>It seems that roll film in Australia is very expensive. I expected the
>price
>to fall with the GST, but it didn't.
Of course not. :(
regards,
Alan Chan
_
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
Hi!
The following is what Pål wrote long ago about the 645n custom functions.
Antti-Pekka
Here are the 645n custom functions:
FUNCTIONS:
1) Half Stop Time Exposures
Allows you to change shutter speeds in 1/2 stop increments instead of full
stop increments
2) Program Shift
Allows you
i own the screwmount version (same lens)
and its OUTSTANDING! Grab it for
that price, you wont be sorry.
BTW, It sold for $2000 U.S. way back
in the 70's. I paid $1000 U.S. for mine
but the screwmount version is more collectable
I would think...
JCO
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL
- Original Message -
From: Simon King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 10:01 PM
Subject: HTML Test
> Can we now send HTML email to the list?
Yes, but it is still bad manners
William Robb
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To
Title: Message
i think the problem is that some members cant
receive HTML mail or dont wish to d/l larger emails.
- Original Message -
From:
Simon
King
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 2:11
PM
Subject: RE: HTML Test
It
would seem we
Title: Message
It
would seem we can.
Now
that's a worry
-Original Message-From: Simon King
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 28 August 2002 12:02
PMTo: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'Subject: HTML
Test
Can we now send HTML email to the
list?
Title: Message
Can we now send HTML email to the
list?
In a message dated 8/27/2002 7:16:08 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The autofocus version just happens to be in a store
nearby for $9,000.
Do you mean the 250-600 f5.6? I didn't know there was an autofocus 135-600?
-Brendan MacRae
Damn spell checker.
At 11:27 PM 8/27/2002 -0400, I wrote:
>Which means that I can ac heave higher quality with my cheap film scanner
>and even
>cheaper HP Printer. This is very sad.
>
>At 09:23 PM 8/27/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>> >But haven't we gotten used to a rather poor quality nowadays? I re
Which means that I can ac heave higher quality with my cheap film scanner
and even
cheaper HP Printer. This is very sad.
At 09:23 PM 8/27/2002 -0400, you wrote:
> >But haven't we gotten used to a rather poor quality nowadays? I recently
>looked at the B&W prints of my grandfather and I was amaz
-Original Message-
From: Christian Skofteland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 7:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Thanks Cesar
On Tuesday 27 August 2002 15:38, Cesar Matamoros II wrote:
> -Original Message-
> Eleanor's (LX) seemed pristine, espec
This is the same guy who has the mint 135-600 F6.7 lens complete with metal
box. He's looking to sell it for about $1,200 Cdn. I am now considering
buying it more as a collector lens than a user. This thing is HUGE, but it is
certainly interesting. The autofocus version just happens to be in a
> > And somehow, having been unsubscribed for a good number of
> months, I'm
> > magically back on the list :)
I'm glad it wasn't just me! I, too, unsubbed a couple of days ago, only
to find myself back on the list. But my computer's been acting weird, so
I thought it was me...
Just got my hands back on my old 85mm, F2 after selling in to a friend a
while back when I needed funds to buy a the 15mm. He has not been using it
much so he sold it back to me for the same price I sold it to him ( $175 Cdn)
a steal at both ends. Anyway, no matter what some people write about
Hi Bob,
I roll my own B/W, but not colour. I actualy just had the unfortunate
experiece of buying some new film cannisters recently and two of them
scratched the film really badly, 3 big strips down the film. They must have
had something in the felt from the factory where they were made. They wer
Paul,
Have you thought about "rolling your own". I think the savings is about
50%. I bought a Watson loader and am planning on buying the long rolls and
spooling my own. DX coding may be a problem for some and the lab recognition
for others.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Jones"
Grrr
I would have made it had it not been for an evil loss of our soccer team..
which of course had to be followed up by an evening of drowning our
sorrows. *sigh*
Maybe another time as long as Paul's hanging out in Hogtown.
Cheers,
Dave
-Original Message-
From: frank theriault [ma
>But haven't we gotten used to a rather poor quality nowadays? I recently
looked at the B&W prints of my grandfather and I was amazed what quality
they had 50 years back. 4x6 inch prints where you would need to go really
close to see all detail. I think the present concept of 10 lines per mm fo
My Sunpak flashes are < 7 volts so that should not be a problem. I am
not sure about TTL, but IIRC it doesn't.
On Tuesday 27 August 2002 07:41 pm, Mishka wrote:
> Anyone knows if Sunpak 522 can fry LX? I don't have a voltmeter and
> not willing to experiment...
