My late father-in-law left me a pristine chrome Spotmatic II with a
S-M-C Takumar 50mm f1.4 and a few accessories. The meter even works!
I was checking some of the usual sites, but could find little
information regarding which lenses to look for and which to avoid. I
did read the 85 f1.8 is a
Interesting..
Just a curiosity -- Anyone els on the list running an MZ-S on NiMH
Batteries, what about other cameras such as an MZ-5n ?
Rgds
Patrick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Patrick Genovese wrote:
I assume you have the battery grip... Some quesitons:
1. What NiMH batteries do you use i.e.
Or driving exotic cars in city traffic...
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
You're right. That's nothing but pleasure of handling nicely krafted camera
in hands. That's one of the main reasons why so many people still likes
their manual cameras very much.
For me it would be an MZ-S with the following changes.
1. Slightly bigger viewfinder and higher eyepoint.
2. Preferably an interchangeable finder.
3. Faster AF and more accurate servo AF.
4. Slightly bigger grip closer to the Z-1P's gip (with at option to add
a handstrap).
5. Faster frame rate
I remember someone mentioned Pentax had recommended the LI setting for
rechargables just in case.
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
3. What about the LR6 / LI Switch on the battery grip, what setting do you
use and what difference does it make ?
LR6. I figure that 1.5v is close to 1.35v
On 20 Oct 2004 at 23:40, Alan Chan wrote:
Or driving exotic cars in city traffic...
LOL, the Dino clutch would send you lame in Sydney traffic :-)
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Do LI batteries have a lower/higher voltage ?
Does anyone what the circutry behind the LI setting is supposed to do?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I remember someone mentioned Pentax had recommended the LI setting for
rechargables just in case.
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
3. What about the
Patrick Genovese mused:
For me it would be an MZ-S with the following changes.
1. Slightly bigger viewfinder and higher eyepoint.
Possible.
2. Preferably an interchangeable finder.
Implausible - that would need to be designed in, not added later.
3. Faster AF and more accurate servo
Many thanks.
Best,
John
-- Original Message ---
From: The Diabolical Dr Z [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 03:33:35 +0200
Subject: Re: FA 35mm f/2 European prices please
Best I could find (in NL) tonight was 325 incl. VAT at
www.geengeld.nl.
Steve Jolly wrote:
Mishka wrote:
in other words, i'll have to pay ~$2K and have an inferior system. how
is that cool?
oh, and if i were to shoot bw, iwould have really great 2MP pixies
(from which i will
be able to make 144M files). wow.
No, your bw photos would still be 6MP. I don't think
Mishka wrote:
but of course!
and if you are at it, i would really want to understand how 6 million
pixels (36M of information)
can be grown to 24 (to get a 144M file).
care to explain (i'll do my best to understand)?
It's the process of resing-up an image to a resolution suitable for
printing.
Toralf Lund wrote:
Or maybe he does. Of course, most of us know by now that 6MP colour
photos also really have only about 1.5 million-pixel's worth of unique
information, since there are 6 million sensor elements, of which each
captures just one colour component, and there are twice as many
Toralf Lund wrote:
Steve Jolly wrote:
Mishka wrote:
in other words, i'll have to pay ~$2K and have an inferior system. how
is that cool?
oh, and if i were to shoot bw, iwould have really great 2MP pixies
(from which i will be able to make 144M files). wow.
No, your bw photos would still be 6MP.
Jostien,
Lovely, lots of mood I agree with Tanya It may be even better in black
and white.
Rgds
Patrick
Steve Jolly wrote:
Mishka wrote:
but of course!
and if you are at it, i would really want to understand how 6 million
pixels (36M of information)
can be grown to 24 (to get a 144M file).
care to explain (i'll do my best to understand)?
It's the process of resing-up an image to a resolution
Hi.
I think I promised someone (Jostein?) that I would tell more about my
experience with Norwegian mail-order developers Fotolabo, and Kodak
Norge. I've now tried them both. In the case of Kodak, I actually sent
the film to Ulles Postfoto (http://www.postfoto.no/), but apparently
Kodak does
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Patrick Genovese mused:
For me it would be an MZ-S with the following changes.
1. Slightly bigger viewfinder and higher eyepoint.
Possible.
