For some reason this photo just popped into my head the other day.
I haven't been out this way for quite some time :( I used to like
exploring the Cave Stream area, then heading to Lake Pearson for the
sunset. This is the same place where I took the panorama I showed a
few weeks ago but I
www = walking with what
When I started photography more seriously a couple of years ago I went to a
photo course. Our teacher gave us the advice to use prime lenses,
preferably normal primes, at least to start with. So for some time I only
had a 50mm-lens.
The last year I found a used FA 20/2.8,
both measured and physical.
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: Caveman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2004 11:50 PM
Subject: Re: 100 ISO v 200 ISO - Digital resolution
Now please tell us what is your definition of resolution.
This one time, at band camp, Peter Smekal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am still quite a novice so any advice is really appreciated. Thanks
My walk around lense is that stays on my *istD wherever I go is a
Sigma 28-300mm. This allows me to capture most things that are put
before me without
Personally I feel 100mm or longer is not particular great as walk around
lens. Standard lens is pretty much my #1 choice, or 77/85mm if you are going
to photograph people mainly. FA100/2.8 is quite heavy btw, the coming
DFA100/2.8 looks more attractive because it is much smaller and lighter.
Hi,
Thus, using a 20mm as a walking around lens is not so
clever. Changing lenses would have taken too much time.
The obvious solution might after all be a zoom lense, like a 28-105. I am
thinking about buying one now. But then again, maybe using a longer prime
lens as walking around lens
Hi Peter
Your teachers advice can be explained by the fact that many consumer zoom
lenses (rather cheap lenses) are not very fast (F 3.5-F5.6) and requires a
lot of light and often not very good either. (If you are using a digital
camera this is not a big problem since you can change the ISO
Hi,
Lasse Karlsson wrote:
So, who of us had the longest hair, then?
Pictures, please...
I could almost, but not quite, sit on mine. If you think you're getting
a picture
mike
still listening to Pete Sinfield
Caveman wrote:
Seems there's plenty of them around the caves this night:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/vdonisa/hw2.html
Must be a meeting or something.
Now let's see some guesses on what these monsters are ;-)
Crustacea
Time for another picture. I don't think I even managed to send a
message about the one before this so there are two for most people to
look at.
The latests is a caterpillar, the one before that is a butterfly.
Comments welcome.
http://www.bluering.org.au/leon/feature.htm
Leon
My second camera was a Starflash. I still have some of those 127
transparencies. In fact, I've been meaning to scan some of them.
Paul
On Oct 22, 2004, at 11:24 PM, frank theriault wrote:
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 22:33:45 -0400, Paul Stenquist
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Great story. Thanks for sharing
Annsan,
You not only win the longest hair contest, you win the prettiest smile
contest :-)
On Oct 23, 2004, at 12:45 AM, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
Lasse Karlsson wrote:
From: Fred Widall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2004 1:21 AM
Subject: Subject: Old Pentax
Of course you took my remark out of context. It came at the end of a
discussion of technique.
On Oct 22, 2004, at 10:04 PM, Graywolf wrote:
Reminds me of the old story. How do you become a writer? Well, first,
you have to have something to say.
But once that is accomplished, whether you trying
On 23/10/04, Leon Altoff, discombobulated, unleashed:
The latests is a caterpillar, the one before that is a butterfly.
Comments welcome.
http://www.bluering.org.au/leon/feature.htm
Very nice!!
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
PS 300mm lens ever made). The 20/2.8 and 85/1.8 use the same lens formulas as
PS Pentax. The 20mm and 35mm CZJ primes focus remarkably close, typically
Hi Paul,
I have to correct one myth.
I looked, and both the 20mm Flektogon and the 85mm Planar don't have
that much common in formula with Pentax
Jim Apilado wrote:
Good story. Yes, a fellow photographer can relate to it. My very first
camera was a Kodak Duoflex II TLR that my parents gave me for a birthday.
My first pictures were terrible and I gave up on the idea of photography for
a while.
I don't have that first camera. I did
JF I don't know why there are two different images of the young girl,
JF so it's not easy to see the point being made.
That's Pentax Markeeting Deparment on it again ;-)
Good light!
fra
Great Shot! Superb!
