrade. Jefery On Nov 4, 2010, at 1:27 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: Hi! Just bought Topaz Denoise. Here is an image I processed with it. K-5 is good, but I am not buying it - there is no need, really. Have a look: http://pentax-ways.blogspot.com/2010/11/peso-2010-47-topaz-cat.html Please be brutal and honest, especially those of you who have experience working with noise reduction software, as I need to learn. Thanks. Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The K-5 vs K-x vs K-7
I think you're right. At least they have flesh colored mikes now. They used to be darker. Jeffery On Nov 4, 2010, at 1:59 PM, Charles Robinson wrote: On Nov 4, 2010, at 13:19, Jeffery Smith wrote: My Mac seems to struggle (run very slowly) with Lightroom and Aperture, so I've sort of avoided them until a get a screamer of a new computer. I give Topaz a run for the money this weekend when I edit 400-some shots. What I'm not looking forward to is removing a microphone from the side of the face of nearly everyone in the muscical. I wouldn't even try. You'll go nuts. If they were wearing microphones, just accept that they'll have microphones on. Maybe if one person wants one photo all large and shiny for a big blowup it might be worth making the effort, but I wouldn't do it as a matter of course on every single image. -Charles -- Charles Robinson - charl...@visi.com Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: OT - Atomic Bomb Test Photographs
Every year, he presents the Experiential Learning Award on Honors Night, and he can't pronounce it either. He says Experential Award. He's a Cajun from Abbeville, and they pronounce everything oddly. Jeffery On Nov 4, 2010, at 2:32 PM, Miserere wrote: Maybe it's just me, but if you're going to be Dean at a college that includes Nuclear Medicine, the first question at the interview for the job should be can you pronounce 'nuclear' for us, please? If they can't, they don't get the job. Yeah, I'd be that draconian. I took a graduate Nuclear Astrophysics course taught by my supervisor and she hated nucular. There was a guy in the class who used it and she spent the whole semester correcting him until he eventually came around to saying it right. Seriously, I need to get that T-shirt :-D --M. On 4 November 2010 14:40, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: As a full time biologist, they use it when talking about the nucleus of an atom and also as the nucleus of a cell. My cell physiology professor from 1970 used to blow a gasket when a student asked about the nuculus. The Dean of Allied Health at my college can't pronounce it either, so he just says Nuke Med for nuclear medicine. The worst, though, was the Nuclear Medicine Department at Tulane Medical School. They ordered a sign for the door, and it came back as Unclear Medicine Lab. They thought it was cute, and kept it on the door. Jeffery On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:48 PM, Miserere wrote: On 3 November 2010 17:22, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: Gaaa! Nuclear, not new-cue-lar! Oh well, Carter and Bush II couldn't pronounce it either. Jeffery As a one-time nuclear physicist (sort of), this is a pet peeve of mine. We should get one of these T-shirts, Jeff: http://rlv.zcache.com/nucular_is_now_pronounced_nuclear_tshirt-p2350035787086046633370_400.jpg Men's version, of course. As for the photos, they frighten me... --M. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: Choosing a Digital Camera
chimping photoshopping On Nov 4, 2010, at 6:55 PM, Walter Hamler wrote: The little talk went very well with the group today. I was pleased with the general level of interest and knowledge from most. I received one question that I thought was interesting, coming from a senior; How many new words have been added to our daily lexicon because of digital pgotography? So, what new words are we using today because of digital photography? Walt On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 12:10 AM, Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com wrote: On Oct 14, 2010, at 05:34 , P. J. Alling wrote: While some people I know in their 90's are quite savvy to the ways of computers, which let's face it, a digital camera is, just wrapped in a, (sometimes, no so), camera like skin. Most liked the UNIX world, that mostly existed up until about 20 years ago, i.e. single use devices that accomplished that function single function well. They're not comfortable with complex user interfaces, (and when those interfaces are hidden in multi-layer menus, they become more confused). They cant see the tree for the forest. Welcome to my sister's world. Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com “ It is still true, as was first said many years ago, that people are the only sophisticated computing devices that can be made at low cost by unskilled workers!” — Martin G. Wolf, PhD -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: seems Texas stole Photo
What is going on with that state? Last month, someone discovered that the Texas state ballot has (and has had for some time) the Chilean flag rather than the Texas flag printed on it. Jeffery On Nov 5, 2010, at 10:21 AM, John Sessoms wrote: From: Bran Everseeking http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/state/suit_centers_on_silhouette_cowboy_106424843.html http://is.gd/gJxbH Makes me glad most of my shots are just of shoe box quality. not really but bleh Yeah, but if he's got a *registered* copyright on that image he's got 'em roped and tied already! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: Choosing a Digital Camera
Wikipedia also led the #1 digital encyclopedia (MS Encarta) to fold. There are some strange people (like a guy at my workplace) who type complete bulls**t into Wikipedia just to see how long it will be online before someone discovers the errors. And unlike the gold standard, Wikipedia has far more articles on things you would not expect to find in the Encyclopedia Britannica, particularly biographies. Jeffery On Nov 5, 2010, at 11:36 AM, P. J. Alling wrote: Wikipedia has been compared to the Gold Standard, (Britannica), and been found to be in most cases just as accurate. Both encyclopedias contain errors, sometimes huge errors. Bottom line you need multiple sources, and don't trust any of them unduly. On 11/5/2010 7:06 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: wikipedia is wholely made up by public hearsay. On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 2:27 AM, Bob Wp...@web-options.com wrote: I was checking definitions of chimping and Wikipedia claims it is and acronym: Chimp is an acronym for CHeck IMage Preview. sounds like horseshit to me. (Does horseshit make a noise? whatever). I reckon that's a back-formation that someone's come up with. Does wikipedia provide any kind of evidence? It also mentions the ooh, ooh, ahh, ahhh connection. I will continue to cite the latter. On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 11:44 PM, Steven Desjardinsdrd1...@gmail.com wrote: New terminology might be a more appropriate phrase. This typically includes current words given new meanings. There are very few totally new words with a truly short term etymology. Even completely new physical properties like those that arise in fundamental physics are usually named with current words given new meanings, e.g., strangeness. On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 9:21 PM, paul stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote: On Nov 4, 2010, at 9:04 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: paul stenquist wrote: But it's not a new word, just a new usage. I believe the original question was a little poorly worded and what was really intended was more like What words have been added to your vocabulary because of digital photography? In other words, the words need not be new, but rather new to you, and they need not be exclusive to digital photography as long as digital photography was how you were introduced to them. Perhaps. But my answer would still be none, and the premise would be less interesting. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Steve Desjardins -- Steve Desjardins -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- 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. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Bat Boy musical with the K-7
Good news: the K-7, 77/1.8, and 50-135 2.8 performed admirably, and I had no issues with noise. I DON'T have to rush out and get a K-5 (...unless I want to). Bad news: in the relative darkness, I tried to change modes from Aperture Priority to Shutter Speed Priority, but accidentally hit the Green (auto) mode. That meant my RAW mode went to 2mp JPEG mode. This seemed to immediately have the effect of completely blown highlights on the singer getting the spotlight. I used a leather bean bag to steady the camera on a rung of a 20-foot step ladder. I'll try to post a few pics this weekend. Based on the K-x and the K-7, along with the great Pentax primes, I cannot imagine ever being tempted by Canon or Nikon; I'm more than satisfied with the results I'm getting right now. If I get any more camera equipment in the next year, it will probably be the 15mm pancake. Have any of you had any experience with this lens? I cannot use the Pentax Gallery on any of my Macs, at least not the option where you choose the lens and look at the pics taken with that lens. Going to next photo simply toggles back and forth between two frames; Jeffery -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: Minor question of Englsih
My only points of reference are Sean Connery and the Fat Bastard. Jeffery On Nov 5, 2010, at 6:38 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: Scottish, no matter how much the Scots deny it, is an English dialect. Sting certianly didn't grow up speaking Gaelic. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: PESO: Life is fun again...
STOP IT! I DON'T NEED A K-5! Jeffery On Nov 5, 2010, at 6:53 PM, Ralf R. Radermacher wrote: It's been awful. Stormy and driving rain. I was soaking wet within minutes. Still, I had to try it out. http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com/2010/11/werkendam.html Taken tonight at the lock between the Canal Albert and the river Meuse in Lanaye, Belgium. Pentax K-5, SMC-M 2/35 mm, ISO 1600, f2.8, 1/20 s. Freehand, no tripod. Grain/noise similar to FP4+ at ISO 200 in Microphen. Life is fun again. :-) Ralf -- Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany Blog : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf Web : http://www.fotoralf.de -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: Apropos of nothing really
I remember the outrage when Vaughn Meader came out with the LP The First Family in 1962 in which he imitated President Kennedy's voice. My 7th grade teachers were infuriated with this lack of respect for the president. What a difference 50 years makes. Jeffery On Nov 5, 2010, at 7:04 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: There are so many ways that's just wrong... On 11/5/2010 11:32 AM, Daniel J. Matyola wrote: Americans may have fallen out of love with Barack Obama, but the president of the United States is still an object of affection for the Chinese: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/8107377/Obama-sex-doll-for-sale-in-China.html On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 12:14 PM, P. J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote: I don't think you should be using Obama and blunt in the same sentence, too close to Lese Majeste. On 11/4/2010 1:59 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote: President Obama has to architect a new plan to blunt the Republicans. On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Brian Walterssupera1...@fastmail.fm wrote: On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 11:10 -0400, Christian Skofteland pterali...@aim.comwrote: On Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 10:16:23PM -0500, P. J. Alling wrote: When /will/ we stop referring to post processing as Digital Darkroom work... About the same time we stop using architect as a verb... Don't think I've come across that. A sample sentence? Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - IMAP accessible web-mail -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- 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. -- 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. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: PESO: Life is fun again...
