Damnation and other rude words,
Some * (fill in your own expletive) has deleted the page except
for the safety warning about not looking into the sun.
Did anyone save a copy of this page rather than just bookmarking it? If
so, I would appreciate a copy.
I was looking forward to
hi!
you could try to find the page through google, at the listings of the
hits they always have a link to the google archive, maybe you are lucky
and the pervious version is still there.
bye Katrin
mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb am 15.07.2003, 12:34:07:
Damnation and other rude words,
The darkroom does not have an Undo key. Nor does it automatically
remember all of the steps that you have taken so that you can repeat them
again and again with perfect accuracy, or back up and redo any or all steps
in the process. There are many more advantages to using a computer but most
I think I saved a copy at home. I'm at work now but I'll check this evening
when I get back there. Let me know, if you haven't gotten it from someone
else first, and I'll zip it up and email it to you, assuming it's all there.
I didn't have time to check it when I saved it.
Len
---
From:
Paul Stenquist wrote:
Thanks John. Yeah, I think a flash would have gotten her
attention:-).
That's not always a bad thing; you could even turn a very
good candid shot into an excellent candid portrait ...
(did I really type that?!).
I never use a flash with the Leica. Just doesn't seem
Joseph Tainter wrote:
It's very simple. Everything in photography is a
trade-off. Everything:
film format (size), film type, camera bodies, lenses,
whether or not to
carry a tripod, what one spends, etc. Provided that we
have some
experience with gear or film, we each make our own
decisions
Yeah it may be cached, search for the paged in google and clicked on the
cached link in the last line of the hit.
hth,
scott
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hi!
you could try to find the page through google, at the listings of the
hits they always have a link to the google archive, maybe you are
www.swiftpay.com
fraud??? or paypal alternative
There is a thread that has just started on rec.photo.equipment.35mm
called 'swiftpay'.
Harry
--
Harold Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Len,
There are many more advantages to using a computer but most
folks already know that, including yourself, so I won't bore the list
further.
Perhaps it's more interesting to give Pentax some more marketing advise ;-)
Cheers, Hans.
Mark Cassino said:
It's sheer speculation on my part since I don't have DSLR, but I'd theorize
that the cropping effect in a DSLR that boosts the effective focal length
of the lens would not similarly boost the effects of vibration on sharpness.
If a point source of light were smeared out
Did the original 645 have a removable finder so it could be used as a waist
level camera?
Ed
_
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
I've only had one lense since I bought my SF-10 in 2000: an F 35-70/3.5-4.5. I
ordered an M 75-150/4 from Adorama and it showed up last week. I was getting rather
frustrated with the new lense because I could only focus it by turning what I thought
was the zoom ring, and I couldn't find the
On 15 Jul 2003 at 8:41, Ed Matthew wrote:
Did the original 645 have a removable finder so it could be used as a waist
level camera?
A big no, none of the Pentax 645 bodies have featured a removable finder.
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL
I shot 4-5 MF pictures of our GPS tech. in action last week
and our
coporate development group has asked me to scan them for possible use on our
website/brochures/cover pages etc.
Film: Fuji Provia 100F chromes
Camera :Pentax 6x7 with 90 leaf
Scanner : Epson 2450
My
On 15 Jul 2003 at 9:47, Richard Klein wrote:
I just realized this morning that the wide (***wide***)
ring is the focusing ring, and you don't twist anything to zoom in/out; you just
slide the focusing ring in/out. :-)
You've just discovered how to operate a one touch zoom lens :-)
Lots of
Which one? The Pentax 645 had a non-interchangeable viewfinder from the beginning.
All the best!
Raimo
Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
-Alkuperäinen viesti-
Lähettäjä: Ed Matthew [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: mike wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Damnation and other rude words,
Some * (fill in your own expletive) has deleted the
page except
for the safety warning about not looking into the sun.
Did anyone save a copy of this page rather than just
PDML
Ok, I've got a top-secret sheet of specs dated as recently as June 30th
2003 for the *ist D, this may be old news, I don't know, don't follow the
group.
