Hi Ann
I don't know if this is what you are looking for. Click File, file info,
and enter info. I don't know if 5.0LE has it or not.
Butch
Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself.
Hermann Hesse (Demian)
The ability to add information is available in the Photoshop 5.5 (full
version). It isn't
in my copy of Photoshop 5.0 LE.
At 01:12 AM 9/30/03 -0400, you wrote:
Matt Bevers wrote:
In photoshop, look under the file menu - the option should be File
Info...
At least that's what it is in 7.0
John, thanks so much for this! It does sound as if I need to upgrade to full
fledged
photo shop. My stock agency wants jpg files that are labeled to start with -
then
wants uncompressed TIFFS for those that interest them - or original
transparancies,
which are still very acceptable for them.
On 29/9/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
Hows married life treating you?
Yeah, it's treating me.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Thanks for the replies. The answer really surprised me, but when I
thought about it I realised that the only thing that had changed
compared to the film *ist was the sensor size, so a 50mm lens should
give a normal magnification.
This just goes to reinforce that we are talking crop factor not
Thanks Paul,
I'm going into the Camera Exchange tomorrow to look at an *ist-D
so I'll have a look at I-Store as well. By the time you factor in
postage the difference in price isn't that great and I'll have someone
to complain to if things go wrong.
Leon, let me know how the x-drive works
then it wasn't IPTC. File||File Info, but i don't think you can get it in
Photoshop LE and definitely not in Photo Deluxe. IPTC also doesn't exist for
Photoshop PSD files. it has other information fields that you can fill in.
if they are sending out TIFF or JPG files to clients, they are using a
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 19:12:49 -0700, Paul Ewins wrote:
Thanks Paul,
I'm going into the Camera Exchange tomorrow to look at an *ist-D
so I'll have a look at I-Store as well. By the time you factor in
postage the difference in price isn't that great and I'll have someone
to complain to if
Beautiful pictures... btw, his 50mm (85 ?) must be one heck of a
lens - I haven't noticed any trace of comma aberration towards the
edges. Possibly the pics are too small for it to show up. However,
my FA 50/1.4 at 1.4 displays huge UFOs in the corners...
Servus, Alin
DagT wrote:
Rob Brigham wrote:
Have you any experience with this company? I was thinking
about
ordering a TV from them.
Hi Rob,
I've not had any personal dealings with them (yet) but know
two people who have purchased domestic electrical items and
have been very satisfied with price and delivery.
Bill, John, Tom,
So now I'm really confused...
A 55mm lens on an old 35mm Spotmatic gives a 'natural' view.
(The view thru the viewfinder and thru the other eye look about the same.)
Now put a 50mm on the *ist-D and you get the same viewfinder view???
So does the viewfinder have generous crop
Most of the time it´s a 35 f/1.4, I don´t know which brand but
obviously not Pentax.
I´ve seen prints in about 20x27cm size, they´re really good.
DagT
På tirsdag, 30. september 2003, kl. 13:14, skrev Alin Flaider:
Beautiful pictures... btw, his 50mm (85 ?) must be one heck of a
lens - I
Hi Fred,
It is good you remind people of that baffle. It was not a pleasant
experience when I first mounted the 35-85 on the LX, I couldn`t
get it back off without a little force. It ever so slightly bent that
upper mirror box metal. After that though, all the VS1`s I have
with the baffle mount
Is it fair to say that digital is like shooting slides? I've read that
in several places. To be honest, I haven't shot many slides nor have I
noticed any particular exposure problems with my E-10. I just use
segment or spot metering as I would on my MZ-s and it comes out fine.
Of course, I do
Hi *,
the October PUG is ready to go.
I will start with the splitted page in January. Jostein and I have to
work out how to distiguish between themed and open galery in Autopug.
Cheers
Adelheid
URL:
http://pug.komkon.org/
--
About resizing your pics:
To make the
A M-B 300D will last longer.