And noise [or lack of] is always on my radar. I carefully followed the Fuji dSLRs with my interest focused on their relatively noise-free images at high ISO. Just 6 years ago, I was getting awful noise OUTDOORS in shadows with my Minolta digicam. Noise reduction is the quantum leap I'm always looking for. Accurate metering and focus, well that's icing on the cake. Jeffery On Nov 5, 2010, at 7:21 PM, Larry Colen wrote: On Nov 5, 2010, at 5:01 PM, Jeffery Smith wrote: STOP IT! I DON'T NEED A K-5! Unless you have use of high ISO, autofocus and accurate metering. I am very curious about how the performance compares with the K-x. My guess is that the noise is a stop or two better at 1600 or above, and that it looks significantly better between 400 and 1600. I am also very curious about night landscape photography using it, showing stars. The last test I did (using LR2) still showed my best results using the K20 at ISO 400. I haven't gone back and tried reprocessing those with LR3 and better noise reduction, but that ISO range seems to be the K-x weak spot. Higher ISO are just too noisy for starry sky photography. -- 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. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
OT - web editing software for Mac
I'm no longer a PC guy (computer platform OR politically correct). I used to maintain my web site with Namo Web Editor for Windows. I need to get a good web editor for the Mac to basically reconstruct my site from the ground up. I am familiar with both SandVox and Rapidweaver. Do any of you who don't use blogs, Flickr, etc. have any recommendations as to which Mac software might be best for maintaining a photo-based web site? Jeffery Smith -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: OT - web editing software for Mac
That is my preference too. I don't care much about WYSIWYG, preferring just to make some thumbnail pages and photo pages on a black background. I'll give it a look. Thanks Adam. Jeffery On Nov 7, 2010, at 1:43 PM, Adam Maas wrote: For text there is only one answer. BBEdit/textWrangler. For WYSIWYMG, I can't suggest anything since I avoid those tools like the plague. -Adam On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: I'm no longer a PC guy (computer platform OR politically correct). I used to maintain my web site with Namo Web Editor for Windows. I need to get a good web editor for the Mac to basically reconstruct my site from the ground up. I am familiar with both SandVox and Rapidweaver. Do any of you who don't use blogs, Flickr, etc. have any recommendations as to which Mac software might be best for maintaining a photo-based web site? Jeffery Smith -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT - web editing software for Mac
Thanks for your input, Godfrey. I used little more than an HTML editor for a couple of years. If I could make a page with a table on it, I could make a thumbnails page. If I could make a black page with a photo and some links on it, I could really do the less. It seems like the freebee html editor back then was a Microsoft product (Frontpage Express?). I've tried to find iWeb in my applications folder, but I must have deleted it. In fact, I may have deleted all of iLife when I got concerned about filling up my hard drive. I'll give Taco a look. Of the non-free editors out there, Freeway Express looks most like Name Web Editor, but I don't know a single soul who uses it, which is scary, Jeffery On Nov 7, 2010, at 6:08 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: I'm no longer a PC guy (computer platform OR politically correct). I used to maintain my web site with Namo Web Editor for Windows. I need to get a good web editor for the Mac to basically reconstruct my site from the ground up. I am familiar with both SandVox and Rapidweaver. Do any of you who don't use blogs, Flickr, etc. have any recommendations as to which Mac software might be best for maintaining a photo-based web site? BBEdit or TextWrangler are what I use the most, editing HTML. They're from the same company (Bare Bones Software). TextWrangler is the freebie version. BBEdit includes very good HTML templates for most HTML constructs and has a bit more powerful scripting capabilities. Another option is Taco HTML Edit from http://www.tacosw.com/. It is basically a 'smart' HTML editor with the ability to display live previews of your pages while you work if you so desire and a somewhat more sophisticated library of component templates that allow you to assemble some of the more modern, fancier bits of HTML UI easily. It's about $25, I think. I've used it a little bit, helping clients out with their HTML, and it works very well. Of course, iWeb comes free with Mac OS X. It's a WYSIWYG editor that I know gags AdamT, but it's quite good, produces very nice sites, and is pretty fast to learn and use. It produces good code that can be hosted on the MobileMe service or any other service (and exported to a local folder too). I had never touched it before when a client asked me if I could help her with something, so I fired it up and produced this test site in about six minutes: http://www.gdgphoto.com/iweb/ It has limitations but for a free website creation tool, it's darn good. (The consulting job earned me a nice fee ... and the client seems very happy with iWeb now ) -- 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: OT - web editing software for Mac
Thanks to all of you who replied to this email post. Most if not all of these programs have a free trial period, so I'm going to download a heap of them and see which has the look and feel I am most comfortable with. Thanks again! Jeffery On Nov 7, 2010, at 10:05 PM, Larry Colen wrote: On Nov 7, 2010, at 11:38 AM, Jeffery Smith wrote: I'm no longer a PC guy (computer platform OR politically correct). I used to maintain my web site with Namo Web Editor for Windows. I need to get a good web editor for the Mac to basically reconstruct my site from the ground up. I am familiar with both SandVox and Rapidweaver. Do any of you who don't use blogs, Flickr, etc. have any recommendations as to which Mac software might be best for maintaining a photo-based web site? Emacs. :-) -- 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. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: PAW44 - Bug
Hanging on for dear life? Jeffery On Nov 8, 2010, at 1:56 PM, DagT wrote: http://www.thrane.name/page3/page7/files/page7-1000-full.html K20D, da*50-...@80mm, 1/180s, f/13, ISO200 DagT http://www.thrane.name/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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.
Samsung lenses
This has undoubtedly been asked before, but here goes. Are Samsung cameras/lenses corresponding to similar Pentax items not sold in the USA? I recall that Samsung started a line of dSLR cameras and lenses (badged as Schneider) a year or two ago, but have never heard of or seen them since. Jeffery -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: peso: eye contact
Yeah, these days. I pretty much live that too. Jeffery On Nov 12, 2010, at 5:10 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote: and I live the old guy eyeing her -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: eye contact
DId you play with this image in black and white? It looks like it would be a natural for monochrome. Jeffery On Nov 12, 2010, at 6:42 PM, paul stenquist wrote: Thanks Christine. Took an hour off at the end of the day for photos. Hope to do more this weekend. Paul On Nov 12, 2010, at 7:30 PM, Christine Aguila wrote: Excellent! Great expression and body position. Great sense of traffic as well. Good one, Paul. Cheers, Christine - Original Message - From: P N Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 4:37 PM Subject: peso: eye contact -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: Darn techno advancements
Ditto on Open Office. Haven't had the urge to use MS Office in years. Jeffery On Nov 13, 2010, at 7:09 PM, Sandy Harris wrote: On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 1:53 AM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Staples has the Office dot mac for sale at $128 for the student and home version. Needs an intel processor and OS 10.5 Crap Open Office is free. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: peso - perfect pizza
This K-5 is looking like a speed demon. Thanks for all of the examples of what it can do at high ISO. Jeffery On Nov 13, 2010, at 8:36 PM, paul stenquist wrote: K-5 and DA* 60-250, ISO 3200 I've shot pics in this pizza place before. Always bounced flash off the ceiling. With the K-5, I just went with the available light. http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=11944334 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: Ken Rockwell LOVES the Pentax DFA 100mm f/2.8 macro!!!
