Re: Swiss camera thief gives himself away

William, Jeff I'm glad you brought it up, I missed the CV as well ;-/ Brad - Original Message - From: "Jeff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 10:00 PM Subject: Re: Swiss camera thief gives himself away > HE HE HE. Now it's funny. > > Jeff > >

Re: LX Erratic Shutter (Illuminati)

At 06:00 8.11.2002 -0800, you wrote: >Anton Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Does the first (and more major) 'fault' happen only at 3200 & >1600 - I've had some at 800 and slower, so I guess I've answered >that one. >> Does it only happen on slow speeds - I can only HEAR it on >slow speed but t

Re[2]: fa 85mm 1.4 vs 77mm limited

Fred, It was the lens gallery. Thanks for the posts. Bruce Sunday, November 10, 2002, 6:05:23 AM, you wrote: >> I did quite a bit of testing of the phenomenon and the results >> are posted on the Lens Test Evaluation site. Hopefully Fred can post >> the site again. F> I'm not sure just wh

Six feet under? (US TV)

So was that a K1000 on screen this evening when whatshername quipped about buying a camera on ebay? R

Re: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro

Bruce, you're right, damn it you're right... Maybe I was hoping for a response along the lines of "after I consult my fellow knights of the round table, etc. etc. .the tennis balls coming out of the TV will tell us what to doetc. etc.". Bruce Rubenstein wrote: Norm, And you are resp

Re: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro

Norm, And you are responding from some ignorant, psychotic kid from Pavement Narrows Ontario, because? I'm crushed, crushed by my bitter disappointment in you. BR From: Norman Baugher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Why are you subscribed to a list of "crap hobbyists"? Pentax Guy wrote: > >

Re: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro

Does it need to go to the hospital? On Monday 11 November 2002 03:32 am, Dan Scott wrote: > (just dropped my freakin FA 35/2 onto the bare floor from shoulder > height and watched it bounce down the freakin hall and bank off a > couple of doors !#@$%) -- Kenneth Archer, San Antonio, Texas [EMAIL

Re: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro

Hey, that's ok Frank, I'll reply to your post, clear up anything, add, whatnot, but after this, it's just like the bokeh, I won't even open emails regarding, so just a heads up for people so you don't waste your time. Pass the word because everyone was going to jump on me while I just wrote an ho

Re: OT: sliding away?

On Sunday, November 10, 2002, at 03:34 PM, Keith Whaley wrote: Hi Dan, a couple of comments below... Have you ever down-loaded and reviewed the 237 page instruction manual that comes with it? Most impressive ~ and I'm talking about image manipulation! Which app are we talking about here, Grap

Re: 200mm macro: FA* vs A*

I think it's the fact that the Pentax 135 market is limited and they need to obtain the brochures from Japan, so they just use whatever they have until dried up. If you don't mind Japanese, you can download the Japanese version from Pentax Japan site. regards, Alan Chan Yep, no doubt the same,

Re: 200mm macro: FA* vs A*

Yep, no doubt the same, no 31L. Where are you located Herb? Is this just Canada or everywhere? Brad - Original Message - From: "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 9:37 PM Subject: Re: 200mm macro: FA* vs A* > Message text written by

Re: Comments Please!

Thanks, Butch, No lighting at all, except the late afternoon sun. Just one of those fortunate times when nature worked out well... And as for the framing of "Crooning", well, with great humility, I have to agree with Mr. Stenquist. I thought at the time I was shooting that the out-of-focus bass

Re: LX MAcro Question

If a camera could have "Bokeh" the LX would be loaded with it.. Vic In a message dated 11/10/02 5:05:14 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Pal, There's no need to get the camera checked as I have sold it now. However, the slight overexposure of the z-1, and the hunting of AF lenses on said Z-1

Re: fa 85mm 1.4 vs 77mm limited

On the contrary, my real world experience suggests the 77/1.9 is better. ;-) regards, Alan Chan According to comparative tests made by AOHC member Carlo Lastrucci, the 77 Limited is not as good as FA* 85/1.4, since contrast is excessive, at least for Velvia film (shades are almost always deep b

Re: OT: Some pics from Sunday

Nice work, Rob. The compositions make these images much more than mere renderings of the original art. And the inclusion of observers in some of the pics adds another dimension. I would say they are well thought out and well executed. Paul Stenquist Rob Studdert wrote: > > Sculptures Under An Omi

Re: Let's Help Greywolf - Update.

