Not really. Just a bit pixelated, that's all.
Cheers,
Jostein
Are they coming apart? ;)
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California
Gianfranco Irlanda wrote:
Hi guys,
That sounds really nice! I'm glad I'm going to join you by the
end of the month, although not in London.
:-)
Gianfranco
Heiko Hamann wrote:
No, there are no different layers of material but one
composite material
(as far a I have understood that).
My Super As appear to have a plastic top plate/prism cover
that has been vacuum plated then painted black.
John
The original 645 was like that too wrt battery consume.
Seems to me that the electronics in these cameras are very tolerant
to dropping voltages.
Cheers,
Jostein
Pål Jensen wrote:
Yep. The batteries last about out the roll on the MZ-S after battery
warning.
The 645NII goes on and on.
Pål
Sorry, Frank.
I connected through the cellphone with my laptop from the restaurant.
Battery life and cellphone rates being what they are, and not to
mention line bandwidth, I just sent the message an logged off.
Cotty was driving, so he was no match in pint hoisting. :-)
Jostein
Onsdag, 02
Pål Jensen wrote:
John wrote:
No doubt Paal will tell me I'm wrong again.
REPLY:
Why should I say that? I've said the same
thing since I forst heard about the 4/3 system.
The Olympus makes more sense than the *ist D
(or D10 for that matter) to me.
The way I see it is that the Olympus offer
Hi John,
on 03 Jul 03 you wrote in pentax.list:
No, there are no different layers of material but one composite
material (as far a I have understood that).
My Super As appear to have a plastic top plate/prism cover
that has been vacuum plated then painted black.
Sorry - I meant the *istD.
The problem I see with the 4/3 system is also the very strength of the
system - namely the 'open standard lens mount'. It will never be in the
interests of P*, C*, N*, M* and some others to make kit in this mount.
They all want to lock you into a proprietary system and force you to buy
their own
I wish I could have been there. Glad someone was there to welcome you
and represent the locals!
Fingers crossed next time I can make it. This is two london bashes that
I have missed now...
Rob
-Original Message-
From: Jostein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 03 July 2003 11:21
To:
No, I don't get it. I guess I haven't been paying attention. How, if it
will
use manual and AF lenses, is it NOT backward compatible?
There are manual lenses and manual lenses - an A series lens is a manual
lens that should work on the *ist D, while plain K-mount lenses probably
won't.
Hi,. Jerome,
ROTFL! You had me going for a second there...
cheers,
frank
jerome wrote:
snipThose who will bitch and moan about backwards compatibility are likely
the same old farts that wouldnt have bought the camera anyway, unless it was
to be found at a yard sale or on eBay for 20% of
Hi Daniel,
On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 09:00:10 -0400, Daniel J. Matyola wrote:
I while back I related how I am using an Altoids tin as the case for
my Optio S, and how well it works. Recently, I was browsing in a
camera shop (something I do whenever I can) and looked again at the
case Pentx sells for
I hope that belt-loop is a real loop!
Yep, it uses a real loop, but I still carry mine in a pocket to be on the
safe side
Any advice on where to get one in the Bay area near San Francisco ?
They're hard to find in the USA right now, according to my local dealers
they're backordered due to
Hi Bill,
On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 08:15:57 -0400, Bill Owens wrote:
Any advice on where to get one in the Bay area near San Francisco ?
They're hard to find in the USA right now, according to my local dealers
I will be near SF the first two weeks of october, so I can't use mail-order.
I will be
My local photo shop (Millburn, NJ) has three in stock.
Bill Owens wrote:
I hope that belt-loop is a real loop!
Yep, it uses a real loop, but I still carry mine in a pocket to be on the
safe side
Any advice on where to get one in the Bay area near San Francisco ?
They're hard to find
Excuse me, but doesn't this newfangled 4/3 system remind you of
something? It is effectively destined to be a digital version of the old
Pentax K mount. Who made the best bodies for the K mount? Pentax. Who
made the best lenses for the K mount? Pentax.