Hard to look at his site for more than a minute without being reminded numerous times to donate money to him. Even the Hare Krishnas give it a rest every now and then. Jeffery On Nov 17, 2010, at 11:15 AM, Miserere wrote: Well, in a roundabout way... http://kenrockwell.com/tokina/100mm-f28.htm [dons flame suit for mentioning the unmentionable name] —M. \/\/o/\/\ -- http://WorldOfMiserere.com http://EnticingTheLight.com A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: digital bw
Photoshop allows a large measure of filter effects in converting color to BW, using slider tools that show the preview of the filter's effects. The biggest problem I have when shooting digital is blown highlights that I cannot burn and basically have to replace using cut a paste from an adjoining area. I've gotten to the point that I often have to use exposure compensation of -1 to avoid blown highlights. Jeffery On Nov 18, 2010, at 1:02 PM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: I've been looking at a lot of digital bw work this week. When you digitroids do this, do you employ filters like we filmaniacs do? I'm thinking that this might be a good Saturday a.m. experiment. When I look at the work on Pentax photo gallery, the Bw efforts seem to share a common fault: 3 tones -- near-black, near-white, zone 6. There just is not the tonal variance. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: digital bw
I'll be the first to admit that the digital color stuff still gives me a hard time. I'm not resistant when it comes to modern digital technology (and converted from the typewriter to the word processor very quickly), but all of the parameters in digital photography can be a bit overwhelming after decades in the analog world. I've been leaning toward shooting digital as though it were color slide film, and that's why the -1 exposure comp. The lighting conditions were a bit extreme (shade with some blown out sunlit areas, and theater, with some blown out highlights on the actor's face). I'll try to get my lingo right. ;-) Old habits die hard. I also still think of my Pentax lenses as x mm equivalent, which I need to stop doing. A 25 1.4 isn't all that much like a 50 1.4, even if it is on an Olympus E-1. The field depth is astronomical. Jeffery On Nov 18, 2010, at 4:08 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: Photoshop allows a large measure of filter effects in converting color to BW, using slider tools that show the preview of the filter's effects. Filter effects isn't the right expression, nor is converting color to BW when you're talking about digital capture to producing BW results. It's somewhat sloppy language that has somehow become the standard. When you make an exposure with a digital camera and save it as a raw file, you are capturing an [x,y] array of linear gamma luminance intensities organized in an RGB mosaic. The process of 'raw conversion' into something intelligible to our eyes involves an interpolation of those RGB values into chrominance values per pixel and gamma correction of the luminance intensities to suit the way our eyes and brain work. A more precise word than 'conversion' is 'rendering'. Rendering an image to monochrome values rather than RGB values, well, since what we appreciate as BW photography is a translation of color values into luminances without chroma, and BW films and colored filters help us to control that translation by separating or smashing together color/intensity values into luminance values, what you're doing with the sliders in Photoshop is directly analogous to putting filters on the lens when exposing BW film. It's not a filter effect: it's filtering, period. ;-) The biggest problem I have when shooting digital is blown highlights that I cannot burn and basically have to replace using cut a paste from an adjoining area. I've gotten to the point that I often have to use exposure compensation of -1 to avoid blown highlights. That's a matter of proper exposure for the digital capture medium, Jeffery, which requires a different approach than metering for film negatives. You should only very rarely have to use negative EV Compensation UNLESS your subject matter is mostly dark and the significant area where you need detail is mostly bright highlights. (I would say if I looked at exposure compensation values for all of my past couple years exposures that my properly exposed photos showed a 100:1 preponderance of +EV valued EV Compensation, not -EV values...) The old adage used for negative film was expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights, the notion being to get enough light energy onto the medium to activate the chemicals and record detail where you wanted it in the dark areas, and then control the gamma (or contrast curve) to keep from blocking up the highlights through development techniques. Digital capture sensors, as said above, always capture in a linear gamma. Their behavior at the limits of exposure are different from film media: the highlight limit is a hard stop when the photosite cannot record any additional light energy, the minimum exposure limit is a soft threshold where detail can no longer be distinguished from noise. Another factor: since the capture gamma is linear and has to be stretched and squeezed into a more curvaceous shape for our eyes and brain to interpret it correctly, it turns out that we need to stuff as many bits towards the high end of the range as we can (without hitting the saturation limit) so that we can stretch the values down into the low end without losing too much data along the way. So the goal in exposing properly for a digital sensor is to consider them as more similar to transparency film ... Avoid over-exposure on the highlights like the dickens and let the rest fall where it might ... but with a lot more control since we can push the rendering curve around with great freedom in the raw processing phase. I usually look at a scene with the idea of evaluating a) what's the overall reflectivity of the scene? and b) where are my Zone IX highlight values? A scene which has a lot of bright in it and a small contrast ratio to handle usually means adding exposure from an averaging meter's normal recommendation (most scenes, as it turns out). A scene
Re: It's a great lens, but not what I bought it for
The same experience with the Sigma 30/1.4. I bought it to shoot indoors at wide open aperture. Not very good. Much better outdoors at 5.6. Unfortunately, it's big and heavy, and Pentax makes a 31 that is smaller and better wide open. Right now, the 30/1.4 is a body cap for my K100. Jeffery On Nov 19, 2010, at 5:24 PM, Larry Colen wrote: When I bought my sigma 20/1.8, the intention was to use it for indoor, low light, dance photography. For various reasons, mostly involving manual focus, it hasn't proven to be as good for that as I had hoped. On the other hand, I'm finding it very handy as a wide angle macro lens. For example, a lot of the time that I'm shooting mushrooms, to get the angle I want, I need to be very close to the subject because roots of the stump, or the ground, is in the way if I'm trying to use a longer lens. Does anybody else have lenses that they bought for one use, that they later found are much better for something else entirely? -- 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. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: It's a great lens, but not what I bought it for
The K-5 might be better wit the Sigma 30/1.4. I may be able to get decent at 2.8 or 3.5 at higher ISO. But once you have the 28/2 Zeiss and 31/1.8 Pentax, things go back to normal and better. The Sigma 30/1.4 seems like good choice for the outdoor papparazi. Center forcuses well, but not te perimeter. Jeffery On Nov 19, 2010, at 7:42 PM, Tim Bray wrote: What killed the Sigma 30/1.4 for me was the better noise processing in Lightroom 3. I'd rather shoot at high ISO with the sweeter, lighter Pentax primes and just live-with/fix-up the noise. -T On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: The same experience with the Sigma 30/1.4. I bought it to shoot indoors at wide open aperture. Not very good. Much better outdoors at 5.6. Unfortunately, it's big and heavy, and Pentax makes a 31 that is smaller and better wide open. Right now, the 30/1.4 is a body cap for my K100. Jeffery On Nov 19, 2010, at 5:24 PM, Larry Colen wrote: When I bought my sigma 20/1.8, the intention was to use it for indoor, low light, dance photography. For various reasons, mostly involving manual focus, it hasn't proven to be as good for that as I had hoped. On the other hand, I'm finding it very handy as a wide angle macro lens. For example, a lot of the time that I'm shooting mushrooms, to get the angle I want, I need to be very close to the subject because roots of the stump, or the ground, is in the way if I'm trying to use a longer lens. Does anybody else have lenses that they bought for one use, that they later found are much better for something else entirely? -- 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. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO firetruck
Well, you did warn us that it was every so often. We'll wait for a while. :-) Jeffery On Nov 21, 2010, at 4:08 AM, Larry Colen wrote: I kind of liked the lights of the firetruck in the rain. Fortunately I had the 16-50 on the K20 so I was undaunted by the weather. ISO 400 f/2.8 1/15 sec at 24mm -- 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. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: Stochastic photography
I was never one to bracket when shooting film, and most of my wasted images were due to dull subject matter and poor choice of subject/angle/telephone pole projecting from the subject's head, not exposure. My biggest hurdle with digital is what seems to be a lack of exposure latitude that I can only attribute to the automation of the camera making some bad choices. That said, spray and pray is becoming more of a norm for me. After all, when my high capacity memory card keeps telling me that I have 999 exposures left, then what the hell. But I wish that this were not the case. If the digital camera would give me a sweet spot ISO from which I had some confidence that exposure over the entire frame could be salvaged no matter what the camera chose for me, I could spend a lot more time composing and moving around, thinking more about the subject. For now, I have decided never to use spot metering on a dSLR. The area being spot measured looks great, but that doesn't mean I can salvage the blown highlights. Jeffery On Nov 21, 2010, at 7:33 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote: Hi all, For the past couple of days, I seem to keep encountering references to stochastic photography -- or spray and pray if you will, and it's piqued my interest. It's not that I'm considering actively pursuing the practice so much as I wonder how much my current style (method?) could actually be considered stochastic. Having never worked in the vicinity of another photographer before, my days out shooting with Ted Beilby were, as I said, educational. We took nearly diametrically opposed approaches. Clearly, Ted came out with better quality shots than I did. He was much more methodical and exacting and produce much more highly textured images than I did. At the same time, I came out with some images that, while not as polished as Ted's, did have some redeeming value -- at least I thought they did. I was so arrested by the sheer amount of potential subject matter that I felt I had to get as many different shots as I could in order to get a reasonable account of my experience, so I shot hand-held, almost exclusively. Knowing that I'd have at least several hundred shots to go through at the end of my trip (also, due to a relative lack of PC processing power and memory), I stuck to shooting single exposures in jpeg. Some subjects, I chose to take three or four different shots from different perspectives and focal depths, while others I shot once or twice and moved on. And, that's typically the way I do things. A large part of the reason for that is that I simply don't trust what the camera shows me on its display to be an accurate depiction of what I'm going to see when I load it onto the computer. The same goes for my perception of any given scene at the time. I come away with rough approximation in my mind, and when I get home, I'm usually fairlyclose, but never seemingly dead-on in my expectations. And, of course, a good bit of what I do shoot simply defies staging in any practical sense. I'm not going to be able to tell a butterfly how to hold its wings, or a bird where to position itself within my frame. So, I have to make snap judgments and several attempts. To the extent that I'm able to dictate composition, I do make a fairly diligent attempt at it. But, at the same time, I don't try to control every minute detail -- essentially because the vast majority of the subjects I shoot are in an environment that simply defies control. So, I was just curious as to the thoughts of the folks on the list as to how much my approach would be considered spray and pray by more seasoned photographers, and how much it would benefit if it were less so. Thanks for any input anyone has to offer. -- Walt http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/waltergilbert http://waltgilbert.posterous.com/ http://polipix.posterous.com/ Contact Me Facebook http://www.facebook.com/walt.gilbertFlickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/walt_gilbert/Twitter http://twitter.com/walt_gilbert --- @ WiseStamp Signature http://my.wisestamp.com/link?u=ypgdb385pypw7fhbsite=www.wisestamp.com/email-install. Get it now http://my.wisestamp.com/link?u=ypgdb385pypw7fhbsite=www.wisestamp.com/email-install -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: Stochastic photography