--
First, for Canadians, it sells for about $6000+ with a lens. [Ouch]
6.1MP [Normal]
Sensitivity is ISO 200 to 3200 [where is
Mark, do you get any keepers at 800mm? And what
do you suspect to be the culprit? Tripod/head
combination in use?
Mark Cassino wrote, in part:
- at my present skill level I can
consistently get sharp results with 680mm - at 800mm my results drop off
dramatically. So I figure I should be able
Except for the inflated price, there's hardly something to startle.
Which leads me to the suspicion this is a hoax. See the sender's
address - abuse something where I doubt anyone will answer to
Pentax questions - while the real sender address is buried
in the headers: [EMAIL
No, Alin, Brad is well known. He's not a hoax.
He left the list some time ago, and I'm surprised to see he showed up
again, even briefly! Signed on just to tell the pdml-ers about some
*ist-D specs? Odd, but then...
keith whaley
Alin Flaider wrote:
Except for the inflated price, there's
No. They do sell a 90 degree attachment, however.
Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA 24450
(540) 458-8873
FAX: (540) 458-8878
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/15/03 09:41AM
Did the original 645 have a removable finder so it could be
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003, Ed Matthew wrote:
Did the original 645 have a removable finder so it could be used as a waist
level camera?
Nope.
--
http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
As a general rule of thumb, you should scan so that the _output_ file will
be the size of the print and 300 dpi.
That's not scanning at 300dpi.
Let's say you are going to make an 8 x 10 inch digital print out of the
6x7cm negative. You'd want a file that is 8 x 10 inches at 300 dpi, or 2400
The debate is a non-issue.
There can be no reason why we should not discuss these
trade-offs. If we stopped, PDML would not need to exist and
our lives would be greatly the poorer for its loss.
I agree with this. I am annoyed, though, by those who write or say that
you are not a serious or
Don't wish to be boring but can we eradicate the growing tendency to stick an e on the
end of lens. It's incorrect, unnecessary, and a waste of a keystroke.
Unless of course these folk are using the Tasmanian Aboriginal spelling, in which case
I apologise profusely
AB
I guess no one was using a Pentax or an SMC lens!
http://www.newsnet5.com/news/2331915/detail.html
If you can see the video, note that the different white shapes likely
correspond to differently shaped lens openings of the different
cameras, including an old Kodak 110!
Joe
Unless of course these folk are using the Tasmanian Aboriginal spelling, in which
case I
apologise profusely
AB
Apology accepted.vbg
Dave
Or unless they've intended it to be plural and left off the last 's'
(lenses) :-)
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Anton Browne [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2003 12:27 PM
Subject: LENS it is, LENSE it is not
Don't wish to be boring but can we
I agree with this. I am annoyed, though, by those who write or say that you
are not a serious or conscientous photographer if you use zooms. (I don't
claim that this was said on PDML, but we were pointed recently to an
article that did say something like that.)
I once waited 6-1/2 hours for
Hi!
The town where I live has only one Pro Foto Shop. It has many Foto
Shops, but only one grades itself as Pro. Anyway, my two most recent
films were scanned at 4000dpi with Nikon CoolScan 4000. Two days ago I
was taking my most recent film (from which by the way I published to
M35/2.8
Pieces like that should only be taken seriously by tyros. If you know what you're
doing, as in you know what you'll get on film with what you have, then you are the
true expert for that shot.
People who use a zoom to avoid moving around probably aren't very good photographers
to begin with, and
A 4000 dpi scan with a bit depth of 16 bits/color give a file that is around 120 mb.
See if turning on ICE cleans up the scans without hurting resolution too much. FARE on
the Canon scanners works great without hurting resolution; I do not have to do any
post scan clean up with FARE set to
I dunno. Show us the pic. g
Joseph Tainter wrote:
The debate is a non-issue.
There can be no reason why we should not discuss these
trade-offs. If we stopped, PDML would not need to exist and
our lives would be greatly the poorer for its loss.