And my point is? I'm not entirely sure but
on 02.07.03 13:04, Alin Flaider at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The E1 is cheap as a body, but expensive as a system. Looking
at the lenses price, I expect only organizations can step in the
4/3 system at this time.
Maybe things will calm down with the advent of an entry level
camera and third
Quoting Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Drop me a big hint, Jerome. What is J-Lo ?
Multiple choice exam:
Option A:
J-Lo is a (Pentax?) Model that was made in 1970. Unlike other Pentax models,
this one was designed in Puerto Rico, not Japan, and manufactured in the Bronx,
NY. The user interface is
The *photographic* evidence in full:
http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/lpdml.html
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Jennifer Lopez???
Oh, I thought it was something important ;-p
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Hello. I would like to comment on Pentax equipment. I have been using
Pentax cameras and lenses for a while now. I have an MX, LX, and PZ-1P.
Oh, an old K1000. I have had a couple of problems. I had the sticky
mirror thing with the LX. Got it fixed and never had a problem with it
again. I have had
Oh, I thought it was something important ;-p
Nope! Not at all. Sorry. It ranks right up there with D-ist speculation in that
respect and Digital vs. Film debates in that respect.
Ok.
I bit the digi-bait this morning, at Cameraworld in Wells Street,
London.
Now I own an Optio S.
If only this meeting could finish, so I could get out and play. :-)
Jostein
Some weeks ago I inquired here about the FA 24-90 lens quality. Subsequently I
bought the lens and shot some film with it. I would rate the optical quality as
very reasonable and the mechanical quality as not-so-good.
What puzzled me was the fact that when looking through the viewfinder the lens
Did you check the short end? Wouldn't be interesting if it was just another
28-80? BTW, nominal and actual focal lengths have always been somewhat
problematic, but 10+% is a bit out of line.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: keller.schaefer
Sven, I'm not familiar with your measuring system, but are you able to check
the focal length at various focusing distances? Some internal focusing (IF)
lenses are known to have shorter effective focal lengths at shorter
distances. The FA 28-200 is around 180mm at infinity, but more like 110 mm
Sylwester, those MSRP are more than twice the street price, while
Oly prices are not exactly official. It's apples versus oranges also
because Oly means buying everything why C/N/etc. is reusing current
system.
Servus, Alin
Sylwester wrote:
SP That's not true. Compare for instance
Sven wrote:
ks As
ks the difference in distance between lens and film (when moving the lens from
ks infinity to 1:1 magnification) equals the focal length, I was able to measure
ks this with some precision.
Sven, this may be valid with older lenses design, but nowadays
modern lenses focus at
If Christine is fit, plan on turning up around mid-afternoon, say 3.30 ?
Remind me - Christine eats fish, yes? Alma got some swordfish from
Waitrose and that barbeques well...
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps
Hi,
Rob wrote:
I wish I could have been there. Glad someone was there to welcome you
and represent the locals!
Having met all of them individually and some of them together, I'm not
sure being in a restaurant with _all_ of them would have been entirely
safe. 8-)
Although, as the
Hi,
Jostein wrote:
Seems to me that the electronics in these cameras are very tolerant
to dropping voltages.
No doubt due to them being analogue devices 8-)
BTW, an interesting comparison in today's newspaper. Printer ink is up
to seven times more expensive than vintage champagne, per
Clothes? What clothes??
Do you mean that I should actually wear something apart from the
camera hanging from my neck?
:-)
Gianfranco
- Original Message -
From: Jostein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 12:12 PM
Subject:
Don't forget to reserve some space for
The difference between infinity and 1:1 is the focal length of any lens, by
definition. I had blocked the lens (with tape) in the infinity position
(verified by looking through the finder) so - more precisely - I should have
stated that what I measured is the focal length in the infinity position.