Patrick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Time for another picture. I don't think I even managed to send a
message about the one before this so there are two for most people to
look at.
The latests is a caterpillar, the one before that is a butterfly.
Comments welcome.
Great shot,
IMHO there are a few minor tweaks that I think can improve it, namely:
1. Straighten the horizon (its' slightly wonky)
2. Adjust the lower part ie the water and lower part of the mountain to
show a little bit more detail. I tried it in ps and youve got loads of
interesting detail
Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I didn't see the original post but even if noise was effectively the
same at ISO 100 and 200 having the lower
speed would allow more DOF control in bright light without using ND
filters, (which can be a PITA).
True. But not a common occurrence for me.
Saturday, October 23, 2004, 5:11:51 AM, Herb wrote:
HC yes, i'm asking because the ISO has nothing to do with resolution on any
HC digital camera. noise affects resolution, but not in the range that digital
HC camera sensors permit. you take a resolution chart and changing the ISO
HC won't affect
frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joseph Tainter wrote:
snip
2 Agfa Ultra 100. Exp 12/04.
2 Kodak Portra 400 UC (now Kodak Ultra 400, I think). Exp 8/04.
11 Kodak Ektachrome E100G. (This is Kodak's new, fine-grained
Ektachrome, competing with Provia 100F.) Exp 9/05.
1 Kodak
BTW, if you have shot any shots of same scene at lowest and highest
iso you will easily see that the resolution is degraded seriously at
the high iso. It's just the same as with film.
fra
I have a better advice. Get a second body, preferably the same as your
first. Use two primes, wide and longer. Or wider and normal. Perfect
with Leicas, as they are small. Same with Pentax, because it makes
some nice small SLRs as well.
Good light!
fra
Frantisek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BTW, if you have shot any shots of same scene at lowest and highest
iso you will easily see that the resolution is degraded seriously at
the high iso. It's just the same as with film.
Every shot I've ever taken with my ist-D has had a resolution of 2008 x
3008,
Hi Peter,
In the not too distant past, my choice of walkaround lenses frequently
depended on where I planned to walk. If I was hoping to shoot
architecture or landscapes, I would choose a 35 mm or 28 mm prine. For
street shots of people, I might have gone with a 50 or 85. However,
I've
Nice of you to share this story.
My first camera was an Agfa Clack (6x9 camera) - I was 10 years old (1960)
when I started taking photographs. I have lost the Agfa many years ago, but
spotted one in a store a few years back. The photo dealer gave it to me,
when he realized how happy I was to see
mike wilson wrote:
Hi,
Lasse Karlsson wrote:
So, who of us had the longest hair, then?
Pictures, please...
I could almost, but not quite, sit on mine. If you think you're getting
a picture
mike
still listening to Pete Sinfield
We only have your word for that, Mike. Come
Don wrote:
I'm looking for a normal AF lens (28 to 35mm) for the D.
Has ayone tried the FA 28/2.8 or the FA 35/2 ?
The FA 31/1.8 is WAY out of my price range, though very nice.
Recommendations? Any other good ones out there?
How about the Sigma 28/1.8 EX DG ?
What are you accustomed to?
The FAJ 18-35mm can be found on ebay for app. 100 USD. But perhaps a zoom
lens isn't normal.
For a prime, I guess I would prefere sonmething like a 24mm or a 28mm.
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Amy Hughes [mailto:[EMAIL
Hi Amy,
Actually my normal of choice on 35 is the 50/1.7.
I've been playing with 28 and 35 on the D and tend to lean toward 35.
I would however go a little wider to get the speed and price of the Sigma
28/1.8.
Hopefully someone is familiar with this lens and will comment, the price
is the same as
It will be bundled with the *istDS (maybe with newer *istD's too?).
I don't know how *istD owners can get it. Probably, still to be decided.
Dario
- Original Message -
From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2004 2:52 AM
Subject: Re: *istDs
Hi Jens,
I have the DA 16-45/4 and it's wonderful but slow and large.
Perhaps I should redefine normal as Small, Light and FAST. ;-)
I love the FA 50/1.7 but it's just a bit too long sometimes.