:)
Collin
snip
After-sales service is not such an issue with these domestic
items as the manufacturers have well-established warranty
schemes, but that may not apply equally to cameras. If I
was buying an EOS 300D I would use Park Cameras of Burgess
Hill.
sucks!
here goes my hope of scanning MF on a budget.
i sold nikon 4000 this summer and got this instead,
and it's been an excercise in frustration ever since.
the resolution (1180dpi) is ok for my purposes. but
pretty much everything else is horrible. the minolta
software is lousy, it does
on 30.09.03 15:33, Mike Ignatiev at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
anyway, it's off to ebay, and i would recommend anyone
considering getting one to think again.
i guess i'll be waiting for the next gen of nikon
multiformat offering...
Sad story. Personally I use Minolta Dimage Scan Multi PRO in
H,
I don't recall having a problem mounting this lens . . . of course
my LX has been out of action for a while, and I haven't used it . . .
I'll have to check on this when I get home . . . wouldn't want to ruin
the lens or camera, thanks for the heads up!
IL Bill
On Monday, September
- Original Message -
From: Bob S
Subject: Re: normal focal length of *ist-D?
Bill, John, Tom,
So now I'm really confused...
A 55mm lens on an old 35mm Spotmatic gives a 'natural' view.
(The view thru the viewfinder and thru the other eye look about the same.)
Now put a 50mm on
-Original Message-
From: Steve Desjardins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is it fair to say that digital is like shooting slides?
Well, sort of, except you can edit the original, easily make a print,
and salvage a bad exposure...
tv
A little before 1 this morning, we had our beloved dog Dexter euthanized.
He had begun internal bleeding, and was in a lot of pain, so we felt this
was best for him. He went peacefully, after 13 wonderful years as part of
our family.
Here is a portrait I did of him back when we lived in
Doug Brewer wrote:
A little before 1 this morning, we had our beloved dog Dexter
euthanized. He had begun internal bleeding, and was in a lot of pain,
so we felt this was best for him. He went peacefully, after 13
wonderful years as part of our family.
Sorry to hear this, Doug. Been there,
Doug,
Heartfelt condolences are extended.
---
Bruce
Tuesday, September 30, 2003, 7:32:10 AM, you wrote:
DB A little before 1 this morning, we had our beloved dog Dexter euthanized.
DB He had begun internal bleeding, and was in a lot of pain, so we felt this
DB was best for him. He went
It is good you remind people of that baffle. It was not a pleasant
experience when I first mounted the 35-85 on the LX, I couldn`t
get it back off without a little force. It ever so slightly bent
that upper mirror box metal. After that though, all the VS1`s I
have with the baffle mount and
Hi,
I am looking at a Tokina AT-X 28-135/4-4.5
Does any of You have experience with this lens?
Any comments are welcome!
Gabor
sigh
At least it seems he did not suffer too much.
Boris
Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike Ignatiev at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
here goes my hope of scanning MF on a budget.
i sold nikon 4000 this summer and got this instead,
and it's been an excercise in frustration ever since.
the resolution (1180dpi) is ok for my purposes. but
Hi all,
This is my first post in list, I'm danilo, from italy.
I have an MX body with three lenses (28/2.8, 50/1.7 , 100/2.8) with K mount.
I have read that its can be mounted on the new *istD body, but they are
totally manual (no AF nor AE). Will they work?
thank you all,
bye, danilo.
Pictures don't come up. Using PowerBook w/ Safari
On Tuesday, September 30, 2003, at 09:39 AM, Fred wrote:
It is good you remind people of that baffle. It was not a pleasant
experience when I first mounted the 35-85 on the LX, I couldn`t
get it back off without a little force. It ever so slightly
Sorry to hear about your loss Doug. That's a tough decision to have to
make, but I'm sure that Dexter agreed with you.
IL Bill
On Tuesday, September 30, 2003, at 09:32 AM, Doug Brewer wrote:
A little before 1 this morning, we had our beloved dog Dexter
euthanized. He had begun internal
Peter Alling wrote:
The ability to add information is available in the Photoshop 5.5 (full
version). It isn't
in my copy of Photoshop 5.0 LE.
Alas, that is what I feared. Thanks Peter (and Butch,and... oh well, you guys
all know I thank you:) )
annsan
p.s. that'll cost me a bundle, right?
A little before 1 this morning, we had our beloved dog Dexter euthanized.