On Sunday, November 10, 2002, at 08:59 PM, Ed Matthew wrote: I'm in discussions with another list member about the possibility of setting up a PayPal thing, so donations can happen that way (I can't do PayPal - no credit cards - don't ask! ). I'm going to contact Tom tonight, to let him kn

Re: fa 85mm 1.4 vs 77mm limited

I would think that Velvia is not a good test for any lens. It has it's applications, and it is a worthy film in that it serves certain purposes very well. But it is so outside the mainstream in terms of contrast and saturation that it should not be used to benchmark lens performance. Paul Stenquist

Re: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro

On Sunday, November 10, 2002, at 01:32 PM, Pentax Guy wrote: Hey Dan, Intriguing, what makes you say that? On the lighter side, I didn't think we ever admit to Pentax errors? ;-) On the more practical side, I'm looking at my lens now, read your email and decided to pull it out. By design

Re: Comments Please!

Great work, Frank. I agree with the others who thought that "Crooning" is the best shot of the group. I disagree strongly with the gentleman who suggested that it would be better as a vertical. The out of focus bass player helps establish the mood for the focal point of the photograph. But what rea

Re: Pentax Screen Tweezers (Was Re: Oops)

Mark Roberts wrote: > I think all the focusing screens come with tweezers (or they're supposed to) > but I usually use surgical forceps (I think you can still buy these at Radio Shack!) In the old days we called them roach clips. Paul

Re: Re: Re: Tamron adaptall KA

On Sun, 10 Nov 2002 22:04:52 -0500, Jeff wrote: > Doug, is yours [Tamron SP 90/2.5] the K or KA version? It's the K version, now that you mention it. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ

Re: Some pics from Sunday

Interesting sculptures. Love that Bee-turtle. Jeff. - Original Message - From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 10:39 PM Subject: OT: Some pics from Sunday > Sculptures Under An Ominous Sky > http://www.home.aone.net.au/audiobia

Re: Re: Re: Tamron adaptall KA

Doug, is yours the K or KA version? Jeff. - Original Message - From: "Doug Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 9:33 PM Subject: Re: Re: Re: Tamron adaptall KA > On Sat, 9 Nov 2002 10:19:34 -0500, Jeff wrote: > > > Maybe other members can

Re: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro

Why are you subscribed to a list of "crap hobbyists"? Pentax Guy wrote:

Re: Swiss camera thief gives himself away

HE HE HE. Now it's funny. Jeff - Original Message - From: "Norman Baugher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 3:59 PM Subject: Re: Swiss camera thief gives himself away > Short for resume? curriculum vitae >

Re: Comments Please!

On Sat, 09 Nov 2002 21:47:55 -0500, frank theriault wrote: > Just kidding, be brutal on list, if you want... Social intercourse prophylactic rule #324: Damn in private, praise in public. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ

Re: Let's Help Greywolf - Update.

I'm in discussions with another list member about the possibility of setting up a PayPal thing, so donations can happen that way (I can't do PayPal - no credit cards - don't ask! ). I'm going to contact Tom tonight, to let him know what we're up to, and to confirm a mailing address that I got fr

Re: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro

This guy sounds like an a-hole, Brad. He says anyone on the Net is a "crap hobbyist", yet he's had no contact with anyone on this list, hasn't seen anyone's work, knows nothing about anyone on this list (except you). Seems to me that there are a few pros here, and a few serious hobbyists whose op

Re: The all new PDML FAQ..