Don
-Original Message-
From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, October
Just downloaded the brochure for the Sigma 28/1.8.
My info listed it at 6.9 ounces, it is actually 16.9!
That takes it out of the Light category.
Make the 35/2 sound a lot better, it really is 6.9oz!
Don
-Original Message-
From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday,
You took what was intended as an comment agreeing with your post as critizism of
it. I only used your tag line as a reference point. Please notice how I craftily
divided my two comments into separate paragraphs. That is a technique. It
indicates they are separate remarks.
--
Paul Stenquist
Didn't know you were one of the faithful, Ann. Don't you live in NY?
The WS oughta be fun. . .
Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA 24450
(540) 458-8873
FAX: (540) 458-8878
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/22/2004 1:14:18 PM
Too bad our
if you mean by resolution what is resolved (as opposed to the # of pixels
I have), you are way overly optimistic. you have 1800x1700 *at best*, with
the 1000:1 contrast. see http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxistd/page17.asp
best,
mishka
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 07:57:12 -0400, Mark Roberts
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:17:19 -0400, Paul Stenquist
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Okay, I found the pic. Here's a quick PS touch up with
highlights/shadows and the burn tool. Some of the soap sculptures
reveal detail. A few in the back row are too burned out for that. But
the shot can definitely be
It depends.
For casual time when I want something light, the Canon G-III goes with me.
It went last night to the Circleville Pumpkin Festival.
If I'm going to shoot something that will or may get serious enlargement
then the good lenses come out. But usually more than one at a time.
Often just
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 00:05:17 -0400, Nicolas Colarusso
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We do [put mayo on fries] in Quebec.
Really? I didn't know that. I haven't lived in Montreal for going on
20 years, but I don't recall mayo on frites. I'd have remembered
that! vbg
It's either a newish thing, or
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:38:01 -0400, Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Didn't know you were one of the faithful, Ann. Don't you live in NY?
The WS oughta be fun. . .
Annsan the Bosox fan is living dangerously these days. Interesting
that she didn't come out of the closet until the
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 07:34:35 -0400, Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They're *all* black and white films if you have Photoshop!
Blasphemer! LOL
-frank
--
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 21:29:58 -0400, Caveman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This guy is exercising for Halloween:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/vdonisa/hw.html
BTW did you guys decorate around ?
There's a joke in there somewhere about my ex-wife. Best left unsaid, though...
vbg
cheers,
frank
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 21:45:36 -0400, Paul Stenquist
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip. But on the last day of work before
Halloween, I wear a long blonde wig and a pig nose. Then I stop in to
see all the pretty girls at work and I say, Don't tell anyone I said
so, but I hear that Stenquist girl is a
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 20:05:44 +1000, Leon Altoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Time for another picture. I don't think I even managed to send a
message about the one before this so there are two for most people to
look at.
The latests is a caterpillar, the one before that is a butterfly.
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 20:40:50 +1300, David Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For some reason this photo just popped into my head the other day.
I haven't been out this way for quite some time :( I used to like
exploring the Cave Stream area, then heading to Lake Pearson for the
sunset. This is
I was using the A 35mm f/2 as my standard until I got the 31mm.
In some respects I prefer the 35mm, it is much more compact.
If the FA 32mm f/2 is as small as the A, it would be a nice choice.
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: Mishka
Subject: Re: 100 ISO v 200 ISO - Digital resolution
if you mean by resolution what is resolved (as opposed to the #
of pixels
I have), you are way overly optimistic. you have 1800x1700 *at
best*, with
the 1000:1 contrast. see
Actually Frank I may have misled you. We do not put mayo on fries, we
actually dip the fries in the mayo. The mayo is served in a small container
on the side, so we can double dip the container is not shared.
You are right about it being newish, it happened in the early 90's. Started
with a chain
On 23/10/04, Nicolas Colarusso, discombobulated, unleashed:
Actually Frank I may have misled you. We do not put mayo on fries, we
actually dip the fries in the mayo. The mayo is served in a small container
on the side, so we can double dip the container is not shared.
You are right about it
Craftily divided indeed :-).
On Oct 23, 2004, at 9:37 AM, Graywolf wrote:
You took what was intended as an comment agreeing with your post as
critizism of it. I only used your tag line as a reference point.