Apologies, please ignore this thread. Finger trouble.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Mm.. swordfish. Shall I bring the sticky wine for afters?
regards,
Anthony Farr
- Original Message -
From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 4 July 2003 12:14 AM
Subject: Saturday
If Christine is fit, plan on turning up around
Tomorrow night I'll be in an office on the 69th floor of the Empire
State Building shooting the fireworks on the East River. I know that I
should get 100 ISO film and take long exposures with a wide angle lens,
but I'm concerned about the fact that there will be a lot of light
coming from other
You'll be shooting at f11 or f16 with 100 speed film. The buildings will probably
expose fine (not blown out) with an exposure of several seconds. Lit windows will be
blown, don't worry, have fun.
BR
Amita Guha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tomorrow night I'll be in an office on the 69th floor of
Imhave no sympathy for you. After all the years you have spent making
photographs you should know better than to bring any film that is of
concern to a cheap amateur lab like that. At least you have now
learned your lesson - too bad, but you get what you pay for, and you
paid for cheap crap!
on 03.07.03 15:29, keller.schaefer at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What puzzled me was the fact that when looking through the viewfinder the lens
in the longest '90' mm position still had a shorter (!) focal lenth than my M
2,0/85. I tried to verify this by mounting the remnants of an old ME Super
the lightning bolt itself is brighter than the sun. you can have very small apertures.
you probably want to underexpose the sky by between two and three stops to get it to
be near black. otherwise, the lightning won't contrast enough with the background. for
such long exposures, you probably
Ed Mathews, Cesar Matamoros, Tom Van Veen, 5 of Tom's Assistants
http://www.bigdayphoto.com/pdml/uhoh1.htm
Hilarious caption!
I sent that last email prematurely... actually there's a handful of them that
are comical in their own rights. For one, I'd forgotten that Teddy Roosevelt
was a devout PDMLer! Aside from that, the one with Cesar peering over your
shoulder is hilarious for reasons that I can't even figure out.
I second that emotion, Jostein.
Bill Owens wrote:
You'll not regret it. Mine is in my pants pocket nearly everywhere I go, and
for a PS digital it's a great piece of equipment.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Jostein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July
In switching servers I've tried to clean
things up
a bit...I've
grouped my PDML images in one place:
http://www.bigdayphoto.com/pdml
How about if we put everyone's PDML group images up here? Cotty, I
know you have a few, send them my way...how
In switching servers I've tried to clean things
up
a bit...I've
grouped my PDML images in one place:
http://www.bigdayphoto.com/pdml
How about if we put everyone's PDML group images up here? Cotty, I
know you have a few, send them my way...how about the NY and
Yes, the old FA Power Zoom 28-105 actually went to 101 mm. The Sigma AF
70-200 f2.8 actually goes to 190 mm. or so. It is common practice.
Still I regard the FA 24-90 as a fine lens. Like you, I do not care for
the built quality.
Joe
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This has started me wondering, do California PDMLers ever
get together?
I know there was one back in 98 or 99...what was the guy's name who
worked at SGI? Bearded guy, left the list last year?
I remember him being
tom wrote:
I know there was one back in 98 or 99...what was the guy's name who
worked at SGI? Bearded guy, left the list last year?
I remember him being in the group shot.
John Francis? I seem to remember his departure was
prompted by a flame war that got personal.
(Killer motorsports
John Francis
At 01:24 PM 7/3/03, throwing caution to the wind, tom wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This has started me wondering, do California PDMLers ever
get together?
I know there was one back in 98 or 99...what was the guy's name who
Hi Jerome
Your editorial work actually has a point. But not a lot of old farts (an
expresion covering people stupid enouhg to own some excellent 20 years old
lenses) would have to buy the camera to pay for a mechanical aperture
simulator, or whatever is missing to make it truely K-mount
hi.
use your steadiest tripod, and a cable release.
Ive done this only once and very happy with the result.
do have a look at http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=149963
and keep enough film - I ran out of film that night !!
choice of lenses would be nice too.
do take shots of the skyline
-Original Message-
From: Stephen Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tom wrote:
I know there was one back in 98 or 99...what was the
guy's name who
worked at SGI? Bearded guy, left the list last year?
I remember him being in the group shot.