I agree with this. I am annoyed, though, by those
According to Merriam-Webster (10 Ed) both lens and lense are acceptable
as the singular form of the noun. I suspect it might be one of those
cases where the error became so common that it was just accepted as
legitimate. It also cites (right below) the use of lens as a
transitive verb meaning
Most of the folks I know are using a computer or a DVD player (some can
do this) and a TV to view images. The images are being stored on a hard
drive or a CD.
Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA 24450
(540) 458-8873
FAX: (540) 458-8878
[EMAIL
I have one of the aforementioned and oft besmirched lenses. I assume
that this was some kind of consumer grade product. It clearly does not
fit into the K, M, A, F, or FA category. Anyone know the details. I
can't find it on any of the Pentax lens pages I usually access.
Steven Desjardins
Hi Dave,
I would scan at max resolution. It is easier and better to downsize an image
then it is to try and res it up. The only place you might need near the full
res is a large image in a brochure, or a full page magazine ad (dream big).
Better to have it and not need it then the other way
I'd use the pseudonym of Grey Lensman but E. E. Smith would probably send
Rod the Rock Kinnison to break both of my knees. ;-)
Len
---
From: Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: LENS it is, LENSE it is not
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003
on 15.07.03 20:01, Steve Desjardins at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have one of the aforementioned and oft besmirched lenses. I assume
that this was some kind of consumer grade product. It clearly does not
fit into the K, M, A, F, or FA category. Anyone know the details. I
can't find it on
Sounds like the best way to go.
They are only 4, 6x7 images,at 2450 that gives me time for dinner and 3-4 beersvbg
Dave
Hi Dave,
I would scan at max resolution. It is easier and better to downsize an image
then it is to try and res it up. The only
Some details here:
http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/primes/_non-SMC/tak_135f2.5.html
It lacks SMC. I think it falls into more of the M series due to its
size. clearly nothing to do with SMCP-M lenses however.
I think mine is a great indoor portrait lens.
Christian
- Original Message
It performs very good wide open with quite nice contrast and
sharpness. OK, maybe not as super-sharp as SMC-K 135/2.5 but still
decent performer for its price - definitely better than many of
today's zooms!
It's a decent lens, and may be considered to be sort of a
lighthearted companion to
I presse down the down DoFP button, and I can see that it stops down the
aperture, it gets darker or ligther. But I really don't notice anything
changing focus, how is it supposed to showe me what's in the DoF? This
is my first camera with DoF, and there's not much in the manual about
it. Its
Hi,
Close focus on something bright, press the DOF button, move the aperture
ring on the
lens from wide open to fully stopped down. You will see the range of focus
increase
and decrease.
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California
- Original Message -
From: Scott D [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
depends on what they like and are willing to photograph. i think it can help some, but
depends on how much the person spends learning too. i used to shoot primes only but
use almost all zooms now. zooms have gotten better and what i used to shoot i don't
anymore.
Herb
- Original
Joe said:
I agree with this. I am annoyed, though, by those who write or say that you
are not a serious or conscientous photographer if you use zooms. (I don't
claim that this was said on PDML, but we were pointed recently to an
article that did say something like that.)
I once waited 6-1/2
Is it one of those American/Brit things. You know, Yank-color Bloke-colour,
Yank-lens Bloke-lense. :-)
Bill
We da Tasmanians laik our lenses wid some e on da end. It
maiks da flair go avay...
---
Boris Liberman
www.geocities.com/dunno57
Never type with your mouth full. It makes you sound funny. :-)
Len
---
The focus of your main subject will not change, but if the subject is
relatively close to you, as the lens stops down, more of the foreground and
background will come into focus. That's why, GENERALLY, for portraits you
use a large lens(e) opening, and for lancscapes a small lens(e) opening.
Bruce, would forcing a zoom owner to use a prime lens, say 50
mm, for say 2 months, say forcing them to shoot, say one film
a week, would help zoom owner improve?
---
Boris Liberman
www.geocities.com/dunno57
I'm not Bruce but I think anyone could benefit from shooting with a
single
Thanks, I notice it now. It is hard to notice if your not focusing on
something really bright.
