Cotty wrote on 25.11.04 8:47:
> I think for what most people on this list want and do, switching is not
> the answer. You're getting into sports shooting in a bigger way, the
> solutions for this are limiting - as you are realising - with your status
> quo. I appreciate the finance aspect, but a u
Quoting Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Which of the many 50mm lenses, made by Pentax, is
> > considered to be the best in terms of image quality?
>
> Oh boy - you're not going to get agreement here on this one - .
>
> For the record, my choice is the A 50/1.4.
>
> Fred
>
>
>
I agree with Fre
This one time, at band camp, "Simon King" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Kevin,
> Unless you;
> a) Travel a lot
I do some miles
> 2) Intend heavy use day in and day out
Not every day, but several times a week
> iii) Want to appear flashy to clients
I care more for my images than my image, hence
This one time, at band camp, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Looking at some new package offers at several camera stores. Some are
> offering
> more than just
> the body and the faj starter lens kit.
> Some are giving a choice over faj and DA zooms and some primes.
I carry my *istD with me a
This one time, at band camp, "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I am looking at purchasing a new system of scrims, gobos, and
> > reflectors.
> > Any recommendations or cautions?
> > Bogen have a small offering here.
> > http://www.bogenimaging.us/product/templates/zoom.php3?img=2579
>
Steve Pearson wrote on 25.11.04 4:57:
> Which of the many 50mm lenses, made by Pentax, is
> considered to be the best in terms of image quality?
You may find interesting this:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-11-24.shtml
--
Best Regards
Sylwek
The UK magazine Amateur Photographer is currently running a Leica special and
in it they review the new 50mm f1.4 ASPH lens for the rangefinder cameras. In
the lengthy review it is mentioned that the Japanese go for high contrast
whereas Leica engineer subtle gradation at the expense of absolute
1. DA 16-45/4
2. FA 50/1.4 for close-up + portrait
3. Tamron SP AF 90/2.8 for short tele + macro
4. FA 35/2 is also a very good standard (but it doesn't fit in my travel
bag)
On my wish-list:
(1. a larger bag)
2. the DA 14
Henk
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PR
On Nov 25, 2004, at 7:54 AM, Francis wrote:
comments and critiques welcome
www.photosynth.ca/photo/f/bird-splash.html
Oh, wow!! You shot that with a nEd!!!
--
-Jon Glass
Krakow, Poland
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Nov 25, 2004, at 3:31 AM, frank theriault wrote:
It looks like
something from the 50's - and the car and the buildings in the
background don't do anything hurt that last observation.
Oh yeah, there's the church there, too. It's an All-American photo -
a time warp.
Yeah, I was thinking the same
On Nov 25, 2004, at 3:31 AM, frank theriault wrote:
the American flags on the windshield.
and don't forget the hawaiian dancer on the dash...
Oh, and I love it too!
--
-Jon Glass
Krakow, Poland
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
As far as I know, the difference is minor. The 67 is said to have a
somewhat more durable film advance mechanism. I have a 6x7 with mirror
lockup and have never experienced a problem.
Paul
On Nov 24, 2004, at 11:43 PM, Bob Blakely wrote:
So, guys, what are the practical differences between the "
Good. That's the consensus in my house as well. (I always poll my wife
and kids, when I'm in doubt about a shot.) I liked the mirror as well
but was afraid that it wouldn't read as the mirror on another car. But
apparently it does. Thanks for taking the time to look. I'll have to
hunt down that
I've used the M and the K 50/1.4. I prefer the K but only because the
build quality seems better. The optical performance of both is
excellent. I think that's true of all the Pentax 50mm lenses. Despite
what might be said here, I doubt that anyone could tell the difference
between them in terms
>> Which of the many 50mm lenses, made by Pentax, is
>> considered to be the best in terms of image quality?
> You may find interesting this:
> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-11-24.shtml
I like the last sentence the best: "Remember, too, that obsessing
about lenses just isn't ne
the original meaning of RAW was preempted by digital camera manufacturers.
they are not the same.