He had begun internal bleeding, and was in a lot of pain, so we felt this
was best for him. He went peacefully, after 13 wonderful years as part of
our family.
Here is a portrait I did of him back when we lived in
Herb Chong wrote:
then it wasn't IPTC. File||File Info, but i don't think you can get it in
Photoshop LE and definitely not in Photo Deluxe. IPTC also doesn't exist for
Photoshop PSD files. it has other information fields that you can fill in.
if they are sending out TIFF or JPG files to
I do have a couple of relevant surgery photos of the procedure being
performed on a couple of VS1 35-85/2.8's (shot, appropriately enough,
with a VS1 90-180/4.5 Flat Field Zoom, which was originally designed
by Vivitar for surgical photography - g) on an embarrassingly
primitive VS1
Not with iMac using Safari or MS IE either.
DagT
På tirsdag, 30. september 2003, kl. 18:41, skrev Mr. William M. Kane:
Pictures don't come up. Using PowerBook w/ Safari
On Tuesday, September 30, 2003, at 09:39 AM, Fred wrote:
It is good you remind people of that baffle. It was not a pleasant
Doug, I'm very sorry to hear about your loss.
Amita
Neither on mine (G4 w/ Netscape 4.79 or Netscape 7.0)
Andre
Pictures don't come up. Using PowerBook w/ Safari
On Tuesday, September 30, 2003, at 09:39 AM, Fred wrote:
http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/v358528/ .
Fred
--
I'm looking for some high saturation print film to take with me to New
England. I'll probably bring some Fuji Superia, but I want some film
with warmer tones to bring out the colors of the trees. Have any of you
used Agfacolor Vista or Optima II, or Kodak Supra?
Thanks,
Amita
Hi!
My modest experience with Agfa Vista 100 is that it has quite
saturated reds, so I suppose it could be used to get warmer tones. I
think for the falling leaves it is a good choice.
Boris
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 12:13:22 -0400
Amita Guha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm looking for some high
Welcome.
The M and K lenses, per previous posts, will need a modification
in order to get along with the *istD body.
As discussed a while ago, drilling a divot in the spot where the
A pin would be. This provides an open electrical connection.
Then, keeping the lens set @ f22, it would appear
Collin Brendemuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Welcome.
The M and K lenses, per previous posts, will need a modification
in order to get along with the *istD body.
As discussed a while ago, drilling a divot in the spot where the
A pin would be. This provides an open electrical connection.
Pictures don't come up. Using PowerBook w/ Safari
Gee, sorry, Bill. I just tried the URL (copied and pasted from the
browser) again, and it worked OK for me. (???) Sorry.
Fred
What a great shot, Doug. Nothing better to remember him by...
I'm really sorry for your loss.
keith whaley
Doug Brewer wrote:
A little before 1 this morning, we had our beloved dog Dexter euthanized.
He had begun internal bleeding, and was in a lot of pain, so we felt this
was best for him.
I can't open them either.
In fact, I have tried unsuccessfully to open another of Fred's photos,
of the 85mm prime comparisons. No go.
If you're using Safari, chances are you're using Mac OS 10.x.x.
I'm using Mac OS 9.2.1 and Netscape Communicator.
I don't have a clue as to what is wrong.
I have
Sorry to hear that, Doug. That's a nice photo to remember him by.
chris
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Doug Brewer wrote:
A little before 1 this morning, we had our beloved dog Dexter euthanized.
He had begun internal bleeding, and was in a lot of pain, so we felt this
was best for him. He went
Amita, I can confirm that Optima II 100 was quite saturated in
yellow and red, and even HDC+ 100 showed some red affinities. ;o)
However, Agfa pretends it changed the emulsion in the new Optima
Prestige - actually in their entire negative film line. The so
called Eye Vision technology
I've shot a decent amount with the Kodak Supra films, and they tend to
be fairly warm as far as tones go. Not as high a saturation as you would
get out of, say, Velvia, or one of the other high-saturation slide
films, but decently saturated enough to put some life into a cloudy-day
picture.
