Mark,
That is too cool! Can you give us any details about how it came
about. The quality of your work goes without saying, but I would
certainly like to hear.
Bruce
Saturday, February 22, 2003, 5:52:44 PM, you wrote:
MC> It's not Rolling Stone and I doubt if anyone on the list is a subscri
> heck - the whole setup was Pentax except for the flash
> bracket, which came from parts bought at Gale's Hardware...
5 points off. Otherwise, your work gets an A...
:-)
--Mike
>> list is a subscriber,
>> but I'm honored to have the photo credit for the
>> winter, 2003, edition of
>> American Entomologist:
>>
>> http://www.markcassino.com/temp/DSCN0506.jpg
Nice work, Mark--but I'm really p*ist I wasn't the first to make an *ist
joke...
--Mike
Mike Johnston wrote:
> Okay, all you SMCP-M shooters--
>
> Given that I love the look of the SMCP-M 50mm f/1.4, am I gonna like the
> look of the 28mm f/2.8?
>
> Let me know what you think if you have or know the 28mm--
>
> --Mike
Yup - you should love it, Mike
annsan
Okay, all you SMCP-M shooters--
Given that I love the look of the SMCP-M 50mm f/1.4, am I gonna like the
look of the 28mm f/2.8?
Let me know what you think if you have or know the 28mm--
--Mike
Congratulations, Mark - well done.
--
John Mustarde
www.photolin.com
Good job, Mark!!
Good job, Mark!!
Amita posted:
> > Nevertheless, for my
> > money, Fuji is still the digicam of choice for photographers
> > like me, who like to be able to shoot without flash at ISO
> > 800 to 1600.
>
> I have my eye on the Fuji Finepix series as well. I really like the pics
> on ERN Reed's homepage. She used
> Subject: Mike's "camera sense" ;^)
>
>
> Mike Johnston wrote:
>
> > Now cut that out, Dayton! I just finally managed to swing
> > for an LX, and there you go trying to entice me into
> > the Brotherhood.
>
> errors in judgement can be excused, but the correct
> path is evident.
> I finally gave in to the legend of the screw mount, I bought a Spotmatic
> II on eBay, BIN for $95. I don't know how close to a good deal that was,
Greg,
Congratulations! I'd say you got a great deal, since you got a camera that
would have to sell for six or eight hundred dollars IF you could b
Mark Cassino wrote:
> It's not Rolling Stone and I doubt if anyone on the list is a subscriber,
> but I'm honored to have the photo credit for the winter, 2003, edition of
> American Entomologist:
>
> http://www.markcassino.com/temp/DSCN0506.jpg
>
> (Sorry for the poor snapshot of the mag - I don'
On Saturday, February 22, 2003, at 07:52 PM, Mark Cassino wrote:
It's not Rolling Stone and I doubt if anyone on the list is a
subscriber, but I'm honored to have the photo credit for the winter,
2003, edition of American Entomologist:
http://www.markcassino.com/temp/DSCN0506.jpg
(Sorry for t
>> Okay, this is totally off topic, but I want to recommend a really nifty
>> little book I just finished. It's the biography of Lincoln in the "Penguin
>> Lives" series. The author is Thomas Keneally.
>
> On that off-topic note, I'd recommend the "Horrible History" series for
> world history; _Th
On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, Gregory L. Hansen wrote:
> I finally gave in to the legend of the screw mount, I bought a Spotmatic
> II on eBay, BIN for $95. I don't know how close to a good deal that was,
> but it was the lowest BIN I remembered seeing and wasn't too far away from
> the $70 figure I saw
Mark Roberts wrote:
> Bob Walkden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Saturday, February 22, 2003, 1:01:42 AM, you wrote:
> >
> >> Ann Sanfedele wrote:
> >
> >>> Thanks Mark!
> >>> I actually had forgotten how nice it was - just the right size for a night
> >>> shirt...
> >>> Thanks so much for keepin
On Saturday, February 22, 2003, at 12:32 PM, Joseph Tainter wrote:
Is Pentax off in la-la land again? How many serious photographers,
like those on this list, would buy an FAJ lens without distance
markings, to use on a digital or any camera? It's a serious question.
Please share your thoughts
Congrats, Mark!
Regards,
Lukasz
===
www.fotopolis.pl
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
internetowy magazyn o fotografii
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Cassino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday,
You rock.