Please notice how I craftily divided my two comments into separate
paragraphs. That is a
Your welcome Frank. I'm going to remove the shot from my page now. If
you're using PSCS, play with that shadow highlight tool and with the
dodge and burn tool. They're both good friends of the photographer.
Have you tried scanning your negs rather than your prints? Unless the
print was truly
I think mayo on fries is a Paris thing. I've had it there a couple of
times. Don't know about the rest of France.
Paul
On Oct 23, 2004, at 10:08 AM, frank theriault wrote:
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 00:05:17 -0400, Nicolas Colarusso
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We do [put mayo on fries] in Quebec.
Really?
In truth, the Bosox have already broke the curse of the Bambino,
because it's been superseded by a far more powerful curse -- a curse
that was explained in a recent NY Times article. This much more deadly
jinx is called the X Factor. What it amounts to is this: The team
that has more ex Cubs
French kitchen has much more good dishes than fries-mayo !! :o
Oh come on, you know you want to.
frank theriault wrote:
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 21:29:58 -0400, Caveman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This guy is exercising for Halloween:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/vdonisa/hw.html
BTW did you guys decorate around ?
There's a joke in there somewhere about my
William Robb wrote:
Does anyone really take pictures at 1000:1?
Yes, the guys shooting resolution targets.
Whats the resolution at 1.6:1?
We can only speculate. Last time we did it we nearly killed each other.
Agreed. I love French food and was hesitant to waste my appetite on a
mere potato. Although as an American in Paris, one must at least
sample the pommes frites to see what the real thing tastes like.
Paul
On Oct 23, 2004, at 10:58 AM, Michel Carrère-Gée wrote:
French kitchen has much more good
As Caveman asked Paul if he had his evening Joint,I must have had two,as here is my
shot.
Taken in McBride British Cloumbia at the end of the Spotmatic era(1975 i think.)
Hair grew a bit after this shot,as we still had several months on the job before we
could
get home.:-)
SP500 and 55mm f 1.8
Peter Alling wrote:
Even if noise was effectively the same at ISO 100 and 200 having the lower
speed would allow more DOF control in bright light without using ND filters,
(which can be a PITA).
Point well taken, Peter. Currently my outdoor film is Fujicolor NPS 160. I
chose it because it has
Amy Hughes wrote:
I was hoping someone would comment on the Sigma lens (28/1.8) you
mentioned.
Amy,
Sigma introduced the 28/1.8 together with a 24/1.8 and 20/1.8. From the
reviews I've read, the 28/1.8 is the most successful design of the
three-that is to say, it truly performs well over a wide
Nicolas Colarusso wrote:
Actually Frank I may have misled you. We do not put mayo on fries, we
actually dip the fries in the mayo. The mayo is served in a small container
on the side, so we can double dip the container is not shared.
You are right about it being newish, it happened in the early
Hi,
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
mike wilson wrote:
Hi,
Lasse Karlsson wrote:
So, who of us had the longest hair, then?
Pictures, please...
I could almost, but not quite, sit on mine. If you think you're getting
a picture
mike
still listening to Pete Sinfield
We only have your word for that,
Bruce, thanks for your comments and the beautiful samples. I just
received this lens and I'm playing with it today. I gotta say it feels
much better on the camera than it does in my hands :-) The focus does
feel nice but it has such a short travel, perhaps 70 degrees. For
comparison, my 50/1.4
i really have no idea. my point was that even under much better than real
condition, it's pretty damn far from 3000x2000 *resolved* pixels.
mishka
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 08:21:04 -0600, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Mishka
Subject: Re: 100 ISO v 200
Just checked dpreview and saw that the istds has picture modes. What is
a picture mode? Is that like landscape, portrait, macro, bowling, and the
like?
Also, the istds has one user memory while its big brother has three. What
exactly is a user memory? Does it mean that only one person can
Just checked dpreview and saw that the istds has picture modes. What is
a picture mode? Is that like landscape, portrait, macro, bowling, and the
like?
Yes, such kind of things.
Also, the istds has one user memory while its big brother has three. What
exactly is a user memory? Does it
Hi,
[...]
It went last night to the Circleville Pumpkin Festival.