I'm glad you are doing this. I'm personally less concerned with techical stuff as much as list protocol. Hell, Boz has enough techinical stuff to stifle you for a year, if my poor brain is any judge. I HEARBY FORMALLY NOMINATE GFEN AS (sucker of the year) THE NEXT PDML FAQ AUTHOR. All in favor,

Aerial Photography with 645N

Is there anyone on the list that regularly uses a Pentax 645N or NII for aerial photography, if so what type of aerial photography do you do and what lenses do use use? Ed Tyler

Re: OT: Disposable Cameras and Ilford

I think Ilford makes both one with XP2 and one with HP5+. I don't think you see the HP5+ version in the States much though. BUTCH "Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself" Hermann Hesse (Demian)

Re: OT: sliding away?

I agree with Herb that the color management in Photoshop is very important to getting good and consistent results. An added advantage is that there is a lot of good training books and videos. I would go with Photoshop Elements (their lite version about $100 US) most of what you need will be there,

RE: Carrying a tripod

Woohoo! Finally a definition that makes me a 'pro'! I am more aware of the shot than the harm to the camera. I have proven time and again that the cameras can take it. I treat my cameras as tools not jewels. Maybe I would not be so cavalier if I did not have so many bodies, but this is somethi

Re: 200mm macro: FA* vs A*

I just tell you about the A, because I have got it. (euh, I sell it too) It's a very good lense, but not IF. (not really important) if you have the A version, I think I don't see in what condition that's the FA was better ? and the price was not the same ! thierry Alexander Krohe a écrit:

RE:Comments Please!

Very nice Frank. I would have liked to see crooning as a vertical format with more body. Did you use auxiliary lighting or was that only stage lighting? Nice exposure and good focus. BUTCH "Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself" Hermann Hesse (Demian)

Re: Personal Poll, opinions wanted

Jeeze, Bruce, if you want wide get wide. If you want telephoto, get telephoto. Both the lenses you list are well outside the lenses you have now. Pentax Guy wrote: > > Hey folks, > > Ok, I have the money to buy a lens. I can only get one, I know the basic > two I want. (Bruce Dayton, don't ans

Re: If You had to pick one lens . . .

On 10 Nov 2002 at 12:39, gfen wrote: > It should proove to be a collossal waste of time and film. :) Now don't you wish you had a DSLR :-) Seriously I'm sure we'll learn a lot more about lenses that we don't own as soon as a DSLR becomes available. I for one would be far happier to do (more) l

RE: LX MAcro Question

Pal, There's no need to get the camera checked as I have sold it now. However, the slight overexposure of the z-1, and the hunting of AF lenses on said Z-1 is not particularly unusual and has been discussed ad nauseum on this list. I single sensor AF system is always going to hunt a little, that i

Re: Pentax Screen Tweezers (Was Re: Oops)

Lon Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Which reminds me: Does Pentax still sell screen tweezers? >Will any tweezer sold work with any screens? I just picked >up a couple MXen (one with split/microprism, one with plain, >and an extra grid screen) and would like to get a tool that >lets me cha

Re: OT: sliding away?

Hi Dan, a couple of comments below... Dan Scott wrote: > > On Sunday, November 10, 2002, at 07:28 AM, Herb Chong wrote: > > > Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Which means I would need to buy a film scanner. > > I have a document scanner that does top quality documents, bu

Re: Oops

Try telling yourself the screen is now "brassed" and therefore has been to hell and back on a brassed LX. Shaun Canning wrote: > > Alas, all too late Vic, but luckily the scratch is only minor. It will not > affect anything other than my pride

Re: Pentax Screen Tweezers (Was Re: Oops)

The grid screen for my PZ-1 came with a tweezer. Isn't that included with all screens? Frits On Sunday 10 November 2002 21:26, Lon Williamson wrote: > Which reminds me: Does Pentax still sell screen tweezers? > Will any tweezer sold work with any screens? I just picked > up a couple MXen (one

Pentax Screen Tweezers (Was Re: Oops)

Which reminds me: Does Pentax still sell screen tweezers? Will any tweezer sold work with any screens? I just picked up a couple MXen (one with split/microprism, one with plain, and an extra grid screen) and would like to get a tool that lets me change these EASILY. Right now I'm using a dental