John Francis?
yep.
tv
The real strength of this system will be that there is a group out there
who really liked the E-10,E-20 system and might like to continue along
these lines. I suspect the price will come down quickly to the $1500
dollar level and they may try to make more money on the lenses, which is
an old
Oh, sure, you're just showing off that you have a life besides the
list.
Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA 24450
(540) 458-8873
FAX: (540) 458-8878
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/03/03 10:14AM
If Christine is fit, plan on turning up
Hallo,
I just put my FA 1.4/85 and my 24-90 on my camera and compared the field of
view
on 85 and 90 at infinity. The zoom has a longer focal lenght than the 85,
maybe 88?
I think that the FA* 85 has a focal lenght of about 85.
I compared it also to the FA 2/24. There it looked the same.
I think
Marnie,
Back in the days of Shel, we had one or two gatherings but it has been
quite a while. Care to set one up for NorCal PDML'ers?
Bruce
Thursday, July 3, 2003, 10:15:20 AM, you wrote:
EacIn switching servers I've tried to clean things
Eac up
Eac a
tom,
He was John. Had the big 250-600 zoom. That was a sight.
Bruce
Thursday, July 3, 2003, 10:24:13 AM, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This has started me wondering, do California PDMLers ever
get together?
t I know there was
I couldn't have said it better.
At 07:40 AM 7/3/03 +0200, you wrote:
It would have been better not to have added your two sentences because
they simply and absolutely are not true. I, for example, am in the market
for a new Pentax DSLR, and I only WILL try to get such a camera in a yard
sale
Unfortunately, in my own experience, price does not neccessarily mean
quality from a lab. I have found most so-called pro labs to be very
inconsistant. If you find a good one, give them your business. But, 99.9% of
the time you can depend on properly processed negatives from the 1 hour
labs.
Hi,
Thursday, July 3, 2003, 4:31:51 PM, you wrote:
http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/lpdml.html
Did you at least get a shot of the waitress?
No, but Cotty was obviously having a shot _at_ her...
(let's hope La Cottette isn't reading g)
--
Cheers,
Bob
Hi,
Thursday, July 3, 2003, 3:19:17 PM, you wrote:
Is that the outdoor eating area near to Festival Hall? (I forget its
name)
yes, indeed. Coin Street.
--
Cheers,
Bobmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ok, it's been updated again.
http://www.bigdayphoto.com/pdml
--
Thomas Van Veen Photography
www.thomasvanveen.com
301-758-3085
Current pop/rap/soul star, a somewhat overrated actress/singer with about the
same talent as Madonna but better looking. (Ok, so Madonna's better
looking since
she's had a few corrections done too, or she's mellowed with age).
At 09:19 AM 7/3/03 +0100, you wrote:
But back to the J-Lo thing
I couldn't have said it better.
Relax. Don't your panties in a bunch.
Gaud, I hope so.
At 07:25 AM 7/3/03 -0700, you wrote:
Clothes? What clothes??
Do you mean that I should actually wear something apart from the
camera hanging from my neck?
:-)
Gianfranco
- Original Message -
From: Jostein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 12:12 PM
Is that what it is...
At 03:26 PM 7/3/03 +0100, you wrote:
Apologies, please ignore this thread. Finger trouble.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
To grasp the
If you think J-Lo is beauty, you must see this:
http://www.pampita-ardohain.com.ar/
It's worth some web-surfing. She is awesome
Regards
Albano
--- jerome [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I couldn't have said it better.
Relax. Don't your panties in a bunch.
=
Albano Garcia
El Pibe
I use Netscape 7.0. From the Anzeigen (display) menue I choose
Zeichenkodierung and then Kyrillisch (Windows-1251). 35 Russian
Rubels are 1 Euro.
Arnold
Kristian-H. Schuessler schrieb:
Hallo Arnold,
how do you manage to read from e-mails and and in www
russian letters as
I agree with f16 aperture but not the 100 speed film.
I've used 400 speed print film in the past with really
good results. Also, and though it's tricky, a 2-3
second exposure is ideal. After that reciprocity
failure creeps in and your color shifts plus the
blacks go all milky.