My problem has always been the reverse...things looking dead when they are really alive. Jeffery On Nov 21, 2010, at 8:17 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote: Ha! I wasn't familiar with Brownian Movement photography before. So, I've already learned something by asking. -- Walt http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/waltergilbert http://waltgilbert.posterous.com/ http://polipix.posterous.com/ Contact Me Facebook http://www.facebook.com/walt.gilbertFlickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/walt_gilbert/Twitter http://twitter.com/walt_gilbert --- @ WiseStamp Signature http://my.wisestamp.com/link?u=ypgdb385pypw7fhbsite=www.wisestamp.com/email-install. Get it now http://my.wisestamp.com/link?u=ypgdb385pypw7fhbsite=www.wisestamp.com/email-install On 11/21/2010 7:59 PM, Doug Franklin wrote: On 2010-11-21 20:33, Walter Gilbert wrote: Hi all, For the past couple of days, I seem to keep encountering references to stochastic photography -- I prefer to think about it as Brownian. ;-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: Stochastic photography
My first camera with metering had a spot meter only, and I soon learned the zone system of metering, relying primarily on using skin tone as the spot for metering. It usually left me with enough latitude that I could dodge and burn in the darkroom and have a usable print. Before that, I used incident light metering with a selenium meter. It also gave me film with enough latitude to salvage detail in overexposed areas. Jeffery On Nov 21, 2010, at 8:52 PM, paul stenquist wrote: Yes, a spot meter is a good tool, but it's only valuable if you can relate the spot you're metering to 18% gray and then compensate accordingly. With the K7 and K5, matrix metering is accurate enough that spot metering is rarely needed. However, I do sometimes use it when shooting something like a neutral colored bird against a white sky background. Paul On Nov 21, 2010, at 9:41 PM, Nick David Wright wrote: Jeffery, you're missing the point of the spot meter. IMHO spot meter was never intended to be used in auto mode (at least not without exposure lock and exposure compensation). The spot meter is there specifically so you can /know/ your highlights will not be blown. See this blog post: http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/do-not-fear-the-sun.html ~nick On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 8:10 PM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: I was never one to bracket when shooting film, and most of my wasted images were due to dull subject matter and poor choice of subject/angle/telephone pole projecting from the subject's head, not exposure. My biggest hurdle with digital is what seems to be a lack of exposure latitude that I can only attribute to the automation of the camera making some bad choices. That said, spray and pray is becoming more of a norm for me. After all, when my high capacity memory card keeps telling me that I have 999 exposures left, then what the hell. But I wish that this were not the case. If the digital camera would give me a sweet spot ISO from which I had some confidence that exposure over the entire frame could be salvaged no matter what the camera chose for me, I could spend a lot more time composing and moving around, thinking more about the subject. For now, I have decided never to use spot metering on a dSLR. The area being spot measured looks great, but that doesn't mean I can salvage the blown highlights. Jeffery On Nov 21, 2010, at 7:33 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote: Hi all, For the past couple of days, I seem to keep encountering references to stochastic photography -- or spray and pray if you will, and it's piqued my interest. It's not that I'm considering actively pursuing the practice so much as I wonder how much my current style (method?) could actually be considered stochastic. Having never worked in the vicinity of another photographer before, my days out shooting with Ted Beilby were, as I said, educational. We took nearly diametrically opposed approaches. Clearly, Ted came out with better quality shots than I did. He was much more methodical and exacting and produce much more highly textured images than I did. At the same time, I came out with some images that, while not as polished as Ted's, did have some redeeming value -- at least I thought they did. I was so arrested by the sheer amount of potential subject matter that I felt I had to get as many different shots as I could in order to get a reasonable account of my experience, so I shot hand-held, almost exclusively. Knowing that I'd have at least several hundred shots to go through at the end of my trip (also, due to a relative lack of PC processing power and memory), I stuck to shooting single exposures in jpeg. Some subjects, I chose to take three or four different shots from different perspectives and focal depths, while others I shot once or twice and moved on. And, that's typically the way I do things. A large part of the reason for that is that I simply don't trust what the camera shows me on its display to be an accurate depiction of what I'm going to see when I load it onto the computer. The same goes for my perception of any given scene at the time. I come away with rough approximation in my mind, and when I get home, I'm usually fairlyclose, but never seemingly dead-on in my expectations. And, of course, a good bit of what I do shoot simply defies staging in any practical sense. I'm not going to be able to tell a butterfly how to hold its wings, or a bird where to position itself within my frame. So, I have to make snap judgments and several attempts. To the extent that I'm able to dictate composition, I do make a fairly diligent attempt at it. But, at the same time, I don't try to control every minute detail -- essentially because the vast majority of the subjects I shoot are in an environment that simply defies control. So, I
Re: New zoom
Based on the reviews I've read, I would concur with Paul. I would love to have either lens. Jeffery On Nov 22, 2010, at 5:19 PM, paul stenquist wrote: The DA* 16-50/2.8 is terrific. Some early samples had element alignment problems, but that seems to have been resolved. The DA 12-24 is also very good. Paul On Nov 22, 2010, at 6:11 PM, drd1...@gmail.com wrote: Well, today my FA 20-35 took a tumble and now the focus is so tight the camera can't drive it. aside from the K28, this was my widest lens. Still, I may replace is with a more modern zoom. What suggestions do you have, based on your experience. I admit I find it increasingly difficult to keep swapping lenses in a travel situation. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: New zoom
And the 16-50 goes all the way up to where the 50-135 can take over, so those two lenses can cover most situations admirably. I have the 50-135, and the 16-50 was going to be my next wanna-have, until Pentax complicated the situation with the K-5 introduction. Jeffery On Nov 22, 2010, at 6:23 PM, paul stenquist wrote: On Nov 22, 2010, at 6:29 PM, Jeffery Smith wrote: Based on the reviews I've read, I would concur with Paul. I would love to have either lens. Jeffery BTW, while I like both lenses, I find the 16-50 much more useful. The wide end is adequate for most situations, and with a range all the way up to what amounts to short telephoto, it's a great all-purpose lens. Paul On Nov 22, 2010, at 5:19 PM, paul stenquist wrote: The DA* 16-50/2.8 is terrific. Some early samples had element alignment problems, but that seems to have been resolved. The DA 12-24 is also very good. Paul On Nov 22, 2010, at 6:11 PM, drd1...@gmail.com wrote: Well, today my FA 20-35 took a tumble and now the focus is so tight the camera can't drive it. aside from the K28, this was my widest lens. Still, I may replace is with a more modern zoom. What suggestions do you have, based on your experience. I admit I find it increasingly difficult to keep swapping lenses in a travel situation. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: New zoom
Gaaa! (mustbuyglass.) On Nov 22, 2010, at 7:22 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: Get the glass. Bodies may come and go, but lenses are forever. :-) I have a 16-50 and it's really great, especially paired to the 50-135. -bmw On 10-11-22 7:42 PM, Jeffery Smith wrote: And the 16-50 goes all the way up to where the 50-135 can take over, so those two lenses can cover most situations admirably. I have the 50-135, and the 16-50 was going to be my next wanna-have, until Pentax complicated the situation with the K-5 introduction. Jeffery On Nov 22, 2010, at 6:23 PM, paul stenquist wrote: On Nov 22, 2010, at 6:29 PM, Jeffery Smith wrote: Based on the reviews I've read, I would concur with Paul. I would love to have either lens. Jeffery BTW, while I like both lenses, I find the 16-50 much more useful. The wide end is adequate for most situations, and with a range all the way up to what amounts to short telephoto, it's a great all-purpose lens. Paul On Nov 22, 2010, at 5:19 PM, paul stenquist wrote: The DA* 16-50/2.8 is terrific. Some early samples had element alignment problems, but that seems to have been resolved. The DA 12-24 is also very good. Paul On Nov 22, 2010, at 6:11 PM, drd1...@gmail.com wrote: Well, today my FA 20-35 took a tumble and now the focus is so tight the camera can't drive it. aside from the K28, this was my widest lens. Still, I may replace is with a more modern zoom. What suggestions do you have, based on your experience. I admit I find it increasingly difficult to keep swapping lenses in a travel situation. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: New zoom
I have the Tamron, which is why I can't justify buying something that is very similar to it. But it is a very nice, small, light zoom lens. I've had it since 2004 and I don't think it is still being manufactured. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-nov-04.shtml This is the article that basically told me of its existence back in 2004. He obviously liked it too. Jeffery On Nov 22, 2010, at 11:58 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: On 11/23/2010 1:11 AM, drd1...@gmail.com wrote: Well, today my FA 20-35 took a tumble and now the focus is so tight the camera can't drive it. aside from the K28, this was my widest lens. Still, I may replace is with a more modern zoom. What suggestions do you have, based on your experience. I admit I find it increasingly difficult to keep swapping lenses in a travel situation. It really depends on the monetary constraints. What comes to mind that seemingly wasn't mentioned or mentioned briefly is: 1. Sigma 24-60/2.8 - not as wide, but faster with very good sharpness and bokeh. Downsize - somewhat different colors and big filters. Beware of sample variation and back/front focus issues. Mine requires -7 focus correction with the K-7. 2. DA 16-45/4 - compared directly with your FA 20-35 by photozone. I don't have one, but whenever I borrowed one from fellow PDMLers it came out really good. 3. Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5 or 17-70/2.8-4.0. I tried the former when Jaume came to Israel and it was surprisingly good. 4. DA 17-70/4 SDM - successor of DA 16-45 in a sense. SDM is either an issue or a non-issue for you. 5. Tamron 17-50/2.8 - cheap alternative to DA* 16-50/2.8. But the IQ is anything but cheap. Actually it is very good judging from what I've seen from the same lens for Canon mount that my friends have. 6. FA 24-90/3.5-4.5 - wobbly build, good optics. With this one you'd loose a bit on the wide end but gain seriously on the long end. HTH. Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: DSLRs apparently banned in Kuwait except for the press
If I ever want to sell my Leica M6, I'll use the Kuwait Craigslist. Jeffery On Nov 23, 2010, at 2:40 PM, Doug Franklin wrote: http://thenextweb.com/me/2010/11/23/kuwait-dslr-camera-ban-now-in-effect/ I haven't been able to verify or refute the information so far. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: What's the advantage of DNG?