What's the general opinion of this lens? Compared to the FA* 200mm f/2.8, F
100mm macro f/2.8 and the F 70-210mm f/4-5.6? What about the weight? And
also if I can ask what you paid for yours used (of list if you want)? I'm
trying to determine what a reasonable price is. Any info about this
Hi Fred,
How long should it take before those changes take effect, if you know?
I still can't open the site, two hours after reading this message.
No hurry. Just leave a message with OKAY! in it! g
keith
Fred wrote:
There are no BODY tags present on this page
You are getting there, Marie. Take your 24x36mm negative and trim it
down to 16x24mm. That is what is happening. There is no actual change in
focal length. It is just a crop.
The reason they started using the 35mm equivalent on PS digitals is
because they all tend to have different size
The 90-180 ...[snip... Perfect compliment to the LX.
Agreed, except I found that the LX is one body (and this is not
true of all K-mount bodies) that requires shaving off the
excessive old-style K-mount baffle that is found (until it is
removed) on some of the original VS1 gems.
It is
graywolf wrote:
You are getting there, Marie. Take your 24x36mm negative and trim it
down to 16x24mm. That is what is happening. There is no actual change in
focal length. It is just a crop.
The reason they started using the 35mm equivalent on PS digitals is
because they all tend to have
I really liked this PUG. Lot of people pictures. It was interesting to
see how folks interpeted the word professional.
Adelheid v. K. wrote:
Hi *,
the October PUG is ready to go.
--
graywolf
http://graywolfphoto.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If I am using a 200m lens and the crop will make it look like 350mm --
am I seeing 200mm through the viewfinder or 350mm?
You're seeing the same *angle of view* that you'd get from a 350mm on a
full-frame camera. I think this is the information you're looking for.
(The
Only the Sigma gives crop lines (They call it a sports-finder) the rest
mask off the unused area, except on the istD where the pentaprism is
specifically designed for a smaller area so there is no need to be as
crude as just masking - same effect though, just reduces the bulk of the
prism housing.
Great set of photos once again group.Good job of interpratation.
This months winner of the honorable equine hoof up goes to Dag Thrane. Great title and
super
shot of the spider.A mind is a terrible thing to waste.:-)
I pondered what to submit and
The viewfinder shows a smaller image than does a 35mm. It has more
magnification than most of the competition though so it looks bigger
than the equalent Nikon or Canon viewfinders which tend to look like
they just had the standard finder masked down to cover the small sensor
area (sort as if
It is very hard when you have to make such decision, I know because I
have been in the same situation several times. But at least you haven't
failed your old friend and have spared him and your family more suffering.
What counts now and forever is the happiness you have shared all these
years
Another way of saying the same thing. If a portion of your image takes up
16mm from top to bottom on an APS size sensor, it will fill the frame. On a
24.mm sensor, that same portion of your image will still take up 16mm in
height, but there will be 8mm of space above or below that same portion
Change the 350 to 300 and you'll be there.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 3:21 PM
Subject: Re: normal focal length of *ist-D?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If I am using a 200m lens and the crop will
still not getting any pictures. I see little boxes with question marks
in Safari, and when I switch to Explorer (v5.2.2), I get boxes with
stop signs in them . . .
Is this just me on the mac? I have a PC I can look at them with, I
just thought it would be nice to know it's not working.
IL
Paul Eriksson wrote:
What's the general opinion of this lens? Compared to the FA*
200mm f/2.8, F 100mm macro f/2.8 and the F 70-210mm f/4-5.6?
What about the weight?
In three words: pretty darn nice. I can't compare it to any of the
lenses you cite, but compared to my SMCA 70-210/f4
That is not the issue now. What do I see through the viewfinder? If I am
using a 200m lens and the crop will make it look like 350mm -- am I seeing 200mm
through the viewfinder or 350mm? And if I am seeing 200mm, then as someone
mentioned previously, are there crop lines?
No. You'll see
The spider is great but my favorite 3 in september PUG are:
* Violin Carving ,by Gianfranco Irlanda
* For Your Own Safety... ,by Mark Cassino
* There Might be a New Star ,by Matjaz Osojnik
They are the kind of pictures I would love to make!
mail to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Oorspronkelijk
I'm quite pleased with my $90.00 Vivitar Series 1 70-210/3.5. Only 1/2 stop
less, and I can live with the zoom creep for the difference in price :-)
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Stephen Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 3:43 PM
Subject:
Paul Eriksson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's the general opinion of this lens?
