On Fri, 2002-09-27 at 15:02, mike wilson wrote:
> I find it amusing that we are heading for a situation where the
> average person is going to expect nothing more than an "image"
> with the (technical) quality of a neolithic cave painting.
I resent that. Cave technology is actually great. Let's
Shadow detail may be there but, from everything I have seen, it is full
of SERIOUS noise.
> -Original Message-
> From: Bruce Rubenstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 27 September 2002 02:18
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re[2]: OT: D1s review
>
>
> There has been a longish thr
My SO has a PhD, works at Harvard and cannot imagine herself with web access slower
than 1Mbps, so she's not exactly technophobic.
Now, when it comes to pictures, she gets mad if I just develop and scan the weekend
snapshots, instead of giving her 4x6s she can put in her album. Even the $3 vs
Is everyone getting a lot of blank emails with just the tag-line stuff on
them and no questions or responses
Vic
I agree wholeheartedly. I think when a few very vocal members of the PDML
begin to discredit a lens or camera everyone starts to believe it as fact.
The SMC 85mm F2 is a good example. An excellent lens that, in some test
cases, proves sharper than the faster Pentax 85s yet can't get no respect
Hi,
I'm not sure I agree with his comment "The internet explodes the
number of people that have access to pictures".
The point is made often in this forum that the majority of human
beings have difficulty getting access to things like clean
water, never mind esoteric electronic goods.
"Film is
Hi Francis,
I have a Benbo Trekker. It is light, adaptable, waterproof up
to the first joint (one joint/two part legs) and goes up to
about 1.8m/5'10".
You do need a PhD in Civil Engineering to erect it, though.
mike
In a message dated 9/26/02 11:15:55 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< That's exactly why I mentioned what lenses I have been using.
I purchased the manual focus Tokina 80-200/2.8 because I really wanted to
save up for the Pentax in AF. But I think I'm going to spring soon for the
AF Tokina cause
No, No, you're nowhere near the edge of the cliff, plenty of room behind you, step
back!
From: John Mustarde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Get a 500/4 IS and stand a couple feet further back...
I see your meaning. Nonetheless, I think this number is as low as it
is because of the P&S's, digital or otherwise. The choice is no longer
between a fine camera and an Instamatic. A $200 P&S can take great
shots and if you are happy with 4x6 the pictures are great. I've seen
some nice stuff
No but i'll try some.Thanks Tom
Dave
Begin Original Message
From: "tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Have you used any of the Fuji NPx stuff? It seems to be about a 1/2
stop faster...skin tones and contrast are good, as you would expect
from a portrait film, though I suspect the color balance
Hi,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/2278678.stm
"Quite frankly people do not want films or digital cameras
they just want pictures"
---
Cheers,
Bob
Don,
My apologies for my misreading of your post. I took the meaning that you
objected to the language of the insults, rather than the insults themselves.
I certainly wasn't aware that you had been the recipient of any insults
before your "Bye bye" message was posted.
If I was a doctor I'd enjo
In a message dated 26/09/02 16:00:11 GMT Daylight Time, Rob writes:
<< Be nice to him, he's a pop start! >>
I am sure you meant to write pop tart, no?
Kind regards
Peter
I sent this to the list and to Don yesterday. Don has read it and replied
but it hasn't shown up in my PDML folder yet so I'm resending. Apologies to
anyone who gets it twice.
---
Don,
My apologies for my mis
Lukasz Kacperczyk wrote:
> These links don't work for me :(
Technically, underscores are not meant to be allowed in a URL. Some
software is more forgiving. I set mine up to allow them but my ISP's
proxy returns an error.
I got around it by temporarily disabling the proxy in my web browser.
Probably overheated from all the flame posts :-)
Regards,
Anthony Farr
- Original Message -
From: "David Chang-Sang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
(snip)
> I guess the poor old server's been having issues :(
>
(snip)
> I have read lots of reviews on the PZ1p "how does it compare to..." ,
"isn't the AF old", blah, blah, blah.
> Most of the reviews are favorable. It is highly regarded to be so "old".
In practice, I find the AF to be dead on accurate, fast, etc. I think the
reason you hear so much negative about
On 26 Sep 2002 at 21:18, Bruce Rubenstein wrote:
> There has been a longish thread on a professional photographer's digital
> forum and their comments are similar: Digital must be treated like slide,
> and not print film when it comes to exposure - don't blow out the
> highlights. It's easy to ch
On 26 Sep 2002 at 21:18, Bruce Rubenstein wrote:
> There has been a longish thread on a professional photographer's digital
> forum and their comments are similar: Digital must be treated like slide,
> and not print film when it comes to exposure - don't blow out the
> highlights. It's easy to ch
It appears that in recent comparisons film has been downgraded from earlier
estimates of either 70 or 40 megs (I recall both numbers at different
times). There might be a confusion over capture resolution and resultant
file size, and it would be helpful if the writers of these essays could be
mor
How apt that Bob's email domain is "yahoo".
I did look for Bob's winky smiley but in it's absence I guess he was in
earnest, still not sure, though?
I enjoy some spicy contention and I don't object to some playful badinage as
long as it's not malicious or childish.
We've been dabating some emot
101 - 122 of 122 matches
Mail list logo