There are several RAW file types. I usually use DNG instead of PEF (both are RAW) because the DNG is a more universal format that PS recognizes. Sony has apparently figured out how to make compressed RAW files that don't lose any detail in the compression. Jeffery On Nov 23, 2010, at 5:36 PM, Eric Weir wrote: On Nov 23, 2010, at 5:29 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote: On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Eric Weir eew...@bellsouth.net wrote: Regarding converting to DNG, I will now expose my naiveté by [1] admitting that, again for the time-being, I am shooting jpeg, [2] asking what's the advantage of DNG. Think of it like having a print (jpg) versus a negative (DGN) to create a print. The jpg's are smaller files rendered from the original in camera digital info. The DGN's are bigger files and retain more detail that can be brought out in software like Lightroom. 5 years ago when digital was new, one of our UK PDML'ers made a discovery. He was shooting jpg's exclusively and tried some RAW (DGN) shots. He posted side by side comparison shots and the detail in the white areas (black areas) was just plain better in the DGN shots. More of the original image was maintained. More could be brought out in difficult lighting situations. That was enough for me, I stopped using jpg's and switched to DGN's Thanks, Bob. I know that subject heading broadcasts my utter ignorance to the world, but the original one was clearly no longer appropriate. So RAW and DGN are the same thing? I figured that at some point down the road I'd switch to RAW, but am deterred for now by concerns about memory and storage and, most important, the fact that my understanding of processing and editing is more limited -- non-existent would be more appropriate -- than even my understanding of file management in LR. Better to leave the processing to the camera for now, I think. -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: What's the advantage of DNG?
I would switch to RAW even with non-existent processing skills. The RAW conversion process isn't really difficult, and your results will probably be better. I don't like the camera doing any sharpening, color balance, etc. Jeffery On Nov 23, 2010, at 6:31 PM, Eric Weir wrote: Given my practically non-existent processing skills, it's probably wise for me to stick with jpeg for the moment? -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: What's the advantage of DNG?
I'm pretty sure that on the K-7, a 16 gb card holds about 650. Jeffery On Nov 23, 2010, at 7:00 PM, Eric Weir wrote: On Nov 23, 2010, at 7:41 PM, Jeffery Smith wrote: I would switch to RAW even with non-existent processing skills. The RAW conversion process isn't really difficult, and your results will probably be better. I don't like the camera doing any sharpening, color balance, etc. Thanks, Jeffery. I may end up giving it a try sooner than I imagined. We'll see. How many raw-formatted images on a 4Gb memory card? -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: wide angle zoom comparison...
I vote for #2, and I don't even have it. Jeffery On Nov 23, 2010, at 7:10 PM, Tanya Love wrote: So I really am needing a good wide angle zoom. I've been procrastinating on it for ages and making do with my 18-55mm kit lens, but it's not fast enough, and optically, could be better too. Sooo, would love to hear your words of wisdom in regards to comparing these: 1. Sigma Lens 20-40mm f/2.8 EX DG ASP - about $400 2. PENTAX-DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 ED AL[IF]SDM - about $1400 3. Pentax Lens 12-24mm f/4 ED AL IF DA - about $1269 4. Sigma Lens 10-20mm f/3.5 EX DC HSM - about $927 Obviously the 20-40 would be a whole lot less in terms of $$ and you usually get what you pay for, but I thought I'd throw it out there to see if anyone has any experience with it? I'm fairly certain that I am set on #2, but interested to here all of your feedback first... Tan.x. Tanya Love Photographer www.lovebytes.com.au www.facebook.com/LoveBytesPhoto www.loveandsoul.com.au m: 0458 006 740 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: What's the advantage of DNG?
RAW processing isn't really scary. It just uses files that have not been modified by in-camera processing/tweaking. The only thing that is really noticeably off is color balance, but the RAW processing software usually has the choices that the camera would (auto, tungsten, daylight, shade, etc.) that you can choose from a menu, and you can lighten, darken, change contrast. When shooting theater productions, I usually don't correct for colors as the slightly warm tone of the floodlights is aesthetically pleasing. Jeffery On Nov 23, 2010, at 7:23 PM, Eric Weir wrote: On Nov 23, 2010, at 8:10 PM, Larry Colen wrote: LR3 does an amazing job of raw processing. So my interim solution -- till I get to where I can begin to do the processing -- could be to let LR3 do the processing instead of relying on the camera to do it? Keep in mind most of my images are garbage right now. Not being able to go back and reprocess them decades from now is not going to be any great loss. Would raw files converted by LR3 look as good as jpegs? -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: OT: State Quarters
In New Orleans, the locals used to refer to dimes (in general) as silver dimes. That threw me for a while since silver dimes had not been made for years when I moved here. I used to run across the occasional Indian Head cent. I guess we are really dating ourselves with these admissions. ;-) Jeffery On Nov 23, 2010, at 8:03 PM, Daniel J. Matyola wrote: When I was a young lad, I would find an Indian Head cent in the change every now and them. I would go through the cash registers at my grandfathers butcher shop and my uncle's gas station, looking for Indian Head pennies and Buffalo nickles. Dan On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 8:28 PM, Ann Sanfedele ann...@nyc.rr.com wrote: Actually right - hence ... :) Richard (my sweetheart to died in 1993) had a batch of wheaties... I look at the pennies I get and I keep finding them though not many, of course, and not in such good shape but I have a hundred or so ann Daniel J. Matyola wrote: One almost never sees wheaties or steel cents in circulation any more. Dan On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 5:43 PM, Ann Sanfedele ann...@nyc.rr.com wrote: Now JOhn and I have lots of info :-) I only mentioned looking for s' cause John did -- prior to his email I didn't know a thing about it... aside from thinking it would be cute to have all the states.. or that someone MIGHT wnat oe in the distant future, all I know about coins are what wheaties are and if I got a 1943 copper coin I could get a prety nice price for one. I have one steel coin from 1943 that I wrote a story about in grade school... thinking it was the unusual one think I I dentified with being out of step? you betcha ann Daniel J. Matyola wrote: Ann: I'm afraid you won't find many S mintmarks. The San Francisco Mint no longer makes coins for general circulation. They specialize in proof coins, which are specially struck to have greater luster, and special issues. http://catalog.usmint.gov/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10001storeId=10001productId=15253langId=-1parent_category_rn=10211 Any S or W (West Point) mint marks you find are special issues, not meant for general circulation. If you find one in regular change, there is is a good chance it was stolen from someone's collection, by someone too stupid to realize its value, who then spent it at face value instead of selling it as a collectible. I usually limit myself these days to buying the annual uncirculated mint sets and proof sets directly from the US Mint. Dan On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Ann Sanfedele ann...@nyc.rr.com wrote: John -- this is odd .. I jsut started doing this too.. I have 43 different ones so far - in less than a month... but I hadn't thought about looking at whether they were P or D and didnt know about S at all Im only keeping one of each state to make a set and just though tit would be nice to have or to save and possibly sell for $1.00 profit or so. I have to just a magnifier to see which state I have in text but I'm getting to know the pictures. Now I'm gonna want to look at each to see if they have an S lol glad you are recouping I didn't get to wish you well _before_ the procedure as I didnt see your post until yesterday... ann John Sessoms wrote: Does anyone know more about the state quarters than I do? Let me rephrase that ... Does anyone know LESS about the state quarters than I do? I just found something odd. At least it's odd to me. Ever since the program began, I have tried to keep every one of the state quarters I've received in change. Just tuck 'em into the watch pocket on my jeans and they tend to pile up around the house. I think I've spent less than $10.00 of the state quarters since 1999. Mostly because of my east coast location I get 'P' quarters. Every once in a while I sort through the piles and separate them by state put 'em into plastic tubes. Any 'D' quarters I get are segregated to a separate pile. I don't get enough to justify separate tubes for each state, but I can sort them by year. Anyway, I'm rambling ... I needed some change just now and grabbed a dollar's worth out of the pile I hadn't sorted through yet and decided to make sure I wasn't grabbing a 'D' quarter. Instead, there was a South Carolina 'S' quarter. I understood the 'S' were all silver proof sets, but this is a regular clad quarter. Try to keep the explanation simple like me. ;-D -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss
Re: What's the advantage of DNG?