Re: 200mm macro: FA* vs A*

I don't dispute what you say, but the latest Pentax lens folder I picked up from my Pentax dealer doesn't have either of those lenses listed... keith whaley Alan Chan wrote: > > This lens has been around for quite some time. > > >http://www.pentax.com/products/lenses/lensemodel.cfm?lensetype=3

Re: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro

Yes, with a filter, I can see a need for the hood. Dan where are you, clear up this mystery! ;-) Brad - Original Message - From: "Alan Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 4:00 PM Subject: Re: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro > Perhaps

Re: 200mm macro: FA* vs A*

Alan, Yup, there it is. I did have a vague recollection of it. It might be nice for Pentax to put out some complete and fully updated literature. I order them off sites from time to time as I lose them, and I get the same thing. They also offer an Accessories one, but despite perhaps a dozen tr

Re: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro

Perhaps Dan was refering to when a filter was used. But I suppose you can use whatever 58mm hood you found. I tried the A*85/1.4 67mm hood with step-up ring and it worked fine, but I have never actually used it in practice. regards, Alan Chan Intriguing, what makes you say that? On the lighte

Re: Swiss camera thief gives himself away

Short for resume? curriculum vitae William Kane wrote: What's a CV? Dan Scott wrote: On Friday, November 8, 2002, at 01:52 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_699887.html Burg

FS: Sunday, Second series

Hi all (again), Here's more (and, yes, I'm selling to save up for the Pentax DSLR): 1. LX with FA-1 finder, serial #5317237. Bought from Rob Studdert a few months ago. 3200 ASA, regular shutter release surround, roller on film back. No brassing at all and really fine shape except for the bottom p

Re: AF 400T swivel head

Both of my AF280T's do the 180 swivel dance. I also like the button that puts it in "macro" mode. -Lon Christian Skofteland wrote: > > Hey; just out of curiosity I checked my AF280T and it swivels 180 degrees > one way and 90 the other. Are all 280's like this? Cool

Re: 200mm macro: FA* vs A*

This lens has been around for quite some time. http://www.pentax.com/products/lenses/lensemodel.cfm?lensetype=35mm&lensemodel=FA%2DMacro http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/primes/tele/FA200f4-Macro.html regards, Alan Chan From: "Brad Dobo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To

Re: 200mm macro: FA* vs A*

Hey guys, Just looking at a little pamphlet I have here on Pentax 35mm SLR lenses and cannot see an FA* 200 macro. I see the A* 200mm Macro ED, but nothing else close, is it a new lens? (this does not contain for instance, the FA 24-90mm) Brad - Original Message - From: "Pål Jensen" <[EM

Re: Dust in Lenses

It is my hypothesis that telephotos (except IF ones, of course) tend to exchange more air while focusing back and forth (with their usually longer helicoids) than do most wide angles, and so they end up sucking in more dust. ;-) Unfortunately, FA135/2.8 & FA*200/2.8 are IF, and they still suck m

Re: OT: What we call ourselves.

More likely "privileged!" keith whaley Pentax Guy wrote: > > heh...for those with the screw mount lenses and perhaps cameras to go with > them, using your example, we could call them 'screwed' ;-) > > Brad > - Original Message - > From: "Lon Williamson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL

Re: 200mm macro: FA* vs A*

Alexander wrote: > Does anybody have experience with both of these > lenses? I understand that the A* version is highly > rated by those list members who have used it, but I > would prefer the AF lens. Is it as good? Yes. If anything, the FA* lens is sharper. The drawback is that the FA* is quit

200mm macro: FA* vs A*

Hi, Does anybody have experience with both of these lenses? I understand that the A* version is highly rated by those list members who have used it, but I would prefer the AF lens. Is it as good? How good is the image quality when it is used with a converter (A1.4xS or A2xS or similar)? Thanks,