2. Preferably an interchangeable finder.
Implausible - that would need to be designed in, not added later.
We're
Steve Jolly wrote:
Toralf Lund wrote:
Or maybe he does. Of course, most of us know by now that 6MP colour
photos also really have only about 1.5 million-pixel's worth of
unique information, since there are 6 million sensor elements, of
which each captures just one colour component, and there
Toralf Lund wrote:
I haven't tried doing the actual maths, but I would assume that no
algorithm can be proven to give you more than 2MPs worth of information
*in the general case*. On the other hand, you might probably show that
they can give you more than that (up to 6MP) under certain
I think CRB was planning a photo road trip. Hope he doesn't come home
to find 5000 messages or so.
Paul
On Oct 20, 2004, at 11:27 PM, Peter J. Alling wrote:
Or short ones for that matter.
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: Peter J. Alling Subject: Re:
unsubscribe
Tfhe 35/2 is a great lens, but it's prone to the yellow glass syndrome.
Make sure the front element hasn't yellowed before buying one of these.
The 50/1.4 that you already have is great, and you're correct about the
85/1.8. The SMC Tak 200/4 is a real bargain and quite good. The last
version
I've been waiting for this to come up again to ask a dumb question.
If an istD is 6MP at 12bits per pixel this would be about 9MB of raw sensor
data.
The .PEF files are a little over 12MB in size.
What information is contained in the additional ~3MB?
Or is the file simply padded to 2 bytes per
Patrick wrote:
11 Why not its a new body - or at least exp compensation in 1/3 stops. An easy way to
do that may be to feed an offset ISO rating to the metering system.
REPLY:
Huh? Huh Huh??
The MZ-S already has stepless exposure compensation. What kind of improvement would it
be
Don Sanderson wrote:
If an istD is 6MP at 12bits per pixel this would be about 9MB of raw sensor
data.
The .PEF files are a little over 12MB in size.
What information is contained in the additional ~3MB?
Or is the file simply padded to 2 bytes per pixel?
The file *is* simply padded to two bytes
Thanks Steve, I just found a short thread in the archives but it didn't
seem to reach a definite conclusion.
Seems that TIFF makes no provision for storing partial bytes of data
in less than full bytes of storage space.
The only downside to this is waste of storage space and increased
read/write
Arghh, I found someone offering his FA 600 f4.0 and FA 300 f2.8 lenses. He is asking
3500 euro and 2500 euro for them. The FA 300 has been on my wishlist a long time, but
I think 2500 euro is way to much. Any advice?
BTW I already have the A 300 f4.0, do I really need the extra stop? Somehow I
Body in black anodized aluminum or magnesium, feels like Super A with Motor
Drive A attached except lighter weight, LX FB/FC finder, or interchangeable,
TTL, DX, databack, digital back, 5 fps, A mode.
- Original Message -
From: Collin Brendemuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Frank Wajer wrote:
Arghh, I found someone offering his FA 600 f4.0 and FA 300 f2.8
lenses. He is asking 3500 euro and 2500 euro for them. The FA 300 has
been on my wishlist a long time, but I think 2500 euro is way to
much.
About the going rate for an FA*300/2.8, I'd have said...
S
Caveman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
tom wrote:
Guys, I think I'm done. I don't follow threads anymore, I don't contribute
much, and I just have no time.
The real problem is that you have no time. Once you'll have again some
we know you'll be back.
If anything ridiculously funny happens, let me
This one time, at band camp, Frank Wajer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Arghh, I found someone offering his FA 600 f4.0 and FA 300 f2.8 lenses. He is asking
3500 euro and 2500 euro for them. The FA 300 has been on my wishlist a long time,
but I think 2500 euro is way to much. Any advice?
BTW I
You can't manually dial in an exposure shift of 1/3 of a stop!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Patrick wrote:
11 Why not its a new body - or at least exp compensation in 1/3 stops. An easy way to
do that may be to feed an offset ISO rating to the metering system.
REPLY:
Huh? Huh Huh??
The MZ-S
I have some 3 meter paper backdrops, but wondered if there was anything
like a 6 meter (without joining them).
If not, what suggestions for a seamless group backdrop.