--
Thomas Van Veen Photography
www.thomasvanveen.com
301-758-3085
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Cassino [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2003 8:53 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Cover Shot
>
>
> It's not Rolling Stone and I doubt if anyone o
Mike Johnston wrote:
> Now cut that out, Dayton! I just finally managed to swing
> for an LX, and there you go trying to entice me into
> the Brotherhood.
errors in judgement can be excused, but the correct
path is evident. just sell that LX miniature camera
when it show
In a message dated 2/22/2003 9:20:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
> Any cover is a big deal. Congratulations.
>
> BR
What he said. Very nice. So how many extra copies did you buy to give to family &
friends and to hoard?
Hehehe.
Doe aka Marnie ;-)
Any cover is a big deal. Congratulations.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's not Rolling Stone and I doubt if anyone on the list is a
subscriber, but I'm honored to have the photo credit for the winter,
2003, edition of American Entomologist:
http://www.markcassino.com/temp/DSCN0506.jpg
(Sorry
Mark Cassino wrote:
It's not Rolling Stone and I doubt if anyone on the list is a
subscriber, but I'm honored to have the photo credit for the winter,
2003, edition of American Entomologist:
Congrats, Mark!! Excellent shot! (Even though I despise spiders) :-)
--
Later,
Gary
Mark Cassino wrote:
It's not Rolling Stone and I doubt if anyone on the list is a
subscriber, but I'm honored to have the photo credit for the winter,
2003, edition of American Entomologist:
Aha ! So you already got a sample of the *ist camera !
cheers,
caveman
> Okay, I found some internet sites, and I determined that this Russian
> Leica clone I bought today is a FED1. It's a near identical copy of a
> Leica II. So all you Leica folks, how the heck do you get the takeup
> reel out of the body?
Paul,
Try forcing it. Those Russian jobs love that.
--M
Sweet!!!
--- Mark Cassino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >
It's not Rolling Stone and I doubt if anyone on the
> list is a subscriber,
> but I'm honored to have the photo credit for the
> winter, 2003, edition of
> American Entomologist:
>
> http://www.markcassino.com/temp/DSCN0506.jpg
>
> (Sorry
> Nevertheless, for my
> money, Fuji is still the digicam of choice for photographers
> like me, who like to be able to shoot without flash at ISO
> 800 to 1600.
I have my eye on the Fuji Finepix series as well. I really like the pics
on ERN Reed's homepage. She used a Finepix 6900. I checked i
It's not Rolling Stone and I doubt if anyone on the list is a subscriber,
but I'm honored to have the photo credit for the winter, 2003, edition of
American Entomologist:
http://www.markcassino.com/temp/DSCN0506.jpg
(Sorry for the poor snapshot of the mag - I don't have a flatbed scanner
anymo
> The "Sir,..." was the first clue!
Keith,
You got that right. In England, the Queen has to knight you. In America,
every guy becomes a "Sir" as soon as he turns 40, or goes bald, gets a
paunch, starts wearing a suit, or any combination of the above.
--Mike
You just made my point, the hot shoe may fail
before the the X port does, so why use it?
I once had a whole roll of flash pictures
ruined from using the hot shoe, even though
the X port was OK. I dont like the SPII
hot shoe arrangement especially because
the sync signal has to go thru a switch
whi
Hi Team,
I've got no remaining P645 glass so this time they have to go:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2913753120
Cheers,
Rob Studdert (eBay ID: distudio)
PO Box 701
HURSTVILLE BC NSW 1481
AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please check m
At 07:27 PM 22/02/2003 -0500, you wrote:
As a matter of fact, I wouldnt
even use the hot shoe, attach your flash cord
to the X outlet for highest reliability.
JCO
Why is that?
The hot shoe on my MX stopped working before the X port (which also stopped
eventually)
Wendy Beard,
Ottawa, Canada
htt
That's it. I found a web site that said a fair amount of force might
have to be applied to remove the take up reel. I pulled hard, and out it
popped. I've loaded a roll of NPZ 800, and I'm going to have some fun.
Paul
Bob Zwarick wrote:
>
> oops, you pul it straight down as I remember mine...
>
On 22 Feb 2003 at 11:57, Mike Johnston wrote:
> I dunno, but I personally would be surprised if we ever see anything like
> this. It's certainly not just a matter of slapping a digital sensor where
> the pressure-plate goes.
In fact it's worse than that since virtually every electronic imaging se
Can anyone recommend a good quality lab that can make high quality 8x10's
(or larger) from a scanned negative, in both mono and colour?