Steve Larson wrote:
Hi,
Close focus on something bright, press the DOF button, move the aperture
ring on the
lens from wide open to fully stopped down. You will see the range of focus
increase
and
Depends on the lens. One of the main fixtures on my LX is an
circa 1980`s zoom. But you`re right, most were crap.
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California
Gregory L. Hansen wrote:
I'm going to guess that this sort of advice appeared with early zooms,
when the quality really was pretty bad.
Well, actually, it's the same show as May in the Fly Gallery here in
Toronto, just in a different venue. This time it's at the Jet Fuel Cafe
(ironically, where all the photos were taken).
Turns out that the photographer who's in there for July didn't have
enough works to fill all of the wall
I understand dof, I just hadn't really noticed any focus changes. Guess
I just wasn't focusing on a bright enough subject. Its a nice feature if
its bright enough.
Bill Owens wrote:
The focus of your main subject will not change, but if the subject is
relatively close to you, as the lens
Don't wish to be boring but can we eradicate the growing tendency to
stick an e on the end of lens. It's incorrect, unnecessary, and a waste
of a keystroke.
Bloodye helle Ie couldn'te agreee moree, thise dispiccablee habite hase
gote toe stope!
(34 deg c today, mags court biker doing 154 mph +
No, Alin, Brad is well known. He's not a hoax.
HAR!
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
På tirsdag, 15. juli 2003, kl. 02:43, skrev William Robb:
- Original Message -
From: Hans Imglueck
Subject: Re: Digital question
Hi Dag,
snip. But as I mentioned
in my first email - digital makes it much more easy.
snip
I had this conversation with Dag a couple of months ago. He assured
Perhaps someone could get this list from Brad and post it here. Hoax or
not, it might be fun.
Paul
Alin Flaider wrote:
Except for the inflated price, there's hardly something to startle.
Which leads me to the suspicion this is a hoax. See the sender's
address - abuse something where
I suppose there is something relevant to photography, and more
specifically Pentax, in dragging Tasmanian Aboriginal people into this
thread? I just wish I knew what the relevance was?
Cheers
Shaun Canning
Cultural Heritage Services
High Street, Broadford,
Vic, 3658
Mob: 0414-967 644
e-mail:
Speaking of the perception of time, especially with regards to the terms
old and new, I've noticed a large difference between the UK (probably
all of Europe, but I speak English), the East Coast and the West Coast (of
the US).
It seems that if an establishment wishes to gain stature by
Hi,
Tuesday, July 15, 2003, 8:54:20 PM, you wrote:
As when C. S. Lewis, portrayed by Anthony Hopkins in the movie Shadowlands,
provided his lady friend with a tour of Cambridge University:
That's the new building.
When was it built?
1733
Quote may be inaccurate but the point is
Hi,
Tuesday, July 15, 2003, 10:07:07 PM, you wrote:
Is it one of those American/Brit things. You know, Yank-color Bloke-colour,
Yank-lens Bloke-lense. :-)
Bill
it's not a current British spelling. I always assumed it was American
ignorance - a back formation from the plural.
--
Cheers,
Sadly, my trip to Cotty-Land has been officially cancelled. For one, my
vacation time has been cut from 10-14 days to 7. IMO, that's just not long
enough to balance out the effects of both time change and travel time.
Secondly, by the time i get there, my good friend who is already there will
1. What are you drinking?
HAR! my thoughts exactly.
http://www.nrg666.com/pdml/portraits/pages/BradDobo.html
I'll say no more...
-frank
Cotty wrote:
No, Alin, Brad is well known. He's not a hoax.
HAR!
--
I don't believe in God, but I do believe in pi - Henri Cartier-Bresson
Hi Cotty!
1. What are you drinking?
A popular California beverage that starts with regular Pimms, which then put
through an isomizer to create a thick honey-coloured potion we call
Pimms-oil.
2. Can I have some?
I'm sorry but it is only legal in Canada.
- THaller
Yeah, you with the 6x7, the rest of us with our 400's - 600's. I doubt it
would draw much attention, huh.