Kind regards
Kevin
-
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed lamb
http://www.robertstech.com/run/graphics/images/7d200713.jpg
Not a particularly remarkable photo, I admit, but that isn't the point.
Johnny Kelley won the Boston Marathon twice - in 1935 and 1945 - and
completed the race an amazing 61 times in all (including 18 top-ten
finishes). His last one was
Is your backdrop plain e..g just black.
If yes you may want to look at cloth as an alternative you can buy in
almost any length and a wide variety of widths.. May be an expensive
solution though. Try bulk cloth suppliers.
If its a one off it may be cheaper to have the wall painted :-)
When I think of the word 'classic' in connection with cameras, I immediately
think of anything M42 or perhaps K2s other early bayonette fitting
equipment. I was quite surprised in the 16.10.04 edition of Amateur
Photographer for an advert (pg5 for those interested) promoting their own
classified
The 28mm (very common and cheap) and the 24mm (less common and
more expensive) are both good lenses.
You have to be more specific than that. The 28mm ?
Fred
Tom,
Good luck for your new enterprise, hope to hear from you as soon
as you have time.
Thanks for everything.
Ciao,
Gianfranco
=
_
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now.
http://messenger.yahoo.com
This one time, at band camp, Patrick Genovese [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is your backdrop plain e..g just black.
If yes you may want to look at cloth as an alternative you can buy in
almost any length and a wide variety of widths.. May be an expensive
solution though. Try bulk cloth
I thought it generally assumed (no rule) that a 'Classic' was 25 yrs+, as an
example the MX would be a classic. Or am I thinking of 'Vintage'?
John
-- Original Message ---
From: Malcolm Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 13:33:25 +0100
I just learned that Adobe originally had a Camera Raw plug-in for
Photoshop 7. Since the release of Photoshop CS they have apparently
taken it off their web site. Anyone on the list got a copy?
(This was, like the CS plug-in, a free download from Adobe so you won't
be breaking any laws here.)
--
Don't know about the formal definition, but some advertising lines
certainly are instant classics ;-). I'm still recovering from the
Official digital camera of the Internet slogan in that other thread (and,
in fact, wonder whether Al Gore approved of that statement - given he's the
Inventor
Toralf, there is one significantly wrong thing with your math. Bayer
array has twice the G pixels as the other ones.
Second, human eye has the most spatial resolution in green
wavelengths.
Third, see some real world examples how sensors can resolve.
It's just different medium, for God's sake,
Thursday, October 21, 2004, 2:34:05 PM, Fred wrote:
The 28mm (very common and cheap) and the 24mm (less common and
more expensive) are both good lenses.
F You have to be more specific than that. The 28mm ?
F Fred
Also, The 35/2 ;-) which one please...
Good light!
fra
Don't know about the formal definition, but some advertising lines
certainly are instant classics ;-). I'm still recovering from the
Official digital camera of the Internet slogan in that other thread
(and, in fact, wonder whether Al Gore approved of that statement -
given he's the Inventor
Things used to last, to be a sense of joy and pride for many years as our
possessions became classics. Digital equipment has changed all the rules.
Once upon a time, we might have said, This is 70's era equipment! or
Those Speed Graphics were used by the great photo journalists of the
'40's. Now
I don't have the plug-in anymore, since moving to CS, but I didn't get it
from Adobe's web site anyway - I got it from Pentax's website. Here is it's
current location -
http://www.pentaximaging.com/customer_care/show_software?softId=1
You have to scroll down the page a little.
Dave
To me classic has always implied the presence of
either a significant or enduring innovation or the
initial component introduction.
A word blasphemed as a selling tool.
--- Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Things used to last, to be a sense of joy and pride
for many years as our
Dave Madsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't have the plug-in anymore, since moving to CS, but I didn't get it
from Adobe's web site anyway - I got it from Pentax's website. Here is it's
current location -
http://www.pentaximaging.com/customer_care/show_software?softId=1
You have to scroll down
It is a much debased term today -- an in the first annual
Bulwer-Lytton/William Robb photographic cliché classic.
I didn't run the contest for this year's cliché PUG, so perhaps that
makes it an emeritus classic.