Re: Swiss camera thief gives himself away

What's a CV? Dan Scott wrote: On Friday, November 8, 2002, at 01:52 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_699887.html Burglar leaves his CV at the scene of the crime See, optimism at its worst. Dan Scott -- William Kane http://www.KaneScience.com IABT Advi

Re: OT: What we call ourselves.

heh...for those with the screw mount lenses and perhaps cameras to go with them, using your example, we could call them 'screwed' ;-) Brad - Original Message - From: "Lon Williamson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 1:01 PM Subject: Re: OT: What w

Re: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro

Hey Dan, Intriguing, what makes you say that? On the lighter side, I didn't think we ever admit to Pentax errors? ;-) On the more practical side, I'm looking at my lens now, read your email and decided to pull it out. By design this lens has a very thick and long hood. I cannot see a reason fo

Re: OT: Is BOKEH real?!?!

Mike J has a good series of articles on sharpness, resolution and contrast on the Luminous Landscape web site. The one on contrast goes into bokeh a bit. He believes good bokeh is largely determined by how closely the tangential and saggital MTF curves follow each other. I expect he's come to this

Re: My Hissy Fit is Over

Good. I'd hate to see too many check out over a "Gregory Who" incident. It's happened before. frank theriault wrote: > > Okay, I'm done with my fit, and I'm back.

Re: KMP lens info

I second this. Boz, I've been on your site countless times and it has helped me greatly. Thanks. - Lon Ken Archer wrote: > > Boz, > Thanks for all your hard work. I just want you to know it is > appreciated. > Ken

Re: Filter/Hood question about 100mm macro

On Wednesday, November 6, 2002, at 11:49 PM, Brad Dobo wrote: I talked to Pentax on this one and they don't make a hood for the lens, because it really is not needed at all. I have the FA version. Putting a UV type filter on will not be protecting the front element anyhow, and with the SMC

Re: OT: What we call ourselves.

Don't set the kid off. Gawd, even Cassleberry was moved to correct him, and THAT didn't work either. I think BD's gonna work out once he tames his typing fingers and figures out he is the new kid on the block, but for NOW frank theriault wrote: > > sexist comment. not funny

Re: If You had to pick one lens . . .

On Sunday, November 10, 2002, at 11:39 AM, gfen wrote: On Sat, 9 Nov 2002, Paul Stenquist wrote: The harshness or smoothness of the bokeh -- or out of focus elements -- is dependent on much more than the lens and the way it renders things. How distant they are from the camera determines their

Re: OT: What we call ourselves.

I do too, but when I meet one, she backs off and snorts. I really should take a bath more than once a week. Grin. -Lon Treena Harp wrote: > > I prefer 'Pentaxettes' ...

Re: OT: What we call ourselves.

LOL. Now to all you newbies, lissen up: You do NOT need big negs. The cameras are clunky, overgrown, and expensive. Buy a Minox and be happy. -"Bubba" (not "Brother") Lon William Robb wrote: > > Some of us have already defined this. > > Brother William

Vs: zeiss 180mm 2.8 lens m42 mount

It is the famous Olympia Sonnar once held in high esteem - designed for the 1936 Berlin Olympics. I have no idea how it measures up with current lenses. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: wayne <[EMAIL

Re: OT: Is BOKEH real?!?! Was -- Re: If You had to pick one lens. . .

On Sat, 9 Nov 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Would this be an example of bad bokeh? Or would it be called something else? It would be, to me. Although, again, like the only example shot I've posted, this is also shot through a tree where all those spaces between the leaves are forming the highli

Re: OT: Is BOKEH real?!?! Was -- Re: If You had to pick one lens. . .

On Sun, 10 Nov 2002, Paul Jones wrote: > Also even though a lense has good bokeh, it doesnt mean it can make a harsh > background look good, shoot a lense wide open into a heavily back lit tree > with light popping through and i doubt any lense will make the bokeh look > really nice. -cough- And

Re: OT: What we call ourselves.

K-Mounters is even better. Debra Wilborn wrote: > (snip) > > Hmm, I'm definately liking "K-Mounties". I need to > find a red coat and a horse.