Totally amazing. Changed my opinion of zooms completely.
Compared to the FA* 200mm f/2.8,
Don't know - I don't have this lens.
F 100mm macro f/2.8
Comparable as far as optical quality goes - but just in the
Stephen,
tanks for the info
/Paul
From: Stephen Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FA* 80-200mm f/2.8
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 15:43:29 -0400
Paul Eriksson wrote:
What's the general opinion of this lens? Compared to the FA*
200mm f/2.8, F
In fact, I can't even raise...
http://www.cetussoft.com
...all by itself! Nothing happens. Well, it does, my browser activity
icon keeps moving, as tho' it were looking for an address...
keith
Keith Whaley wrote:
Oh yes, I also tried with G3, Netscape 7.01. Doesn't work...
keith
graywolf wrote:
He asked about which lens would match his other eye when he looked
through the viewfinder. That is different than a normal 50mm (normal on
135 cameras because that is what the Leica came with), and normal
rule-of-thumb ( = diagonal of the negative ) 43mm on 135. So, yes it is
Thanks Mark,
Paul
From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FA* 80-200mm f/2.8
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 15:59:48 -0400
Paul Eriksson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's the general opinion of this lens?
Totally amazing. Changed my opinion of
Hi cotty, buying in USA is a option that I had, but there is one
problem TAXES for any shipping made from outside Europe, they are
charging me near a 40% on the price... And this make it more expensive
than buying in Europe.
I think I will finally end buying a Canon EOS 10D (1440 euros) and a
Paul Eriksson wrote:
What's the general opinion of this lens? Compared to the FA* 200mm
f/2.8, F 100mm macro f/2.8 and the F 70-210mm f/4-5.6? What about the
weight? And also if I can ask what you paid for yours used (of list if
you want)? I'm trying to determine what a reasonable price is.
Can anyone name any reputable repair shop or repair person that
uses salvaged old pentax parts to repair old pentaxes?
I'm asking not because I want to get gear repaired, but rather
because I have an MX, K2 and SMC Takumar 20mm that are all broken
and declared irreparable for lack of parts by my
A line of PDMLers are waiting with their LX in one hand and a VS1
lens in the other...
Andre
--
John Francis wrote:
Marnie aka Doe ;-) Also William Robb said the 50mm looked close, ergo
that
would not be a 50mm but an 75 or 80 or 85mm or something.
No - it would be a 50mm. But it would be cropped to roughly the same field of
view as a 75mm on an MX (or a 150mm on a 6x7, or ...)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For the *istD to emulate the field of view (hope that is the
correct term)
that a 50mm lens has on a film camera -- because the center
of the image is
essentially cropped by the APS sensor and magnified --
I always hold on to my dead bodies for parts rather than
give away or sell for next to nothing. For example I recently
had a black spot f CLA'd and a couple of the parts in the
finder were damaged. My tech replaced them from a dead body
I sent along at no extra charge even though he had to open
... is really screwing up my digest formatting!
!!!
--
--
Collin Brendemuehl
KC8TKA
Ron Santo deserves enshrinement in Cooperstown.
-- Me
--
Ann
There is a possibility that Photoshop elements might offer that. I don't
have it so I can't check. Perhaps if someone on the list is using Elements
they can check. If it's on there Elements sells for under $100. The other
good news is that Adobe just announced a new upgrade to 7.0, Photoshop
I've been doing handheld shots with my MZ-S and Portra 400 UC lately. I
really like the results that I get at a local lab (I think they use a Fuji
Frontier).
--Mark
I have an example of this lens. It's heavy, big, and produces sharp,
contrasty images. I got mine (almost new in condition) from another PDML
lister about 4 years ago for about $1100.
--Mark
Hans Beumer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The spider is great but my favorite 3 in september PUG are:
* Violin Carving ,by Gianfranco Irlanda
* For Your Own Safety... ,by Mark Cassino
* There Might be a New Star ,by Matjaz Osojnik
They are the kind of pictures I would love to make!