Joe
I've been thinking this way for some time and Tom V
gave me that nudge over the line. Time to stop dealing with
hardware always looking for that next goodie.
135 for color:
Super Program
135 for bw:
KX
135 lenses:
FA50/1.4, A70-210/4, A100/2.8, A35/2, Sigma 28/2.8
generic 28-80 zoom, M75-150
Wow!
Joe
Lovely. Hope I get a chance to get there some day.
Joe
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004, Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
LF bodies:
4x5 Nakagoa wood field
Collin,
What's one of these? I've never heard of that maker before - I googled it
and came up with one hit which was basically a for-sale advert mentioning
it in passing - by you! :-) Got any pics/links?
Chris
Well, in the car world there are:
Special Interest Cars --fairly new but are interesting,
Classic Cars --20+ years old,
Veteran Cars --30+,
Vintage Cars --40+
Or at least those were the ages specified back in the 50's when that meant
classics were from the 30's, Veterans the 20's, and Vintage
Although I currently have four LF cameras, I do have the
same two you do, the Nakagoa 4x5 and the Kodak 2D 8x10,
what a coincidence! Great lightweight cameras. I have more LF
lenses but don't feel overburdened yet,
so don't worry you arent going explode or anything.
I would recommend a 480-600 mm
How high do you need it.. Can you use it length wise 3m high may be
enough 6m in length no probs.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This one time, at band camp, Patrick Genovese [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is your backdrop plain e..g just black.
If yes you may want to look at cloth as an alternative
As I just said I have one too. It is similar to the Tachihara but a
little earlier. Made in Japan wood field. VERY compact and light.
I really like mine a lot. It can even do 65mm lenses without a recessed
lensboard
board with a minor modification. They are fairly uncommon though.
I will try to
At 06:29 AM 10/21/2004 -0400, Patrick Genovese wrote:
For me it would be an MZ-S with the following changes.
1. Slightly bigger viewfinder and higher eyepoint.
I don't know if they could fit this in with the current top plate, but I'd
like it if they could.
2. Preferably an interchangeable
Hi gang,
I'm new to digital with a 3MP camera (Fuji S5000,
Pentax not available at all in Argentina, either film
or digital).
It's capable of shooting RAW and that's what I'm
doing. My problem comes when I do prints. I made
several 8x10 inch from 3MP files, taking care with
unsharp mask, and
I've some work to do, if I want to emulate him!
Not copy him...no way I could run marathons, but...it's an excellent
object lesson.
To see an old guy (he finally deserves that title!) be active and
involved like that, well into his 90s, that's encouraging.
keith whaley
Mark Roberts wrote:
Tom,
I enjoyed your posts as well as I like your style of photography.
Good luck.
Matjaz
Guys, I think I'm done. I don't follow threads anymore, I don't
contribute much, and I just have no time.
Before I head out, here's my new website -
www.bigdayphoto.com
Designed by our own
Buy the FA600, hit the seller with it while he/shes not looking, grab
both and run...
Frank Wajer wrote:
Arghh, I found someone offering his FA 600 f4.0 and FA 300 f2.8 lenses. He is asking
3500 euro and 2500 euro for them. The FA 300 has been on my wishlist a long time, but
I think 2500 euro
Welcome to the wonderful world of digital electronics.
Malcolm Smith wrote:
When I think of the word 'classic' in connection with cameras, I immediately
think of anything M42 or perhaps K2s other early bayonette fitting
equipment. I was quite surprised in the 16.10.04 edition of Amateur
Words don't have much meaning any more, do they? It falls in line with
an increasing lack of respect by those in the first 1/3 of their
allotted life span.
Superlatives have long since attained mediocrity status. Little or no
need for the word anymore, in fact!
When one has a group of 4
FYI,
RE: The Nagaoka Seisakusho
Woodfield 4x5 Folding Camera
I have posted a few photos and comments on the camera at:
http://www.jcoconnell.com/naga.htm
Later,
JCO
J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 21/10/04, Collin Brendemuehl, discombobulated, unleashed:
So when you guys doing digital get frustrated because of
the lack of durable history, I'll have a stack of negatives
to set beside your scratched CDs/DVDs.
Hey Collin, I'm glad you are set mate, sounds great.