> And if those two can work toget
I think I pay about $8.50au for a 120 roll of Provia 100F, i don't so much
mind that, but $18au for a roll of 35mm is a little rich for my blood :)
Paul
- Original Message -
From: "Bob Rapp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 10:52 AM
Subject: Re:
It seems that roll film in Australia is very expensive. I expected the price
to fall with the GST, but it didn't.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Is it any cheaper that Provia 100F? i use provia 100F in 120, but not
35mm,
> as its to expensive here, about
Anyone knows if Sunpak 522 can fry LX? I don't have a voltmeter and not
willing to experiment...
And if those two can work together peacefully, does it do TTL with LX?
Best,
Mishka
- Original Message -
From: "Simon King" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 2
Where I am buying, it's USD$1.99/roll of 120. It's expired (a few months),
but so far the slides look pretty good.
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: Are zoom lenses as good as primes?: T
Thanks John, that is precisely the combination I am looking at using on my
z-1. I also have a 1.7x that I am busting to try.
Cheers
Shaun
-Original Message-
From: John Mustarde [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, 28 August 2002 10:27 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Tokina 3
> How and with what do you measure
> [flash voltages].??
Simple, put your tongue on the trigger and shoe spring (you may have to
suck), charge up the flash and then guess the voltage before you pass out.
:-)
OK - Not really. I just hung a multimeter over the two terminals once the
flash was cha
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 09:07:46 +1000, you wrote:
>Hi Gang,
>
>Has any ever used or actually own a manual focus Tokina 300mm F2.8 SD lens?
>I am interested in some comments on these thingy's.
It is an excellent lens in every respect - build quality and optical
quality and ease of use are outstandi
Is it any cheaper that Provia 100F? i use provia 100F in 120, but not 35mm,
as its to expensive here, about $18au a role.
I might buy a role and give it a try.
Paul
- Original Message -
From: "Mishka" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 9:46 AM
Su
And thanks for all the hard work, Doug. Oh yeah, nice picture in Mike Johnston's
column, too
> -Original Message-
> From: Doug Brewer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: August 27, 2002 10:46 AM
>
> Hi troops,
> First off, my apologies for the transition glitches. Nothing like a liv
You can tell by the black tulip hood.
His loss...
> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Woerner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: August 27, 2002 11:09 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: F*300mm f4.5 in Natl Geographic
>
>
> Darn. Wrong again. I looked at it long and hard and eve
- Original Message -
From: Dr E D F Williams
Subject: Re: Aerial photography question
> Sorry Anthony, to go on being pernickitty, but how does
distance introduce
> haze?
The haze is always there, but as distance from camera to subject
increases, it becomes more of a problem.
William R
Don Williams wrote:
> Sorry Anthony, to go on being pernickitty, but how does distance
> introduce haze?
Hi Don,
I think Anthony was just referring to the fact that you've got a longer path
of hazy air you're looking through when you shoot from a greater distance.
Bill Peifer
Rochester, NY
Sorry Anthony, to go on being pernickitty, but how does distance introduce
haze?
D
Dr E D F Williams
http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams
Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery
Updated: March 30, 2002
- Original Message -
From: "Anthony Farr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTE
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Brewer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: list update update
> nomail file was full of old addresses that I had never cleaned out. My
bad.
> 3.) It is possible to set up a new nomail list, but I haven't done it yet.
> When I do, I will notify the list. In orde
In a message dated 8/27/2002 11:54:48 AM US Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thanks for doing all of this work. The more I learn about computers, the more amazed I am that anything works at all . . .
May I add a non-secular AMEN?
Ed
Thanks for doing all of this work. The more I learn
about computers, the more amazed I am that anything works at all . .
.
Steven DesjardinsDepartment of ChemistryWashington
and Lee UniversityLexington, VA 24450(540) 458-8873FAX: (540)
458-8878[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Basically..
1) MG IV RC paper - I only use it in the one darkroom I rent (I consider
going to wet but haven't yet - hmm.. that rhymes don't it) which happens to
be a "dry" darkroom (i.e. no trays.. a machine process).
Yes technically it could still be called wet because chemicals are involved
Yep. :)
Dave
Begin Original Message
From: Doug Brewer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5.) I hope you were able to get some good
photos.
Carry on, then
DougList Guy
End Original Message
Pentax User
Stouffville Ontario Canada
http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/
http://brooks1952.t
> -Original Message-
> From: David Chang-Sang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> When I said I was comparing it to MG IV - I was comparing
> the Gallerie Pearl
> to their line of REAL photo paper (i.e. NON inkjet -
> darkroom based photo
> paper).
Are your saying you like your inkjet prints b
Doug,
Congratulations! For such a major move, the glitches I saw are negligible. I
was worried for a while yesterday, not being sure what's going on, but now I
see what happened and that you've done one hell of a job!