The size of the LCD on your camera is TINY. You can probably see if the image is grossly out of focus, but I wouldn't expect much more. It's amazing that we get spoiled by the increasing size of LCD screens on the newer cameras, and then when we pick up a starkist, it looks like a postage stamp sized LCD. Jeffery On Nov 23, 2010, at 8:07 PM, Eric Weir wrote: On Nov 23, 2010, at 8:31 PM, Jeffery Smith wrote: RAW processing isn't really scary. It just uses files that have not been modified by in-camera processing/tweaking. The only thing that is really noticeably off is color balance, but the RAW processing software usually has the choices that the camera would (auto, tungsten, daylight, shade, etc.) that you can choose from a menu, and you can lighten, darken, change contrast. When shooting theater productions, I usually don't correct for colors as the slightly warm tone of the floodlights is aesthetically pleasing. Thanks, Jeffrey. It's getting to the point where I need to stop asking questions and just try it. That said, I really am a novice, relying a lot on the immediate feedback that digital photography provides to help me become a better photographer. If I'm shooting raw, what will the images on the lcd screen tell me about the quality of my images? -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: What's the advantage of DNG?
A full frame dSLR in RAW mode with a 1 gb card is more like what you would get on a roll of film. :-) Jeffery On Nov 23, 2010, at 7:27 PM, Eric Weir wrote: On Nov 23, 2010, at 8:04 PM, eckinator wrote: 367 on 2GB for a 10 MP K10D so should be closer to 1000 on 4GB for a 6 MP starkist I reckon Wow. Nowhere near what I thought it would be. I imagined in the neighborhood of what you'd get from a roll of film Had to think about that 6 MP starkist. I never know how to tell people what camera I have, other than that it's a Pentax. -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: wide angle zoom comparison...
Not a problem in the South. You just have to go through the window INTO a house, and the owner shoots you. Jeffery On Nov 23, 2010, at 8:29 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote: Lens prices make me glad I live in a town where there are no structures tall enough from which to defenestrate myself. -- Walt On 11/23/2010 7:10 PM, Tanya Love wrote: So I really am needing a good wide angle zoom. I've been procrastinating on it for ages and making do with my 18-55mm kit lens, but it's not fast enough, and optically, could be better too. Sooo, would love to hear your words of wisdom in regards to comparing these: 1. Sigma Lens 20-40mm f/2.8 EX DG ASP - about $400 2. PENTAX-DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 ED AL[IF]SDM - about $1400 3. Pentax Lens 12-24mm f/4 ED AL IF DA - about $1269 4. Sigma Lens 10-20mm f/3.5 EX DC HSM- about $927 Obviously the 20-40 would be a whole lot less in terms of $$ and you usually get what you pay for, but I thought I'd throw it out there to see if anyone has any experience with it? I'm fairly certain that I am set on #2, but interested to here all of your feedback first... Tan.x. Tanya Love Photographer www.lovebytes.com.au www.facebook.com/LoveBytesPhoto www.loveandsoul.com.au m: 0458 006 740 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: What's the advantage of DNG?
One of the ironic mistakes that Sigma made was having RAW only dSLRs. That ensured that the photographer had the maximum potential files, but because the camera was ostensibly aimed at amateurs, it backfired badly as being perceived as a crucial weakness of the camera. John Bean (UK) used to blow me away with his Sigma dSLR images. Jeffery On Nov 23, 2010, at 9:02 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: I would switch to RAW even with non-existent processing skills. The RAW conversion process isn't really difficult, and your results will probably be better. I don't like the camera doing any sharpening, color balance, etc. In particular, if you are using Lightroom anyway, the processing for raw or JPEG or TIFF or PSD files is presented by the exact same tools and UI, so if you can edit one you can edit any of them. The difference is that with raw files you have a lot more processing potential to work with than any of the others. Lightroom's standard calibration and camera profile defaults for raw files are generally quite good (although usually different from the in-camera JPEG rendering options) so there's little real difference between doing the simple effort of bringing in JPEGs and outputting them to size and doing the same thing with raw files. As soon as you start to adjust things, however, the greater resiliency and capabilities of the raw files are immediately apparent. -- 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: What's the advantage of DNG?
I agree that the RAW only was absolutely not their Achilles heel. Their optics are getting better, but they need to work on build quality, reliability, and focus issues. I have a few, but don't recommend them. Jeffery On Nov 23, 2010, at 9:22 PM, Adam Maas wrote: There's so much wrong with the SD series DSLR's (and their SA series film SLR predecessors) that it's hard to nail down anything close to a crucial weakness. No JPEG wasn't a big issue given that pretty much everything else about the Sigma's sucked worse (Bodies that would have been obsolete if 10 years older, AF which barely kept up with a Maxxum 7000, overly small, low-resolution sensors with ridiculous marketting, an inability to get good files over ISO 400, bad metering, very limited lens options, poor handling, high pricing, an inability to ship within 2 years of announcement, etc). The one thing the Sigma's have going for them is very nice per-pixel sharpness (the much vaunted colour accuracy of the Foveon X3's is in fact non-existent, Bayer sensors produce significantly more accurate colour due to having less channel overlap. The only colour-related advantage of Foveon is that colour aliasing is impossible). -Adam On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:13 PM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: One of the ironic mistakes that Sigma made was having RAW only dSLRs. That ensured that the photographer had the maximum potential files, but because the camera was ostensibly aimed at amateurs, it backfired badly as being perceived as a crucial weakness of the camera. John Bean (UK) used to blow me away with his Sigma dSLR images. Jeffery -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: wide angle zoom comparison...
The 16-50 is about $750 in the US. You are down under? Jeffery On Nov 23, 2010, at 10:43 PM, Tanya Love wrote: Thanks for all of the feedback guys. Yep, I know that the AOV is quite varied in this grouping - I am more interested really in the widest end, and the speed (and of course overall image quality etc). I'm really thinking that at f4 the 12-24 is just that bit too slow. I know that it is a lovely lens and I considered it a while back but f4, with moving babies and darkish interiors. Of course, when I get my hands on my new K-5, it won't be such an issue... I do know also that the 16-50, isn't too much different from the 18-55 kit lens that I currently have, but you know I NEVER use it unless it is for an interior or a funky looking fashion shot and it is almost ALMOST used at 18mm. I'd love something a little wider, but not to the point of being fish eye, which is why I included the 16-50. I don't EVER use zooms anymore unless I really have to. I shoot almost exclusively these days with my FA50mm 1.7 or my FA100m f2.8 macro and very occasionally with the 18-55mm or I also have a 28-70mm/f2.8 Tokina that is getting on now but is a huge, heavy lens and gives fine results and used to be my main lens in my wedding photography days... Anyways, I think I pretty much have it narrowed down to either the: 2. PENTAX-DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 ED AL[IF]SDM - about $1400 Or 4. Sigma Lens 10-20mm f/3.5 EX DC HSM - about $927 I just think that the 12-24mm is just that bit too slow. Interested to hear any further thoughts? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: wide angle zoom comparison...