-Original Message-
From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: July 14, 2003 6:03 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: Photo Essays Street Photography
My, aren't you preciousd!
Bob Walkden wrote:
well, that's very new indeed. Most of us live in houses that you guys
would treat as museums. My house was built in 1896 and is perfectly
ordinary. My sister's was built in 1837, which is no age at all. My
boarding house at school was built in 1585.
Nah...
When I ponder questions of time (especially the inner workings of
time, if ya know what I mean), the substance ingested isn't usually
alcohol...
cheers, from the country that recently decriminalized marijuana,
frank
jerome wrote:
1. What are you drinking?
HAR! my thoughts exactly.
Hi frank,
When I ponder questions of time... the substance ingested isn't
usually alcohol...
Then you may appreciate my response to Mr. Cotty...
Besides, with 25 replies to LENS it is... how can I be berated for this
thread??
- THaller
S1 3.5 70-210?
Steve Larson wrote:
Depends on the lens. One of the main fixtures on my LX is an
circa 1980`s zoom. But you`re right, most were crap.
--
I don't believe in God, but I do believe in pi - Henri Cartier-Bresson
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 18:31:48 +0400, Boris Liberman wrote:
The town where I live has only one Pro Foto Shop. It has many Foto
Shops, but only one grades itself as Pro. Anyway, my two most recent
films were scanned at 4000dpi with Nikon CoolScan 4000.
Boy, I wish I could get that in my area.
Rock on, dudes!
Thomas Haller wrote:
snip
I'm sorry but it is only legal in Canada.
- THaller
--
I don't believe in God, but I do believe in pi - Henri Cartier-Bresson
Thomas Haller wrote:
Hi frank,
When I ponder questions of time... the substance ingested isn't
usually alcohol...
Then you may appreciate my response to Mr. Cotty...
Besides, with 25 replies to LENS it is... how can I be berated for this
thread??
Har! Because that is the dao of
No, the S1 35-85/2.8. I finally found the film that works excellent with it,
Fuji NPS 160. Have you tried the 160 yet Frank? Nevermind, you`re BW
only.
Maybe someday I`ll get my 24-48 back :(
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California
- Original Message -
From: frank theriault [EMAIL
Costa rica is marvelous I was there and loved it. Make sure you don't rent a
car because they really end up screwing you with it. Trust me take the tours
it is a lot more fun and you won't be getting lost all the time. It is an
absolutely marvelous place.
If you want I will scan a few images from
Hi, Steve,
OOOo - a 2.8 (drool drool) - even better. I couldn't remember which one you
had, but I knew you liked it.
Well, I'm about 90% or more BW, but I will buy the odd roll of colour for
family and holiday snaps, only to stop the inevitable whining (why didn't you
take colour?), and
To keep the record straight, blame Keith for de-hoaxing Brad, not poor Cotty...
And now you've put a face to him.
Un fait accompli.
keith
frank theriault wrote:
http://www.nrg666.com/pdml/portraits/pages/BradDobo.html
I'll say no more...
-frank
Cotty wrote:
No, Alin, Brad is well
Frank,
Deep down I`m envious of your BW abilities, (not to mention your 24-48)
:)!
I usually always have BW loaded in a Spottie, but just don`t shoot it
enough, gotta change that.
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California
- Original Message -
From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1618301
They say the good die young.Must be true.Eight months old,now gone.Followed another
local
cat across
a busy road to the east of us.Only one made it to the other side.
Sighh
Joseph Tainter wrote:
I agree with this. I am annoyed, though, by those who
write or say that
you are not a serious or conscientous photographer if you
use zooms. (I
don't claim that this was said on PDML, but we were
pointed recently to
an article that did say something like that.)
I once
Well, actually, it's the same show as May in
the Fly
Gallery here in
Toronto, just in a different venue. This time it's at the Jet Fuel Cafe
(ironically, where all the photos were taken).
As Mr. Monty C Burns would say: Exelent
I'l definetly try
I got the M 3.5 a few months ago off ebay, for about $40 IIRC. I've been
pretty happy with it.