An actor friend of mine is visiting Florida to do some promotional work,
including some photo-signing sessions, and was bemoaning the weight of 1100
prints to tak
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
"Now, when I use small cameras, I find I don't use the scales anyway. For
me, they are just another way to confuse me when I should be concentrating
on picture taking."
I rely on distance markings--and the DOF scale--to get maximum depth of
field when shooting
on 2/22/03 1:32 PM, Kenneth Waller at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Any advice from list members on sending money from England to the US of A?
>
> Thanks in advance...
>
> Kenneth Waller
>
>
>
PayPal works and costs the recipient .5% of the transfer amount more than a
transfer within the U.S.
S
Did mike post an image too? Mine was the
one with the "greyscale image" title of
the post. Which image are you reffering to?
( I posted 2 different ones).
JCO
> -Original Message-
> From: Paul Franklin Stregevsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2003 7:14 PM
> To: '
on 2/22/03 12:32 PM, Joseph Tainter at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>...
> I would never buy a lens without a distance scale, even understanding
> that the distances on zoom lenses are only approximate. On occasion I
> try to figure hyperfocal distance with zooms, generally with pretty good
> success.
Rüdiger wrote:
I'm not impressed.
I see your point, Rüdiger; you have found some true deficiencies in the old
and new Fujis. Nevertheless, for my money, Fuji is still the digicam of
choice for photographers like me, who like to be able to shoot without flash
at ISO 800 to 1600. No other nonprofess
Mike,
Sorry...All I can say, is if you heft a 67II, you will get hooked if
you like nice, big, clear viewfinders and that wonderful mechanical
feel of old. The 67II gives you just enough automation (about on par
with the LX) to be used in faster moving situations and has the nicest
grip for your
Impressive tonality, Mike. I especially like the detail visible in the
corduroy fabric of the dress at the right.
You hit the exposure right on the money; nothing is burned out; a stop
under, and you wouldn't be able to see the face of the fellow at the left.
I can't wait to hear what lens this
or resell it on ebay if you got it
REAL cheap! I think MF minolta
is a hard sell.
JCO
> -Original Message-
> From: Fred [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2003 6:54 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: series 1 135mm disapointment
>
>
> > well it turned ou
Nick Zentena [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
"Does the US clear things electronically? I know in the past US sellers
didn't like Canadian bank MO because it could take forever to clear. That
meant sending Postal MO that would clear quicker. I've heard horror stories
about how long personal checks can take
dont use the FP outlet or set the sync switch to FP
thats for flashbulbs and wont sync with electronic
flash properly!!! As a matter of fact, I wouldnt
even use the hot shoe, attach your flash cord
to the X outlet for highest reliability.
JCO
JCO
> -Original Message-
> From: Gregory L. Han
Hi Mike,
I see your point, however I would have thought the electronics could have
been shrunk to fit.
Having said that, I can see that even if the technical concerns could be
addressed it doesn't make any sense, especially from a manufacturing
perspective.
(damn... now I'll have to retract that Pa
> well it turned out to be a minolta md mount
Oops, too bad - incorrect advertising by the seller.
> apart from returning it can i convert it to a k mount?
Nope. (Not in any practical way.)
I think a return for a refund is your only recourse.
Fred
Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The *Ist is entry level regardless of the arguments thrown
>around from Pentax reps and price levels: it is designed as
>entry level. Hence, they may have opted for limitations in
>the lens mount like on the older MZ-series entry bodies.
It's been confirme
Bob Walkden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Saturday, February 22, 2003, 1:01:42 AM, you wrote:
>
>> Ann Sanfedele wrote:
>
>>> Thanks Mark!
>>> I actually had forgotten how nice it was - just the right size for a night
>>> shirt...
>>> Thanks so much for keeping it this long and remembering whose it
Paul Stregevsky asked;
<>
I have both a CP-5 and CP-6 bodies which have 2 level
program modes, P1 and P2. I also have the normal lens
associated with these cameras, 50mm f1.8. It looks
just like an "M" series lens. There is NO electrical
contact between the lens and body other than the
aperture
BTW, heres a similar shot taken in color
but converted to greyscale but using
35mm and a Tokina 28-85 F4 RMC lens.
Film Kodak royal gold 400. It's way
grainer and not as sharp but I think it
shows better overall contrast:
http://jcoconnell.com/temp/RF001sbw.jpg
JCO
> -Original Message-
>
> Joseph wrote:
>
> > Is Pentax off in la-la land again? How many serious photographers, like
> > those on this list, would buy an FAJ lens without distance markings, to
> > use on a digital or any camera?