BTW, I'm doing digital
Depends on your viewing distance and well you discrimination, I wouldn't
go larger than 4x5.
Albano Garcia wrote:
Hi gang,
I'm new to digital with a 3MP camera (Fuji S5000,
Pentax not available at all in Argentina, either film
or digital).
It's capable of shooting RAW and that's what I'm
doing.
These are opposites. You can not have both. High magnification means a bigger
finder image and a shorter eyepoint. The best you can do is find an acceptable
compromise. I personally prefer higher magnification as long as I can still see
the whole viewfinder screen even if that means I have to
Keith Whaley wrote:
Words don't have much meaning any more, do they? It falls in
line with an increasing lack of respect by those in the first
1/3 of their allotted life span.
Superlatives have long since attained mediocrity status.
Little or no need for the word anymore, in fact!
When
On 21/10/04, Graywolf, discombobulated, unleashed:
I personally prefer higher magnification as long as I can still see
the whole viewfinder screen even if that means I have to cock my head a bit.
Oi, non of that here - this is a family list ;-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) |
This implies that 9 megapixels is required for 8x10...
I'm not saying that's true, just that if 3MP - 4x5, 9MP-8x10 for the same
quality in close examination.
Regards,
Bob...
From: Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Depends on your viewing distance and well you discrimination, I wouldn't
go
I'll bet it's a joy to use!
keith
J. C. O'Connell wrote:
FYI,
RE: The Nagaoka Seisakusho
Woodfield 4x5 Folding Camera
I have posted a few photos and comments on the camera at:
http://www.jcoconnell.com/naga.htm
Later,
JCO
Misprint - it´s Nagaoka.
All the best!
Raimo K
Personal photography homepage at:
http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
- Original Message -
From: Chris Stoddart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 5:33 PM
Subject: Re: All the hardware I need
On
I'm not sure of your issue with the Fuji RAW format, Albano. You say you
print 5X4 jpegs at 1MB in size okay - have you tried printing a large/
fine jpeg at 10X8 ?
One thing you must remember is that the physical attributes of the sensor
play a much larger role than most people understand. A file
From 4 MP sensor of Optio S4 you get compressed JPG file of about 2.6 MP
which gives very good A4 prints - about 7x8.5 inches I suppose.
All the best!
Raimo K
Personal photography homepage at:
http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
- Original Message -
From: Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 21/10/04, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed:
This page may be of interest:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0210/02100402sensorsizes.asp
And also this page:
http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Camera_System/Sensor_Sizes_01.htm
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places,
Bloody hell, isn't that a really lovely camera - and it's tiny!
Completely destroys the myth of large format not being portable. Must be
about the size of a Canon SLR?! One of my real regrets is I have never
worked with large format and I am determined to give it a go before...
well it's not
MZ-S with an aperture wheel on the body, metal back, fill flash compensation
and AF assist without RTF-flash.
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Collin Brendemuehl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 20. oktober 2004 16:03
Til:
Thursday, October 21, 2004, 2:34:05 PM, Fred wrote:
The 28mm (very common and cheap) and the 24mm (less common and
more expensive) are both good lenses.
F You have to be more specific than that. The 28mm ?
F Fred
Also, The 35/2 ;-) which one please...
Good light!
fra
SMC lenses, as
Buy the FA600, hit the seller with it while he/shes not looking,
grab both and run...
Isn't that a bit rude?
Andre
P.S.: Hypnotism might be better on the long run...
Hi Tanya and Frank.
Normally I don't work with b/w, but maybe I should. You may have a
good point there, Tan. I'll have a look.
Thanks for the comments. :-)
Jostein
- Original Message -
From: Tanya Mayer Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 21,
Albano Garcia mused:
Hi gang,
I'm new to digital with a 3MP camera (Fuji S5000,
Pentax not available at all in Argentina, either film
or digital).
It's capable of shooting RAW and that's what I'm
doing. My problem comes when I do prints. I made
several 8x10 inch from 3MP files, taking
Words don't have much meaning any more, do they? It falls in line
with an increasing lack of respect by those in the first 1/3 of
their allotted life span.
I see this every day in my job, I work with students (16-20+), a high
percentage cannot spell have no idea of punctuation and do not
I've thought about this a lot...