Christian Skofteland wrote:
I bought my Takumar (Bayonet) 135/2.5 for US$20.00 in
almost-never-used-because-it-was-so-clean-and-perfect condition. Sounds
like a budget lens to me.,,,
(the M is
cheers, from the country that recently decriminalized marijuana,
frank
when did you say is the next TPDML?
all of a sudden, a 9hrs drive seems like nothing...
mishka
Nope. It'll be the drive ~back~ that'll seem like nothing. Or it'll
seem like forever, but you won't care... vbg
Next TOPDML? Like, whenever the kharma strikes us, dude!
don't Bogart,
frank
mishka wrote:
cheers, from the country that recently decriminalized marijuana,
frank
when did
Very true. I recently used my 28-70mm to shoot fireworks, and because of
the flexibility, my shots came out a lot better than they would have if
I'd been stuck trying to swap primes, with limited time, in the dark.
-Original Message-
From: Lon Williamson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I
I think that it is something like practicing scales on a musical
instrument: it's an exercise to make you better, and not an end in
itself. A photographer named David Hume Kennerly did something like this
with a Mamiya 67 with a single wide angle lens (read about him and the
book that was the
the Nikon 4000ED has a full roll holder. you put the entire roll in. it also is much
faster. the minimal processing 4000dpi scan takes under 40 seconds per frame. the
change in speed is negligible to drop to 1000 dpi.
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I was there Nov. 93, end of the rainy season/start of the dry season.
I'm still drinking Costa Rican coffee. Great place. If I get back I'll
try to photograph the long columns of leaf-cutter ants.
But you are talking rainy season. Put it off until November or later if
you want to do things out
It drives crazy when vendors do this on eBay. And they do it in
ignorance, not because lense is an acceptable spelling in a dictionary
they have never consulted.
Joe
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 22:16:04 -0400, Herb Chong wrote:
the Nikon 4000ED has a full roll holder. you put the entire roll
in. it also is much faster. the minimal processing 4000dpi scan
takes under 40 seconds per frame. the change in speed is negligible
to drop to 1000 dpi.
Two darned good
On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 11:44:10 -0400, tom wrote:
Is this something the Frontier operator could control?
Yes.
Is the control easy enough that I could ask them to reduce these
effects just on my film, like special processing?
Yes, assuming they know how to operate it.
On Sat, 12 Jul 2003
After consulting with my friend who lived in Costa Rica for some time,
here's some thoughts.
1) Plenty of Photo ops (native stuff plus wildlife opportunities): yes,
definitely.
2) Not absurdly crowded: yes.
3) Not ridiculously hot: depends on the location more than the time of
year. Costa Rica
rumor has it that Nikon is going to be dropping the 4000ED and replacing it with a new
model, possibly at a lower cost. nothing substantial enough for me to know whether i
should believe the rumor or not. the list price plus rebate has dropped to under $1400
and you may be able to get it for
Sorry for the post.I feel better typing this to my group of friends.
Dave
No apology needed. Speaking as a person owned by two cats, you have my
sympathy.
Regards,
Ed
_
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
Sorry to hear about your loss. Boris, my oldest, passed last year at 12 Y.O.
I sometimes question the morality of keeping indoor cats, then I am reminded
of this. There are a lot of outdoor cats where I live (city) Few I see more
then a couple of years. A good friend of mine lost 3 older cats in
- Original Message -
From: Bruce Rubenstein
Subject: Re: Zooms vs. primes: the final word and ultimate wisdom
I think that it is something like practicing scales on a musical
instrument: it's an exercise to make you better, and not an end in
itself.
Well put.
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: Lon Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 9:36 AM
Subject: Re: Zooms vs. primes (WAS: Re: Let's talk about the FA
28-105/4-5.6PZ (now abit long))
Mark, I have the Pentax auto tube set, two third party auto tube
sets,
It quite possible would help the zoom owner ti improve.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bruce, would forcing a zoom owner to use a prime lens, say 50 mm, for
say 2 months, say forcing them to shoot, say one film a week, would
help zoom owner improve?
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