I had to get used to NOT having distance information when I went to large
format. Now, whe
I agree with you guys stating the unevenness of
the right side of the frame vs. the left. Must
be glare/flare. Exposure was 1/200 @ f16.
I just wanted to be sure I wasnt imagining things...
http://jcoconnell.com/temp/rf03s.jpg
BTW, the lens used was a 105mm F3.8 Zeiss Tessar
mounted on a Super-Ik
Be sure to use an envelope. ;-)
But seriously, a credit or debit card is the easiest.
Maris
Kenneth Waller wrote:
> Any advice from list members on sending money from England to the US
> of A?
>
> Thanks in advance...
>
> Kenneth Waller
Any advice from list members on sending money from England to the US of A?
Thanks in advance...
Kenneth Waller
Joseph wrote:
> Is Pentax off in la-la land again? How many serious photographers, like
> those on this list, would buy an FAJ lens without distance markings, to
> use on a digital or any camera?
About 95,6% of the camera buying public in this segment. Mind you, I have no idea if
theres trut
Matti wrote:
> 2. He told me that both cameras (DSLR and *ist) are fully compatible with
> K/M -lenses. For me, seeing is believing...
I'm not sure about this. The *Ist is entry level regardless of the arguments thrown
around from Pentax reps and price levels: it is designed as entry level. Henc
Mike wrote:
> Perhaps. The problem right now is that the "flagship effect" has very
> definitely switched over to the digital realm. Sales of top film SLRs are
> way down. Film SLRs are old hat and yesterday's news, and are unlikely to
> have the effects Bruce is talking about. I do buy his points
No, it's more like mount the *ist on the Big gun. And while you're at it get
the sturdiest tripod, a gimbaled head & a Sherpa to lug the combo around!
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: "Joseph Tainter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "pdml" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2
Joseph,
The trick to jumping ship is that seems to be the future of the other
brands, too. Perhaps you are meaning If Pentax starts moving
downstream in target audience then it is time to jump ship? I believe
there are a few on the list who would strongly argue that this has
already occurred man
> We made the mistake of NOT sacrificing a chicken when we opened our new
> datacenter two years ago. Been paying the price ever since!
When I was 14 I worked at a Kentucky Friend Chicken stand in Wisconsin. One
summer night a few of us who worked there went up on the roof with a few
six-packs o
>Good luck. I've got to wash the 110s :-(
Well, I've got dirty LRs in the drive, but the son shobe beautifully:
http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/landscapes/images/pic34.html
Best for now,
Cot
Oh, swipe me! He paints with light!
http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/
_
>> Personally I think this is tosh. 'The most demanding professionals' will
>> not be buying this camera, and few SLR novices will. Only those with
>> loadsamoney. It's still a nice looker though, and I'm sure it will
>> perform well.
>
> Having read all the posts here on the *ist, and the views o
Regarding the *ist:
>>My copy actually arrived as I read your posting! A smart looking camera and
>>I thought it was interesting that it was aimed at 'the most demanding
>>professionals and experienced amateurs to SLR novices'.
I wrote:
>Personally I think this is tosh. 'The most demanding profe
3. FAJ 18-35mm along with the DSLR. Don´t know the aperature range.
Wasn´t this lens rumored a year ago or so (well not the FAJ version)?
-Matti Eteläperä
Is Pentax off in la-la land again? How many serious photographers, like
those on this list, would buy an FAJ lens without distance markings,
From Shaun:
Anyone fancy mending me six and a half grand? Sure you do.
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2913422082&category=4688
Mount that on the *ist!
Joe
> --Mike
>
> P.S. I wonder if we could--ahem--re-title this thread...
>
What - you don't like the word "inexplicable"?
Lukasz
--r-e-k-l-a-m-a-
Tanie bilety lotnicze!
http://samoloty.onet.pl
> Lukasz,
> I've had a few e-mails to you bounce back to me. I've just sent you
another
> as a test...
>
> --Mike
>
It arrived safely (both of them :-)
Thanks,
Lukasz
===
www.fotopolis.pl
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
int
Hallo Mike,
the pictures show how bad the 601 is. Look at the distortion of the third
picture.
All the left pictures are overexposed. Why? So the right pictures are
looking better.
Look at the third picture of the F700 at the door frame. There is a awfull
blue color between frame and the outside sk
>After reading all the digital compatibility messages I pondered...