Best,
Mishka
P.S. I did take some pictures meanwhile -- that probably explains
Darn. Wrong again. I looked at it long and hard and even compared it to
Boz's pics. Guess I need a magnifying glass.
Robert
>From: Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: F*300mm f4.5 in Natl Geographic
>Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:21:42
Hi troops,
First off, my apologies for the transition glitches. Nothing like a live
fire exercise, eh? To address some concerns:
1.) I've just changed the variable to force replies to be addressed to the
list itself, instead of the original author. It should go into effect in a
few moments. (I
Prompted by the recent thread on the Kiron 70-210/4 lens (titled
"Kiron 70-210 f/4 macro 62mm filter"), I dug out a review on the
lens, from Modern Photography for November, 1983.
"Specifications: 70-210mm f/4 Kiron" "Accepts 62mm filters; f/4 to
f/22, 1/2 stop detents; min. foc. dist. 3 ft. 9 in
Yes, anyone with a pernicketty bone in their body knows that a lens's focal
length has no direct bearing on perspective. But it is also true that each
particular focal length requires its own particular distance to subject to
maintain a constant subject reproduction ratio. So, while in theory an
> It seems as though Steve Winter, a photographer for Natl. Geographic, has a
> Pentax F*300mm f4.5 mounted to an unknown(I can't tell what it is anyway)
> body in the July 2002 Natl. Geographic.
No he doesn't. It's a Canon zoom lens. Most likely the 70-210/2.8 L-lens.
Pål
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 07:16:26 -0400, David Brooks wrote:
> I cannot answer your question Simon,but have
> one for you.How and with what do you measure
> [flash voltages].??
1) Get a volt meter, or VOM meter (Volts-Ohms-Milliamps).
2) Put fresh batteries in your flash and turn it on.
3) Put th
Hi Michel,
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 07:44:21 +0200, Michel Carrre-Ge wrote:
> It is a bug of Acorbat when one adds several pages at a time in an existing
> document!
I knew there must be a reasonable explanation. I thought Japanese read
right to left, but I thought reversing the entire manual a
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 13:02:17 +0400, Salikh Zakirov wrote:
> Doug, check whether this pdf is intended to be printed as a book:
> [...] 144 1 2 143 142 3 4 141 140 5 6 ...
Nope. It's just backwards! front cover, inside of front cover, inside
of back cover, 136, 135, 134, ... 2, 1, back cover!
TT
-Original Message-
From: Mark Roberts
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2002 11:23 AM
Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Sigma 20-200 (2.8)
>
>Apologies, that should of course read 70-200.
>
>Cotty
>
>PS but a 20-200 2.8 *would* be intersting ;-)
If you could carry it!
But I'm sure Cesar "Sherp
-Original Message-
From: Rob Studdert
Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 4:33 AM
On 3 Aug 2002 at 22:14, Cesar Matamoros II wrote:
> Oh, did I mention it was the first shots with MY 31 Limited,
So Cesar how were the shots from the 31mm?
Completely on topic too.
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE
Yes I was referring to the inkjet series. You'll love it
Vic
Simon,
FWIW I have an older Achiever flash (don't remember the model), GN is
28/meters and I always used it on my Program A (Program +) without
problems.
This unit must be at least 15 yrs. old. If you're interested I can dig
it out and check the model.
Ciao, Flavio
I cannot answer your question Simon,but have
one for you.How and with what do you measure
these amounts.??
Dave
Begin Original Message
From: Simon King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 07:53:07 +0800
To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'"
Subject: Flash trigger voltage & Pentax camera
Well,after 35 minuites on the phone with the
all powerfull automated voice mail(ar) i'm
now going back to school before my daughter
(she's getting tired of me saying that though)
Signed up for the developing and dark room
course last Friday.I 'v got one roll of FP4+
almost shot and will ho
David.
I was at Henrys Newmarket and saw they had a
sample pack of the 4 Ilford Glossy papers,for
$8.99 so i snagged one to try this week.It
sounds like Epson printers have more paper
options than the Canon drivers,but hopefully
there is not much difference between papers so
the S800 won't g
Anyone seen Mike Johnstons latest 'Sunday Morning'?
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-08-25.shtml
Actually,
at the time I posted it Tom - hitting reply-all didn't work.
Same thing happened to Frank, so I knew it wasn't a "user" problem :)
When I said I was comparing it to MG IV - I was comparing the Gallerie Pearl
to their line of REAL photo paper (i.e. NON inkjet - darkroom based photo
paper
Jeff,
I too will be getting the 2450 in due time for my MF stuff.
Currently this is the 35mm stuff (you know.. the Pentax LX stuff *smirk*)
that I am scanning with the Minolta Dimage Scan Elite II. :)
Cheers,
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, Au
57 matches
Mail list logo