It would be an LX (size, weight, fit, feel, changeable finders) plus:
Modes: Add Shutter-Priority AE mode.
MeteringSpot meter choice.
Shutter: 1/4000th second.
Sync: to 1/250 second.
ISO: to 64000.
Focus:
Hi,
When one has a group of 4 increasing larger, let's say coffee,
containers and the smallest of the group is called Giant, well, all
comparison is lost, isn't it.
A good way to market condoms, perhaps. As for coffee, the smallest (or
perhaps I should say 'least large') servings are giant
Cotty wrote:
I'm not sure of your issue with the Fuji RAW format, Albano.
Hey, I think I know. I've hit it with my dinky little Canon. On short
it works like this: the in-camera and the PC RAW-to-jpg converter
supplied by Canon are producing quite different results from PS CS with
the default
Too bad this model is hard to find on used market. The only thing I know
similar
is the Tachihara 45GF but it is slighty larger and somewhat heavier but
it is
better made so that is expected.
http://www.badgergraphic.com/search_product2.asp?x=1020
As you can see, the Tachihara goes about $600
I'm probably not as nit-picky as most of you, but 8x10 looks fine to me from
both the Optio S and Optio MX
Bill
I've decided to start using the PESO acronym since I'm so far behind in
PAW's. To the point.
This was taken a couple of weekends ago when an Antique Car rally was
held locally.
As usual I welcome anyone who would like to comment but I reserve the
right to completely ignore them.
That's the way I see it, there's an amazing lack of detail in 6mp 8x10's
IMHO. Ok so I'm not really humble.
Bob Blakely wrote:
This implies that 9 megapixels is required for 8x10...
I'm not saying that's true, just that if 3MP - 4x5, 9MP-8x10 for the
same quality in close examination.
They were asking for advice on how to acquire a lens, not manners.
Andre Langevin wrote:
Buy the FA600, hit the seller with it while he/shes not looking, grab
both and run...
Isn't that a bit rude?
Andre
P.S.: Hypnotism might be better on the long run...
--
I can understand why mankind hasn't
On 21/10/04, Peter J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed:
http://www.mindspring.com/~pjalling/PESO_--_early_american.html
A Moggy Minor!
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
Starbucks uses that for marketing,
Starbucks The rest of the World
TALL== Small
GRANDE == Medium
VENTE(SP?) == Large
or else Starbucks only sells one size since they all more or less
translate into large.
Bob W wrote:
Hi,
Peter J. Alling wrote:
That's the way I see it, there's an amazing lack of detail in 6mp 8x10's
IMHO.
You can fix that:
http://tinyurl.com/5bqgz
Well, Pentax started selling a camera in 1977 that met all my needs featurewise.
Time has shown a few weaknesses in that camera.
1. The top and bottom plates could be studier.
2. The light seals would be better if they were felt instead of foam.
3. The foam mirror dampner was cheap, but they
Note the use of Double Quotation marks denoting irony...
Cotty wrote:
On 21/10/04, Peter J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed:
http://www.mindspring.com/~pjalling/PESO_--_early_american.html
A Moggy Minor!
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
At the cost of my self respect, and a fairly large cash down payment...
No thanks.
Caveman wrote:
Peter J. Alling wrote:
That's the way I see it, there's an amazing lack of detail in 6mp
8x10's IMHO.
You can fix that:
http://tinyurl.com/5bqgz
--
I can understand why mankind hasn't given up
Too bad the modern cars were in the background, otherwise it would have been a
timeless photo. I guess you could PS them out if you wanted to make the effort.
Nice shot regardless.
--
Peter J. Alling wrote:
I've decided to start using the PESO acronym since I'm so far behind in
PAW's. To the
Well, then you could always shoot film. It won't look as sharp as the
digital but the detail will be there.
Peter J. Alling wrote:
At the cost of my self respect, and a fairly large cash down payment...
No thanks.
Caveman wrote:
Peter J. Alling wrote:
That's the way I see it, there's an amazing
Peter, it's a little too tightly framed for for me. Alsso it has a slight
yelllow tint to it, even the white license plate.
Feel free to ignore this.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 3:04
1 - 100 of 202 matches
Mail list logo