Re: OT: Disposable Cameras and Ilford

Nope, not sure at all. Now that you mention it, being a C41 would make sense considering who they are selling to. Brad. - Original Message - From: "gfen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "PDML (Pentax)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 12:14 PM Subject: Re: OT: Disposable Camer

Re: OT: Is BOKEH real?!?! Was -- Re: If You had to pick one lens. . .

Worry less about the word "bokeh," and the endless arguments about it, and instead go as you wanted to, to a local univeristy or museum or whatever, and LOOK at the pictures... You'll see that some of them inevitably have a smoother, nicer look to their out of focus areas.. Some of them do not. T

Re: If You had to pick one lens . . .

On Sat, 9 Nov 2002, Paul Stenquist wrote: > The harshness or smoothness of the bokeh -- or out of focus elements -- > is dependent on much more than the lens and the way it renders things. > How distant they are from the camera determines their rendering more > than any other element. The lighting

Re: Can We Help Tom?

I'd be happy to contribute $20. Paul Stenquist frank theriault wrote: > > Just going through Greywolf's journal, he thanked Adelheid for her very > kind assistance of some badly needed money. > > It looks like Tom may be having a really tough time right now, both in > terms of finance and health

Re: Types of photographers

- Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 11:43 PM Subject: Re: Types of photographers > > In a message dated 11/9/02 11:58:54 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > << http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm >> > > Great Essay. I t

FS Sunday

Hi all, Sorry for putting up "for sale" on Sunday rather than Friday, but I've had a hard time deciding to "let go" of the following. 1. Black KX (Serial# 8380420): This is in *very* good condition with the only signs of minor brassing on the right corner of the base-plate (on the very edges of t

Re: fa 85mm 1.4 vs 77mm limited

Wayne wrote: > for general portaiture and landscapes > which of these is the better lens > which is better optically > what is a good used price > just curious cos they are both on ebay at the moment The 77 is the better lens. I've owned both. Pål

Re: LX MAcro Question

Shaun wrote: > P.S. by the way Pal, which camera do you still have, the z-1p or the LX? If > I read your last email correctly, it sounds like you ditched the z-1p, but > still have at least one LX. MZ-S. Pål

Re: If You had to pick one lens . . .

Alan wrote: > I have felt the FA43/1.9 is nothing special optically as much as I like it's > compactness and built quality. Mine is utterly special. Its sharpness from F:4 to F:8 isn't surpassed by anything on sale. It's bokeh and 3D rendition is damned spacial too. Images look close to stere

Re: Bokeh hot off presses

Brad wrote: > Well, got my points across (at least to my liking) but bokeh is rather a > dull subject, real or not. That fully explains why you spend do much time on the subject. Pål

Re: LX MAcro Question

Shaun wrote: >The Z-1 AF system causes the FA 100mm macro to hunt > somewhat at close focusing distances, and the metering system consistently > overexposes by anywhere between 1/3 and 2/3 of a stop (depending upon the > film too You should get your camera and/or lens checked... Pål

Re: Vs: Is BOKEH real?!?! Was -- Re: If You had to pick one lens . . .

Fred wrote: > Bokeh exists. It ~is~ very important for some of us. Probably no > photo stands or falls just because of bokeh, but it can be a very > important aspect of some photographs. I have several photos that has ended up in the waste basket due to horrible bokeh. All shot with the FA645

RE: 200/2.5 custom tripod mount pics --Jose

Vic, Thanks for posting the photos. It appears to function pretty good; not intrusive. Regards, Jose R. Rodriguez -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Pentxuser@;aol.com] Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 5:06 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: 200/2.5 custom tripod mount

Re: Can We Help Tom?