Instead of a
Hi
OK metal shells may be better. But I have a 11 years old Z1, (plastic
shell) - still working like the day i got it in 1992 - through thousinds of
rolls. What more would you expect from a diggie? You may have to buy a new
one every 2-4 years anyway, because technology evolves so (too) fast.
On
Pål
When you take a position you defend it even when it's
indefensible. The problem is people on the list
who don't know better will take your word as gospel. The LX had at least
limited but useable compatibility
with all previous Pentax made lenses for their 35mm cameras. As a
landscape
Well, the LX can use M42 lenses via the screw mount adapater. With this
adapter, the LX can use all M42 lenses at all apertures, and the meter
works at all apertures too. There is no such adapter for plain K-mount
lenses for the *ist D to achieve the same functionality. However, the
*ist D
If you think J-Lo is beauty, you must see this:
http://www.pampita-ardohain.com.ar/
It's worth some web-surfing. She is awesome
Regards
Albano
...a long way ahead of J Lo. Thanks.
Ed
_
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection
At 11:17 PM 7/2/2003 -0400, jerome wrote:
From the magazine (July / August issue):
Those who will bitch and moan about backwards compatibility are likely
the same old farts that wouldnt have bought the camera anyway, unless it was
to be found at a yard sale or on eBay for 20% of retail. Pentax
At 11:36 AM 7/3/2003 -0400, Caveman wrote:
What would the replacement be ? Or are they dropping 100 completely ? Or
is it just a renaming game ?
The other day I noticed that the mondo-super-ulta-one-stop store that I use
is not stocking ISO 100 color print film. They _do_ have TMax 100 and
Hi
I recently saw a TV show about an American who made GREAT lightning shots:
He was just shooting away - he didn't wait for the flash to appear on the
sky. That would be too late anyway. He fired ALL THE TIME - really -
pointing at the part of the sky where I believed the lighning show. Using
Hi Pål
Have you got one?
Jens
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Pål Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 3. juli 2003 17:00
Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Emne: Future Pentax e-bay classics
Chrome MZ-S bodies and black Limited lenses are going to fetch stellar
prices on e-bay in the future. You
Mark Cassino wrote:
The other day I noticed that the mondo-super-ulta-one-stop store
Wally World? :-)))
--
Later,
Gary
I always knew my FA77 is actually a FA85. :-)
regards,
Alan Chan
Some weeks ago I inquired here about the FA 24-90 lens quality.
Subsequently I
bought the lens and shot some film with it. I would rate the optical
quality as
very reasonable and the mechanical quality as not-so-good.
What
Cotty has, I think, been known to snap pix of waitresses.
I seem to remember one on PDML, but I'm too damned lazy
to confirm such.
Cotty wrote:
Did you at least get a shot of the waitress?
Letch!
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
If you think J-Lo is beauty, you must see this:
http://www.pampita-ardohain.com.ar/
It's worth some web-surfing. She is awesome
Needs a comb running through that hair.
Also, Pampita is a nice name, but the rest sounds like something you
paint on a fence.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) |
Cotty has, I think, been known to snap pix of waitresses.
I seem to remember one on PDML, but I'm too damned lazy
to confirm such.
Cotty wrote:
Did you at least get a shot of the waitress?
Good memory Lon. I'm impressed.
http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/portraits/images/pic1.html
Cheers,
Which are the best AF teleconverters for use with F 100mm macro and the FA
200mm f/2.8?
The best TC for FA*200/2.8 is A2X-L, as suggested by Pentax. However, it is
not AF.
regards,
Alan Chan
_
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses.
Andre Langevin wrote:
A little bit over eleven hundreds for a Pentax-A 300mm f2.8.
Is this a common price for this lens?
Sounds like a bargain...if you want a *green* one.
grinning, ducking, and running
Stephen
This was recently posted on Leica Users Group, and I received the
author's permission to post it here, as some might be interested:
[Sorry to break the Friday-posting rule, this is a one-time thing]
I was wandering around some used camera stores in Osaka today and found
two lenses that are of
http://www.fotoversand24.de/fotoversand24.htm?vid=3feb3e3c7fac1f70fdc20fda07680a91pid=997tid=shop/4cp=1pmid=1psid=21mid=2sid=3ssid=32ptid=shop/2
399 euro excluding memory card.