Robert White (England) used to sell Voigtlander stuff below the US prices, and I bought quite a bit of stuff from him for a few years. I know that shipping to/from US/AUS can be prohibitive, are there also VAT issues? I once thought of buying an Epiphone guitar from Australia (a discontinued model), but the shipping via air was prohibitive. And you can forget getting a bicycle shipped from AUS to US. Jeffery On Nov 23, 2010, at 11:28 PM, Brian Walters wrote: On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 22:54 -0600, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: The 16-50 is about $750 in the US. You are down under? Tan is. The interesting thing about prices down under is that, although the $A has been approaching or at parity with the $US in recent months, lens prices have remained high in comparison with those in the US. It's a much smaller market, of course. The prices Tan quoted are about right for one of the more reputable on-line sellers here. They would probably be even higher at the usual High Street shops. Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ On Nov 23, 2010, at 10:43 PM, Tanya Love wrote: Thanks for all of the feedback guys. Yep, I know that the AOV is quite varied in this grouping - I am more interested really in the widest end, and the speed (and of course overall image quality etc). I'm really thinking that at f4 the 12-24 is just that bit too slow. I know that it is a lovely lens and I considered it a while back but f4, with moving babies and darkish interiors. Of course, when I get my hands on my new K-5, it won't be such an issue... I do know also that the 16-50, isn't too much different from the 18-55 kit lens that I currently have, but you know I NEVER use it unless it is for an interior or a funky looking fashion shot and it is almost ALMOST used at 18mm. I'd love something a little wider, but not to the point of being fish eye, which is why I included the 16-50. I don't EVER use zooms anymore unless I really have to. I shoot almost exclusively these days with my FA50mm 1.7 or my FA100m f2.8 macro and very occasionally with the 18-55mm or I also have a 28-70mm/f2.8 Tokina that is getting on now but is a huge, heavy lens and gives fine results and used to be my main lens in my wedding photography days... Anyways, I think I pretty much have it narrowed down to either the: 2. PENTAX-DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 ED AL[IF]SDM - about $1400 Or 4. Sigma Lens 10-20mm f/3.5 EX DC HSM - about $927 I just think that the 12-24mm is just that bit too slow. Interested to hear any further thoughts? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Or how I learned to stop worrying and love email again -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax Camera Spelling Fail
One must dispose of those batteries in an appropriate manner. Apparently you have to swallow them first. Jeffery On Nov 24, 2010, at 8:57 AM, drd1...@gmail.com wrote: That should make it popular with older photographers. -Original Message- From: Tanya Love tanyal...@bigpond.com Sender: pdml-boun...@pdml.net Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 14:28:38 To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'pdml@pdml.net Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: RE: Pentax Camera Spelling Fail Bwahahaha! -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Walter Gilbert Sent: Monday, 22 November 2010 2:22 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Pentax Camera Spelling Fail Don't remember seeing this posted to the list, so forgive me if this is old news. But, I couldn't *not* share it. http://spellingfails.com/post/1314299088/pentax-cameras-spelling-fail -- Walt http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/waltergilbert http://waltgilbert.posterous.com/ http://polipix.posterous.com/ Contact Me Facebook http://www.facebook.com/walt.gilbertFlickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/walt_gilbert/Twitter http://twitter.com/walt_gilbert --- @ WiseStamp Signature http://my.wisestamp.com/link?u=ypgdb385pypw7fhbsite=www.wisestamp.com/emai l-install. Get it now http://my.wisestamp.com/link?u=ypgdb385pypw7fhbsite=www.wisestamp.com/emai l-install -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K-5, ISO 12800 beer bottle to play guitar!
It's nearly 5,000 pixels wide. On Nov 25, 2010, at 12:16 PM, Dario Bonazza wrote: I find this picture quite fascinating in more than one way: www.dariobonazza.com/public/K5_00898_1.jpg K-5, ISO 12800, 1/200s f/4, Sigma 17-70mm @70mm f/4 (full aperture) focused on the guitar. Dario -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
K-5 available again at BH...for a few hours
This K-5 must be selling like hotcakes. I signed up for an in stock alert from BH. The K-5 apparently go back into stock yesterday but sold out yesterday. They're now backordered again. Jeffery -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: K-5 available again at BH...for a few hours
I had added it to my cart (the K-5). I balked for a few hours. When I went back and signed in, it had been removed from my cart with an explanation that they were out of stock again. My fault for balking. Jeffery On Nov 25, 2010, at 10:04 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote: Jeffery, I had the same with the 31mm Limited lens. I couldn't get it ordered before it was out of stock. I called and asked how to get the lens. They had me order one and charge it. One was shipped to me about 3 days later. Regards, Bob A. On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: This K-5 must be selling like hotcakes. I signed up for an in stock alert from BH. The K-5 apparently go back into stock yesterday but sold out yesterday. They're now backordered again. Jeffery -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K-5 available again at BH...for a few hours
I have to wait a few weeks anyway. I missed my window of opportunity for having a place to mail it. Faculty are no longer allowed to receive mail at the college, so I have to wait until the beginning of Xmas break to have it mailed to my home. Jeffery On Nov 26, 2010, at 11:02 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: Talk to a person... On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: I had added it to my cart (the K-5). I balked for a few hours. When I went back and signed in, it had been removed from my cart with an explanation that they were out of stock again. My fault for balking. Jeffery On Nov 25, 2010, at 10:04 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote: Jeffery, I had the same with the 31mm Limited lens. I couldn't get it ordered before it was out of stock. I called and asked how to get the lens. They had me order one and charge it. One was shipped to me about 3 days later. Regards, Bob A. On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: This K-5 must be selling like hotcakes. I signed up for an in stock alert from BH. The K-5 apparently go back into stock yesterday but sold out yesterday. They're now backordered again. Jeffery -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K-5 available again at BH...for a few hours
That is absolutely the effect it has. And now there are such draconian rules on computer usage at the college, one might as well go home and use his/her computer at home instead. For some reason, people don't understand that if you make everything illegal, nobody will do anything. On Nov 26, 2010, at 2:06 PM, drd1...@gmail.com wrote: That's a pain. WL figured that doing that would make faculty go home early to wait for packages. -Original Message- From: Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net Sender: pdml-boun...@pdml.net Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 11:23:46 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail Listpdml@pdml.net Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: K-5 available again at BH...for a few hours I have to wait a few weeks anyway. I missed my window of opportunity for having a place to mail it. Faculty are no longer allowed to receive mail at the college, so I have to wait until the beginning of Xmas break to have it mailed to my home. Jeffery On Nov 26, 2010, at 11:02 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: Talk to a person... On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: I had added it to my cart (the K-5). I balked for a few hours. When I went back and signed in, it had been removed from my cart with an explanation that they were out of stock again. My fault for balking. Jeffery On Nov 25, 2010, at 10:04 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote: Jeffery, I had the same with the 31mm Limited lens. I couldn't get it ordered before it was out of stock. I called and asked how to get the lens. They had me order one and charge it. One was shipped to me about 3 days later. Regards, Bob A. On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@bellsouth.net wrote: This K-5 must be selling like hotcakes. I signed up for an in stock alert from BH. The K-5 apparently go back into stock yesterday but sold out yesterday. They're now backordered again. Jeffery -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: Boy
Has a certain Lensbaby or Holga feel to it. Jeffery On Nov 28, 2010, at 9:52 AM, SV Hovland wrote: http://album.heime.org/Default.aspx?albummode=Pagealbumpath=%2falbum%2ftemporary%2fIMGP0587.JPG Taken with K-5 and DA70/2,4 in Sandnes, Norway today. Created in the camera with several filters. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: with blurb, matte or lustre paper?
I think it is like pearl (sort of a shiny matte, like Agfa paper from 30 years ago). Jeffery On Nov 30, 2010, at 6:32 PM, Larry Colen wrote: I've got no idea what they mean by lustre. Anybody know what the differences are? Which is better? -- 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. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: OT - We are not alone?
Strange finding. They discovered a bacterium that uses arsenic in place of phosphorus in its DNA. That is somewhat earth-shaking in the biology field, as no other organism on earth has been able to substitute other elements in DNA. Jeffery On Nov 30, 2010, at 3:46 PM, Brian Walters wrote: http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2010/nov/HQ_M10-167_Astrobiology.html Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - The professional email service -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: PESO - Trust and Obey!
Love a good street photo. Jeffery Sent from my iPad On Apr 22, 2012, at 20:45, frank theriault knarftheria...@gmail.com wrote: An alternate title might be If there's really a God, get me out of here: http://knarfinthecity.blogspot.ca/2012/04/trust-and-obey_22.html Hope you enjoy. Comments always welcome. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: Anybody still using the *istD?
I kept mine because it is so small and light with the 40/2.8. Most of what I've shot in the past 4 years has been indoors, low light (college plays and musical productions) with the K-x or K-5. Jeffery On Apr 23, 2012, at 4:59 PM, David J Brooks wrote: Nope, i sold mine amd my sisters a few years back. I regret not keeping one of them had i known the problems future cameras would have for flash, and to do IR. The G3 works well, but i miss the extra lenses. Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: Mr. Bunnell on lens pricing...