Count me in. E-mail direct if you like - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ed Matthew From: frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Can We Help Tom? Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 07:53:23 -0500 Just going through Greywolf's journal, he thanke

Odp: Odp: vivitar 35-85mm 2.8 lens

Not really. And I think you should know not all of us on this list understand Polish and may be a bit puzzled when they see a post like yours so the general consensus is to use English. Anyway, welcome to the list (I assume this is your first post?) Łukasz - Original Message - From: <[EM

Odp: Odp: vivitar 35-85mm 2.8 lens

Maybe he thought he was seinding it off-list. Lukasz - Original Message - From: frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 1:31 PM Subject: Re: Odp: vivitar 35-85mm 2.8 lens > I couldn't have said it better! > > -frank > > [EMAIL PROTEC

Re: fa 85mm 1.4 vs 77mm limited

> I did quite a bit of testing of the phenomenon and the results > are posted on the Lens Test Evaluation site. Hopefully Fred can post > the site again. I'm not sure just which site you mean, Bruce. (Sorry.) Arnold has a lot of 77mm and 85mm images at: http://www.arnoldstark.de/pentax.htm I h

Re: Dust in Lenses

> Somehow the 43 is pretty dust resistance. Mine is clean too even > it is my most used lens for the last 3 years. FA24 2nd. FA77/1.8 & > F/FA135/2.8 are dust suckers. It is my hypothesis that telephotos (except IF ones, of course) tend to exchange more air while focusing back and forth (with the

Re: 200/2.5 custom tripod mount pics --Jose

> Yes Fred I think I would use the A* 300/4 more if it had a tripod > mount. I tend to favour the Tokina 100-300 AT-X/4 because of its > tripod mount... Same here, Vic. The AT-X 100-300/4 isn't a prime, but it gives some primes a pretty good run for their money, and it has that useful tripod moun

Re: Comments Please!

Hi Frank, the photos are quite nice (I would have preferred them in color) and very sharp etc. I think it would be nice to play more attention to the proportions, the centering, --(difficult to explain, not my native language)-- you know: golden section and so on, to get a certain tension int

Re: OT: sliding away?

Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Which means I would need to buy a film scanner. I have a document scanner that does top quality documents, but I don't think it's optimized for film... I'll have to check my manual carefully. I know I'd be very unhappy with it if it were only med

Re: OT: Is BOKEH real?!?! Was -- Re: If You had to pick one lens . . .

Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >What an awesome rose photo. I loved the pink rosebud, but this one totally blew me away. I would never have guessed it was from a digital camera. Now I really want one. I know this is not on the original topic, but if you wanted a print made,

Re: OT: Is BOKEH real?!?! Was -- Re: If You had to pick one lens . . .

Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >What an awesome rose photo. I loved the pink rosebud, but this one totally blew me away. I would never have guessed it was from a digital camera. Now I really want one. I know this is not on the original topic, but if you wanted a print made,

Re: OT: Types of photographers

I have to read it again carefully, but at the first glimpse I am sure I am in the wrong category ... I will work on that. Or should I say: yeah, it's me! Who matters?! Have a nice sunday. Bernd - original Nachricht Should be good for a laugh, if only at yourself: http://www.kenro

Re: OT: sliding away?

alex wrote: > > Keith, > > I found if I scan my slides with a quality film scanner, > Photoshop them slightly and print on a decent Epson > inkjet, I get better results than commercial labs can > (or willing to) do with negatives. > > This could be an indication of my local labs quality :=) >

Can We Help Tom?

Just going through Greywolf's journal, he thanked Adelheid for her very kind assistance of some badly needed money. It looks like Tom may be having a really tough time right now, both in terms of finance and health. I'm wondering if there's anything we could do to help him out financially. I kno

zeiss 180mm 2.8 lens m42 mount

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=800474171 is this a good lens or is my money better spent elsewhere?

Re: Re:TOPDML Pentax posters

Count me in. Jeff. - Original Message - From: "David Brooks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 6:45 AM Subject: Re:TOPDML Pentax posters > Horse show today(Sunday).Hows next Saturday for > everyone > > Dave >

Re: Where's Greywolf?

For some reason my bookmark wasn't working is all. I've updated, and I can get back onto his journal. Sounds like he's having a tough time of it, being broke, and now having his arthritis flare up real bad. Last entry October 19 (sounds like right around when you checked last, Dave). I hope he'

  1   2   >