Are you located in Europe, perhaps the Netherlands based on your name?
Regards,
Frits
On Thu, 2003-07-03 at 13:20,
Is this a good lens optically? I am comparing it to the tokina atx 28-80mm
and Sigma 28-70mm and tamron 28-105mm. Much distortion at the 24mm end, is
flare well controlled.
Firstly, I will readily admit that I haven't shot enough frames with this lens
to give a *conclusive* review of it... but I do own it. And I must say that I
love this lens thus far! For one (you didn't ask about it, but) the feel and
the build quality are definitely to my liking (I'd say the
As far as I know, there are no pentax af tc's.
Does anyone have any 3rd party recommendations for these lenses?
Jason
Sent via wireless messaging device.
I wrote:
I haven't noticed any distortion
I should clarify. I meant that I haven't noticed anything abnormal about the
distortion at 24mm. Nothing that you wouldn't expect. And nothing (to me) that
says, hey! thats a wide angle lens.. which is what I *don't* want in my
landscape shots (i.e.,
As far as I know, there are no pentax af tc's.
And now you know differently :o)
http://www.pentax.co.uk/cgi-
bin/pentax.storefront/3f04b3a1007a0f482740c2d886f006a5/Catalog/1023
There's a typo on that page, it should be 1.7x, not 17.x (boy, wouldn't that be
interesting). In case the page
Cheers!
Karen Nakamura
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
p.s. please don't ask me for the name of the store since I'd like to
make sure that there's still one of the lenses for me to buy for myself!
:-)
FWIW - I remember that woman from a RF List, and she seems an honest person.
Regards,
Lukasz
Time to have a nice holiday in Japan and stock up every silver MZ-S you
can.
This baby is even less common than black Limited.
But it sure looks much worse than black ltds.
Regards,
ukasz
But isn't this the af adapter for mf lenses. The way I understand is that it moves the
tc element to make mf lenes af. It does not actually pass the af info to the lens
Jason
Sent via wireless messaging device.
But isn't this the af adapter for mf lenses. The way I understand is that it
moves the tc element to make mf lenes af. It does not actually pass the af
info to the lens
Your understanding is correct. In that respect, I suppose it can be said that
it is not a true AF adaptor. Sorry to have
On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 20:26:04 -0400, jerome wrote:
Your understanding is correct. In that respect, I suppose it can be said that
it is not a true AF adaptor. Sorry to have misled you. However, I wouldn't
say that it is totally useless for an AF lens (I use it with an FA 300mm 2.8),
as it
- Original Message -
From: Pål Jensen
Subject: Lens compatibility in perspective (WAS: Re: D-ist blurb in
American Photo magazine)
It IS true. You are just an exception.
The funny thing is that the *ist D has better compatibility than the LX
had when released. The LX was only fully
- Original Message -
From: zcaballero
Subject: Re: I Am Pissed!
Imhave no sympathy for you. After all the years you have spent making
photographs you should know better than to bring any film that is of
concern to a cheap amateur lab like that. At least you have now
learned your
- Original Message -
From: Jens Bladt
Subject: SV: *ist D was not production type :-(
Hi
OK metal shells may be better. But I have a 11 years old Z1, (plastic
shell) - still working like the day i got it in 1992 - through thousinds
of
rolls. What more would you expect from a
On 3 Jul 2003 at 17:00, Pål Jensen wrote:
Chrome MZ-S bodies and black Limited lenses are going to fetch stellar prices on
e-bay in the future. You just mark my word...
Before of after Pentax is no longer?
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL
On 3 Jul 2003 at 16:50, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
on 03.07.03 15:29, keller.schaefer at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Interesting. But read test of this lens in Popular Photography:
http://www.popphoto.com/article.asp?section_id=2article_id=327
They rate 24-90 as 24.42-87.14 mm in reality. Who is
1 - 100 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