I had heard some time (over a year) ago that some catastrophic setbacks in the production of their play station cost so much money, they would never make any money on it and would likely lose a load of money that would have to be made up through other parts of Sony. Jeffery On Apr 24, 2012, at 10:58 AM, Stan Halpin wrote: Recent articles in various newspaper business sections have talked about Sony Corp's attempts to stop losing money. The general impression is that they have far too many product lines with much competition rather than cooperation across various fiefdoms within the corporation. The new President (CEO?) has stated an intent to focus on three key products: TV's, digital imaging, and something else that I have forgotten. The previous President (CEO?) has stated that the strategy is a good one and that he was unable to get the various engineers to work toward common goals; everyone is apparently trying to be the one to develop the next Walkman. So he is skeptical that the strategy can be implemented. So anyway, SONY is in trouble, has stated an intent to keep digital imaging as one of a few key product lines, and we shall see. stan On Apr 23, 2012, at 11:44 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: Boris, That's an interesting question. The rumor around here is that Sony is having profit problems. They should give the 35mm SLR's more time to take hold. I'm sure their point-n-shoot sales are being hit by 'no-name' competition, besides what Canon, Nikon, and other name brands are selling. Regards, Bob S. On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 11:21 PM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: On 4/23/2012 07:06, P. J. Alling wrote: I think Sony may have abandoned their full frame line. Both are discontinued and have been for some time. A pity really since the A900 was supposed to be quite nice, and the A850 was very inexpensive for what it was. It might be so. A pity really. I wonder if Nikon D800's sensor has Sony hands on it. If so I wonder what kind of agreement is signed between the two companies. Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: LR4 docs?
Godfrey, What have you been using in place of CS5? Do you just go with the RAW file editor that comes with the camera? Jeffery On Apr 24, 2012, at 12:24 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I've used Photoshop CS5 so little I see no point to upgrading yet again to CS6. It would be a waste of money and disk space for me. G -- 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: LR4 docs?
You have a Leica M9? [I'm JEALOU$] On Apr 24, 2012, at 2:55 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I use Lightroom almost exclusively. For borders and other such adornments, I have lately been using Flare and Snapseed rather than turning them myself in Photoshop. Lightroom 3 was included with the Leica M9. But I'd been using Lr for years already at that point ... ! :-) G On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@gmail.com wrote: Godfrey, What have you been using in place of CS5? Do you just go with the RAW file editor that comes with the camera? Jeffery On Apr 24, 2012, at 12:24 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I've used Photoshop CS5 so little I see no point to upgrading yet again to CS6. It would be a waste of money and disk space for me. G -- 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. -- 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: PESO: One Little Joy
G! I prefer dark brown freckles to light brown freckles. But girls are often traumatized by either form. Tell the girl I think they're cute. There's a Mexican boxer with freckles, and he's adored by his countrymen for them (Canelo Alvarez?). Sent from my iPad On Apr 24, 2012, at 20:53, Rick Womer rwomer1...@yahoo.com wrote: Nice composition and use of focus, and a very nice subject. To me the freckles are overdone, though; it looks as though she has some horrible hemorrhagic disease. Cheers, Rick http://photo.net/photos/RickW - Original Message - From: Walt Gilbert ldott...@gmail.com To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Cc: Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 11:43 PM Subject: PESO: One Little Joy Hi all, Having pulled out of my despondency with knowledge that I have a replacement for my A50/1.7 on the way, I thought I might as well pull out my original beloved lens, the M 50/2 -- the one I feared was destroyed when my cat knocked it off the dresser. It still feels a little weird while focusing -- though, that could be due to the fact that I'd gotten so used to using the A 50/1.7 K 50/1.4. In any event, I took it out into the yard and popped off a few shots before I headed out for a bit this evening. I have to say I'm pleased with the sharpness it produces -- I think it may even be just a smidge sharper than the A50/1.7. Here's one of the few shots I knocked out late this afternoon -- it's my next door neighbor's daughter, who happened to be outside playing while I was taking a few flower shots for my own amusement. I have to say, I'm pretty happy with the results: http://www.flickriver.com/photos/walt_gilbert/7108383777/ K20D, M 50/2, ISO 100, 1/200 sec, f/3.5(?) Freckles are one of my weaknesses when it comes to human subjects. I just find them enchanting. Nevertheless, this was a bit of a therapeutic shot. I still really like the lens -- a lot. I just wish it had A contacts. Is the A 50/2 as nice a lens as the M 50/2? I may look into one someday if it is. Comments, critiques and suggestions are, as always, eagerly solicited. Thanks! -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: Tripod
Manfrotto is pricing itself steeply these days. This Slik looks good for the price. http://www.amazon.com/Slik-Heavy-Duty-Tripod-Fluid-Effect-Built-In/dp/B6HOKW/ref=sr_1_2?s=electronicsie=UTF8qid=1335406182sr=1-2 Hard to tell how solid it is. This is one thing that is best bought in a camera store. I have two light, flimsy tripods that seem to have been designed for point-and-shoots. Jeffery Sent from my iPad On Apr 25, 2012, at 20:47, jn289 jn...@verizon.net wrote: Looking for some thoughts on a good pod to hold Pentax 300 F2.8, 500 F.4 Sigma Mirror, and the 500 F4.5 Pentax..What was I using last night was just shaking a little on moon photos..Thanks Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: OT PESO - Pale Horse Rider.
Good composition.and bokeh. Okay, you can't take credit for the latter, but can take credit for acquiring the lens and using it wide open. Jeffery Sent from my iPad On Apr 26, 2012, at 20:58, David Savage ozsav...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Dan. Dave On 27/04/2012, Daniel J. Matyola danmaty...@gmail.com wrote: A good one! Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 11:43 AM, David Savage ozsav...@gmail.com wrote: G'day All, One take during the day for a change: http://www.flickr.com/photos/disavage/7115893549/in/photostream/lightbox/ One of the riders at the York Motorcycle Festival. Enjoy, Cheers, Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K-5 and *new* lens purchase
If one was ever wondering if the Sigma 28/1.8 tended to flare, this should put the question to rest. Jeffery On Apr 27, 2012, at 3:06 PM, Darren Addy wrote: I've always been somewhat of a bottom-feeder when it comes to equipment (you remember me, Mr. Bang-for-the-buck Guy) so this K-5 is new territory for me (but I think I could get used to it). I'm very impressed by what I see of the K-5 so far. What I've never heard anybody talk about before (or maybe I wasn't paying attention) is how QUIET it is when you fire the shutter. I can take pictures up close behind people's back and they don't even hear it. Heck, *I* can hardly hear it! I think I'm in love. In another departure from my bottom-feeder ways, I ordered my first *new* lens yesterday. I made an unexpected lens sale and ordered the Sigma 28mm f/1.8 EX DG DF Macro AF with the windfall. It should be here next Friday. If nothing else, it should provide me with some faster exposure times the next time the Northern Lights decide to show themselves to South-Central Nebraska! Interesting images taken with this lens from Flickriver.com: http://www.flickriver.com/groups/sigma28mm18exdgapo/pool/interesting/ The seller has more and their price is more than right on this lens. If I'm not mistaken this lens will cover full frame (an important consideration if you are leaning toward Pentax announcing a FF one day) : ) http://www.ebay.com/itm/370564652825?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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: 100/2.8 Macro Issue - Thoughts?
My is seriously prone to search wildly for focus when I'm shooting close objects. Jeffery On Apr 27, 2012, at 4:13 PM, Tom C wrote: I've started having problems with this lens that are weird. I don't think it's operator error... It didn't want to AF last time I had it on (was using more as a telephoto). I just mounted it again, and had the same issue. It seems to hunt a bit but does not achieve focus and stops. It was on the 'A' setting and the view through the viewfinder was very dark. I turned the aperture ring to 2.8 and voila it focuses. I then returned it to 'A' and it focuses with no problem, as it always has, regardless of what I set aperture to via the body. However, if I take the lens off the camera, and put it back on, it's behavior goes to as stated earlier, it doesn't want to focus. I've repeated this half a dozen time and it's the same each time I try it. Idea's? Tom 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: K-5 and *new* lens purchase
I'm looking forward to seeing some images taken with the Sigma. A friend of mine just bought the Pentax 10-17, but I don't like the distortion of it. I'm hankering' for a good ultra wide angle, and it is going to either be Pentax or Sigma. Jeffery On Apr 27, 2012, at 3:50 PM, Darren Addy wrote: There are no bad lenses. Only lenses used badly. I'm not sure if some of those images are truly low contrast from flare, or if they have been lomographied with Instagram or something. In any event, in this day and age, there is no excuse not to know what you are getting when you purchase a lens. Between online galleries and owner reviews you can pretty much tell if a lens is going to fit your use for it. Fortunately, my use for it is probably not going to involve shooting directly into the sun very often. :) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.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.