Hi Hans,
Nope.
I was referring to the image one would see if one looked through the
viewfinder, what would match the other eye. I probably worded it completely
wrong.
Right, no connection to sensor, only view finder. But miswording is
completely
besides the point. You guys are sometimes being so
whose exactly?
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
... is really screwing up my digest formatting!
!!!
--
--
Collin Brendemuehl
KC8TKA
Ron Santo deserves enshrinement in Cooperstown.
-- Me
--
Hope this helps.
Rob
I'm sorry, due to my email bouncing repeatedly to the list, the top of my
last post got cut off and it is not clear whom I am addressing.
The answer to the above was:
Nope.
Blah, blah, blah.
I would not repost this, but I wanted it clear who I was addressing.
Sorry. I
i found kodak supra being pretty far from being a high saturation --
just plain normal.
superia works great here in foliage!
mishka
Amita Guha wrote:
I'm looking for some high saturation print film to take with me to New
England. I'll probably bring some Fuji Superia, but I want some film
with
Marnie, you need to go find a DSLR somewhere and *look* through the
viewfinder. This is probably the only way you'll really find out what
you want to know.
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com
Marnie wrote:
But I am not so sure that I like the idea that you cannot see the increase
through the viewfinder. I rely heavy on what I can see through the
viewfinder.
Using mainly zooms, that is what I use to determine if I want to shoot at
70mm
or 135mm or something.
So maybe there are
enough -- not another DOF thread!!!
vbg
mishka
graywolf wrote:
The strange thing is optics seems to be the area where the most
erroneous BS is accepted as TRUTH! in photography. And most of
optics is simply ratios, and no harder to understand than figuring out
how much ingredients you need to
And the first person has signed up. That was fast!
1. Jim Fellows
chris
Hey Doug -
I'm so sad to read about what happened to Dexter. I know what those late
night emergencies are like.
Pets are not humans, but they share our lives and mirror back to us the
basics and the fundamentals of what life is all about. They are a window
through which we can see what is
Condolences to you and yours Doug.
You should never doubt you did the right thing, and you have such a
beautiful photo to have to remember him by.
Simon
Doug Brewer wrote:
A little before 1 this morning, we had our beloved dog Dexter euthanized.
He had begun internal bleeding, and was in a
Hi William,
HTH
It helped me at least - I've been following this thread as I'm pretty much
in the same position as Bo-Ming.
I've been amazed how expensive some studio equipment is, and how easily you
can simply make them yourself out of everyday household objects.
Cheers,
Simon
-Original
What's the general opinion of this lens? Compared to the FA* 200mm f/2.8,
F 100mm macro f/2.8 and the F 70-210mm f/4-5.6? What about the weight?
And also if I can ask what you paid for yours used (of list if you want)?
I'm trying to determine what a reasonable price is. Any info about this
Wish I could help you, but I have visited 2 largest repair house recently,
and none of them made sense and messed up my working MX, so I have decided
to fix it myself. Now they are in perfect working order. What's wrong with
your MX anyway (sorry I only know how to repair MX)?
Alan Chan
has anyone tried a 1G or larger memory card in the camera to see if it
works? currently, my plan is to get a pair of 1G cards. i'm not interested
in Microdrives because of power consumption. i will use high speed
CompactFlash.
Herb...
Good one Andre!
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California
- Original Message -
From: Andre Langevin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 1:38 PM
Subject: Re: Macro lenses
A line of PDMLers are waiting with their LX in one hand and a VS1
lens in the
On 30 Sep 2003 at 17:25, graywolf wrote:
Bill Robb did that and showed that I was wrong about needing an 82mm
lens for a 1:1 image it is closer to a 50mm. After rethinking, it it
probably would be a 52-53mm lens. Note that is much longer than some
others said.
And just to confuse the
Great set indeed.
The one that gets my vote for wow factor is Strange Noise by Rolf Brenner.
It really captures the slice in time perfectly.
It also looks like the sort of festival that if you can remember anything
about it you weren't really there.
Simon
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
1 - 100 of 125 matches
Mail list logo