[...]
The Circleville Pumpkin Festival. Now that sounds just great - my
imagination goes wild thinking of how it ought to be. I hope I never
go to it, or see any pictures of it, because the reality could never
be as good as my
Is this true for K 1000?
Not all mechanical shutters can do this because the speeds are controlled by
cams, different one for each speed. The only one I know to be capable of
this is the one in Leica rangefinder cameras and even it not between all
speeds. But yes, there can be more
because most of
And french fries were actually invented in Belgium.
All the best!
Raimo K
Personal photography homepage at:
http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
- Original Message -
From: Michel Carrère-Gée [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2004 5:58 PM
Subject: Re: OT
Hi,
Saturday, October 23, 2004, 4:04:16 PM, Paul wrote:
Agreed. I love French food and was hesitant to waste my appetite on a
mere potato. [...]
don't let M. Parmentier hear you say that!
--
Cheers,
Bob
Art is anything you can get away with
-- Marshall McLuhan
Hi!
ft The clouds make it, Boris. Oh yeah, great framing, too. And, I like
ft the more-or-less silhouette.
That was my goal - to make it more-or-less silhouette.
ft Who know you were a landscape photographer? What, no nice Israeli
ft landscapes for you to shoot? vbg
It is actually a
I doubt they are. I have a sunpak flash for TTL
that has a Pentax-Oly switch on it. The contacts
in the shoe/flash may be layed out the same, but
their meanings are different.
-Lon
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I heard at a time that Olympus (old system, not digital one) was compatible with
Pentax
Yesterday I was using my K28/2 which is a rather stiff focusing lens
and I noticed that the rubber on the focusing ring is a bit slippery,
thus contributing to lack of ease when focusing. Is there a
treatment to give the rubber (it's probably not rubber actually, but
some kind of vynil) its
I've got the M 4/100 that isn't Dental. Very sturdy lens,
I use it more than my Kiron 2/8/105 because it is a lot smaller
and lighter. I also use it in preference to my Phoenix 3.5/100.
I spent about $110 for my M.
-Lon
Katrin Müller-Sauer wrote:
Hello!
I'm looking for a Macro and now I've seen
So Paul, where's your link?
--Amita
-Original Message-
From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2004 8:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Who had the longest hair? (Was: Old Pentax
Photos for Dario
Okay, I'm in. This is me, circa 1973.
Yes. Thes modes are aimed at users, who don't (want to) undserstand how to
use a camera in different situations.
Not many Pentax SLR's are featuring such custom settings.
These modes are often accompanied by pictograms for Portrait, Landscape,
Macro, Slow Flash, Action etc.
Jens Bladt
Very intesting and powerful photograph.
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Caveman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 23. oktober 2004 03:30
Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Emne: PESO - Cave monster
This guy is exercising for Halloween:
The istD has a bit depth of 12. I seem to recall some DSLR with a bit
depth of 14 ... maybe. The specs on the new Hasselblad claim a bit depth
of 16. Why is it that so many DSLR cameras are using a bit depth of 12?
Is there a physical or design reason? Cost? My little Nikon scanner has a
bit
Does picture mode do that when shooting RAW? Can one shoot RAW with
picture modes?
Can the bar graph be interpreted so the photog knows by how much s/he's
over or under the exposure recommended by the camera? Is the graph
segmented (something like this: III) or is it just a solid line?
This is very true.The last French restaurant I patronized with my friend
June produced for us beautifully arranged and most delicious appetizers.
Following two small bites, they were gone. The main course was a joy, both
to the palate and the eye - three small bites, and they were gone as well.
I would like to have a lens sent to Canada from Germany. I am being
told that shipping would be 35 euros (lower fare) or 50 euros by air
mail. That seems high compared to, say, shipping from U.K. The pack
could be made to be under 1 kilo without problem.
Anybody in Germany could tell me if
Keith Whaley mused:
I think my first ever camera was a Kodak Baby Brownie. Black Bakelite®
body. Put a lot of film thru that one.
Mine was a Brownie 127 (when I was 7). It served me well for 5 or 6 years,
and even got one roll of colour film put through it (on a school trip to
Switzerland).