>What would be the technical problems with making a digital back for a 35mm
>Camera, or camera range (MZ/ZX)?
>Just a thought - anyone care to comment?
Simon,
It just doesn't make a lot of sense...a lot of the innards of a 35mm
> Hi Mike,
>
> Have you received my emails? Sorry for writing to the list, but I really
> need to know.
>
> Best regards,
> £ukasz
Lukasz,
I've had a few e-mails to you bounce back to me. I've just sent you another
as a test...
--Mike
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Johnston"
Subject: Re: Mike's inexplicable Fuji fetish
>
> P.S. I wonder if we could--ahem--re-title this thread...
Hows that Mike?
WW
> You should read some of Keneally's other stuff Mike. He is one of our
> (Australian)finest writers, and writes across several genres (i.e.
> historical, historical faction, fiction)
Shaun,
I shall.
--Mike
> Does this look good? Tmax 400.
>
> http://jcoconnell.com/temp/rf03s.jpg
>
> I'm talikng about the technical quality,
> not the subject matter or composition.
> I ask because it was taken with a non-Pentax
> lens which I will reveal later...
As I see it on my monitor, I would say, if I were lo
> I did notice some "pixelating" (jaggies) along some edges (think it was along
> her skin/clotheing line, contrast between one color and multicolors). Not sure
> what that means re scan or photo. We shall see.
Probably just a resolution mismatch somewhere along the line. Camera
shouldn't have an
Whenever myself or one of the other sys-admins finds a poorly documented or
previously unknown command or script that fixes something someone will say:
"Yeah, that system was FUBAR until [insert name] found a new incantation."
Also, if a server draws blood from an SA we take that as a sign that th
On Fri, 21 Feb 2003 22:12:47 -0500, you wrote:
>
>Other than the program mode Ricohs, the only lens I know of that cannot be
>used on newer bodies is the Vivitar S1 70-200 f3.5, which has an extra long
>flange near the lever that connects to the lens aperture. That flange hits
>the power zoom c
If I were in your shoes, I wouldn't sell, unless there were a desperate need
for money. Keep it, wait and see -- the lens isn't going to evaporate. Nor
is its value (unlike the electronic gear). And meanwhile, enjoy the G3 and
'flex (I have a rolleicord, and it's one hell of a camera!).
Best,
Mish
On Fri, 21 Feb 2003 22:01:10 -0500, Peter Alling wrote:
> Was that an organically grown free range chicken or the regular supermarket
> variety,
> enquiring minds want to know.
Live. Anything else screws up your ju-ju. :-)
TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Hi Cotty,
> >My copy actually arrived as I read your posting! A smart looking
> camera and
> >I thought it was interesting that it was aimed at 'the most demanding
> >professionals and experienced amateurs to SLR novices'.
Cotty wrote:
>
> Personally I think this is tosh. 'The most demanding prof
I finally received my erratic-shutter LX back from Pentax Europe with the erratic
shutter still fully in evidence. I took it in to Pentax UK in slough and confronted
the Technical Supervisor once agtain, he tested the camera and confirmed the behaviour
he then said there's nothing we can do, Pen
I believe that any Ricoh-brand lens that features the P setting is in danger
of locking onto any Pentax AF body. In other words, any Rikenon P lens.
The older, XR Rikenon lenses are safe.
Chris raised the larger question:
"Did Vivitar, or any other company, make lenses for Ricohs that cannot be
Peter Smekal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
"I private person is selling a SMC(K) 3,5/18mm lens in mint condition. He is
asking for a bid. Any idea what a 'reasonable' price might be?"
Peter,
I've seen these go for anywhere from US $500 to $900. A few have gone on
German Ebay for less, probably because
On February 22, 2003 09:05 am, David Brooks wrote:
> Hi all.A quick quiry now that i'm 99.9% sure the SO is letting me
> bring up the darkroom stuff from my parents house.
> Equipment is a Vivitar E-32 enlarger with Vivitar 50mm lens.It also
> has a carrier for MF 6x6 negs.I know i need a 75 or 80
Hi all.A quick quiry now that i'm 99.9% sure the SO is letting me
bring up the darkroom stuff from my parents house.
Equipment is a Vivitar E-32 enlarger with Vivitar 50mm lens.It also
has a carrier for MF 6x6 negs.I know i need a 75 or 80 lens to
accomodate the size diffrence but are the mounts
85 matches
Mail list logo