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: "Jerry in Houston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 11:33 PM
Subject: PS Saving in RAW
> I know about saving
>>> Which of the many 50mm lenses, made by Pentax, is considered to
>>> be the best in terms of image quality?
>> Oh boy - you're not going to get agreement here on this one - .
>>
>> For the record, my choice is the A 50/1.4.
> Why? What are the characteristics of that lens that makes you
> fee
> 4. FA 35/2 is also a very good standard (but it doesn't fit in my
> travel bag)
> On my wish-list:
> (1. a larger bag)
Har!
Fred
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens
The UK magazine Amateur Photographer is currently running a Leica
special and in it they review the new 50mm f1.4 ASPH lens for the
rangefinder cameras. In the lengthy review it is mentioned that the
J
Hello,
I'm sort of a luddite because the latest version I own is the
A50/1.4. If I were to keep just one it would be the Super-
Multi-Coated Takumar 50/1.4 for overall sharpness, contrast,
and by far the best build quality. For best contrast I'd pick
the A50/1.4, but it is the softest of the my 1
SMCP 50/1.4 = SMCP K50/1.4 in the previous post.
Couple more things, for bokeh I think I would choose
the SMC K50/1.4. For the 3D effect it would be the
Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 50/1.4.
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California
- Original Message -
From: "Steve Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The optical performance of both is excellent. I think that's true
> of all the Pentax 50mm lenses. Despite what might be said here, I
> doubt that anyone could tell the difference between them in terms
> of results.
I'd say that's probably generally true.
> However, the 1.2 is very expensive a
A friend at work(in our print department)has asked me to take
some shots of his
young
lad playing hockey so that he can put a collage together for his wife as a
Christmas
present. I have no
problem doing this as he has done a ton of favou
> I love em all ;)
And you can't have too many 50's, right?
Fred (guilty as charged)
JB> I'm now looking at a Sigma f2.8/18-50mm to replace the Tokina 28-70mm, which
JB> has a focusing problem and is not really wide enough.
One finally arrived and I did a quick evaluation in the shop, shooting
from their balcony (overviewing a big park, convenient for lens
testing ).
So far, it's
Hehe, so true!
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California
- Original Message -
From: "Fred" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Steve Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 4:43 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax's Best 50mm Lens
> > I love em all ;)
>
> And you can't have too many 50's,
Hi Fred,
The 1.2 is king for low-light focusing. I feel it sharpens up
very nicely at f4.
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California
- Original Message -
From: "Fred" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The 50/1.2 is worth it if you do sometimes need the speed (not just
> for low-light exposures but
Paul Stenquist wrote:
I've used the M and the K 50/1.4. I prefer the K but only because the
build quality seems better. The optical performance of both is
excellent. I think that's true of all the Pentax 50mm lenses. Despite
what might be said here, I doubt that anyone could tell the difference
>>Don Said:
>
> I have however cleaned a number of mirrors,
> I buy a lot of "as is" or "for parts/repair"
> 35's and some are unbelievably filthy.
> The method I've used is this:
> 1. "Tease" the end of several Q-Tips (Cotton swabs)
> until they look more l
To all on the list, even if you don't celebrate the holiday I send good
wishes and hope that everyone spends a moment just thinking of what they
are truly grateful for. Expecially here in the States where many do not
realize just how good we have really got it.
Hope everyone has a wonderful day..
Dave,
Do a custom white balance off something white that's in the playing area
(NOT the ice). Get somebody to take a piece of paper out there pre-game and
get your WB set and you'll be good to go.
CW
Has been using the auto white balance for a long time now but would
certainly custom for anyth
Interesting chart. The differences are probably imperceptible in most
cases, although the 1.4 A clearly outperformed the 1.4 M. I would like
to see how the 1.4 K and FA would do. Of course, this is just
resolution and doesn't include other factors.