Andre Langevin wrote:
I would like to have a lens sent to Canada from Germany. I am being
told that shipping would be 35 euros (lower fare) or 50 euros by air
mail.
The prices seem to be those of the Duetsche Post. There is a little
error: Canada is zone 3, i.e. the lower fare should be 29,-
Thought I posted it, but I could have gone into brain fade.
It's here:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2813211
On Oct 23, 2004, at 2:52 PM, Amita Guha wrote:
So Paul, where's your link?
--Amita
-Original Message-
From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday,
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Does picture mode do that when shooting RAW? Can one shoot RAW with
picture modes?
I believe that picture modes can only save in JPEG format, because they set
conversion settings too.
However, if you shoot RAW using an applicable shooting mode, you can then
use picture
Shel Belinkoff mused:
The istD has a bit depth of 12. I seem to recall some DSLR with a bit
depth of 14 ... maybe. The specs on the new Hasselblad claim a bit depth
of 16. Why is it that so many DSLR cameras are using a bit depth of 12?
Is there a physical or design reason? Cost? My
Hi John ...
Couldn't forget that linear stuff since I never knew it vbg
Don't really understand the 2D thing. Are there two rows of pixels, one
below the other? Nah, that can't be it? So how come the 'blad can have a
16-bit sensor, and some DSLR cameras 14-bit? Is it a matter of space
(which
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 10:23:53AM -0400, frank theriault wrote:
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 21:45:36 -0400, Paul Stenquist
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip. But on the last day of work before
Halloween, I wear a long blonde wig and a pig nose. Then I stop in to
see all the pretty girls at work and I
Decided to spend a few minutes trying out the FA 80-320/4.5-5.6 that I
bought this week. I know it's not highly rated -- it's obviously a
consumer zoom -- but I'm rather pleased with it. I shot people walking
down the street with the camera set to continuous autofocus. This young
lady was
http://pug.komkon.org/00augu/00Aug/shel.html
Shel
Shel,
I think what John is saying is that it takes significantly more power
to compute the four extra bits per pixel between 12 and 16. You'd need
much stronger number-crunching logic around the chip, and more RAM as
well, to make processing of the image from chip to storage medium go
reasonably
The lens has a nice, soft quality about it. I like that, and the bokeh in
this pic looks pretty decent as well.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Decided to spend a few minutes trying out the FA 80-320/4.5-5.6 that I
bought this week. I know it's not highly
while the scanners may output a 16bit signal that doesn't mean
it is truly resolving 16 bits. Noise could dominate well before
you get down to that level of resolution.
JCO
-Original Message-
From: Jostein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2004 4:14 PM
To: [EMAIL
Yeah, soft is correct... no matter who swears by this lens.
The girl is soft, too.
All the best!
Raimo K
Personal photography homepage at:
http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, October 23,
Thanks Shel. I think it's a nice people lens. I ran into two couples I
knew as well, so I shot a couple of portraits. They're just about
exactly what I would want for that type of photography. I think they
were at 120mm or so. Again, the bokeh looks quite good, considering
that the background
It's not all that soft, considering that the lady is walking rapidly
and this is a hand held shot. Later, I'll post some portraits I shot
with it. Perhaps even some 100% detail. You're looking at a tiny web
image, Raimo, and drawing unfair conclusions.
Paul
On Oct 23, 2004, at 4:25 PM, Raimo K
Um...
Are you sure resolution has anything to do with this? I thought the
number of bits at any given pixel describes how many distinct levels
of illumination that pixel can distinguish. The extra bits of colour
depth gives more exposure latitude, but does it alter the resolution?
I didn't know
Jostein wrote:
Um...
Are you sure resolution has anything to do with this? I thought the
number of bits at any given pixel describes how many distinct levels
of illumination that pixel can distinguish. The extra bits of colour
depth gives more exposure latitude, but does it alter the resolution?
I
Paul Stenquist wrote:
It's not all that soft, considering that the lady is walking rapidly...
I don't think so. What I mean is, the way her arms are crossed, she
LOOKS static.
But then, you were there, so I defer to you.
keith whaley
...and this is a hand held shot. Later, I'll post some
1 - 100 of 155 matches
Mail list logo