On Nov 25, 2004, at 7:27 AM, Fred wrote:
Which
I know I was surprised at the diffference in contraast between my
Summicron 50/2 Collapsible and my Pentax lenses. To me, the Leitz glass
produces almost a retro feel. Of course I'm talking about 50 year old
Leitz glass here, so it darn well ought to produce a retro feel ,.
On Nov 25, 2004, at 7
I've shot hockey. If you take a meter reading off the ice, you'll
grossly underexpose. Find something neutral that is getting as much
light as the ice (like a grey or greens shirt for example) and
spotmeter on that. Or if you can get to the ice, take a reading with an
incident meter. I've found
Happy Thanksgiving to you as well. I will soon have to go get our
turkey out of the garage where he's been soaking an an apple cider
brine for the last three day. Time to feast.
Paul
On Nov 25, 2004, at 8:21 AM, Jason Randolph wrote:
To all on the list, even if you don't celebrate the holiday I
> Which of the many 50mm lenses, made by Pentax, is considered to be
> the best in terms of image quality?
And then, if we throw 50mm macro lenses into the mix, there may be
additional thoughts (on this 50mm "sub-category"). My personal
opinions:
The F 50/2.8 (and I understand the FA is the same
I'm probably opening mself up for a flogging but here goes:
I've had only one camera so far that didn't focus properly,
by that I mean in-focus in the viewfinder wasn't in-focus on film.
That was an MX, and it was off by a mile.
What I wound up doing was re-shimming the mirror/lens mount
assembly w
I suspect most repair shops do not have "all" the instruments required to do
a complete check. Last year I had my MX repaired by 2 seem-to-be reputable
service centers in Vancouver, one did not do anything but trying to convince
me the camera was fixed, the other screwed up the mirror assembly.
Paul,
That Sounds super-tasty. Send me a leg, won't you?
Cory
plans to eat too much, watch football, take a nap, have a sandwich, watch a
movie, and go to bed...Perfect day, I say.
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, No
The metal mirror bumper of the MX is spring loaded, and could be out of
alignment if messed with (but you can push it with finger w/o side effect).
The resting position can be adjusted through the slot screw near the metal
arm. However, it should be fixed with threadlock and next to impossible t
I have a hair on my sensor. I tired blowing it off with a squeeze puffer to
no avail. I couldn't tell if it moved at all. What can I do to get rid of
it?
CW
great, hair leaving my head and going where I don't want it. growing older
sucks...
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Check
I misread your question. You asked about checking white balance. If you
shoot RAW, you can just leave it on auto, and you'll come close enough
to easily correct it in conversion. If not, you might want to set it
manually. You can probably find something close enough to white to get
an accurate
How about a cotton swab with rubbing alcohol?
Maris
cbwaters wrote:
> I have a hair on my sensor. I tired blowing it off with a squeeze
> puffer to no avail. I couldn't tell if it moved at all. What can I
> do to get rid of it?
Francis, I like the composition but it comes across as underexposed on my
monitor. No details in the bird & very little in the rock. You should have
exposed for the rock and taken the overexposed water.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: "Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: PAW
70-210 F
300 FA
600 FA
Kenneth Waller
-Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: What lens do you find is on your *istD most often
I was hoping someone would come up with a tested
solution for you but since they haven't:
**IF IT WERE ME**, and take this with a grain of
salt since I've only done this on mirrors:
I would take a DRY Q-Tip, pull the end out into
a point and very gently try to snag that little
devil and get it loo
You're implying that Nikon Capture will process RAW from the *ist D?
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Anyone shoot hockey with their digital?
>
> A friend at work(in our print department)has asked me to take
some shots of his
> young
> lad
I just thought (ouch) about that.
Would a "Wild Hair(Hare)" be the evil twin of a "Dust Bunny"???
Don (Sorry, waiting for the damn turkey to thaw!)
> -Original Message-
> From: cbwaters [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 8:30 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject
Thanks Sylwester for that link. That was very
interesting reading!
--- Sylwester Pietrzyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Steve Pearson wrote on 25.11.04 4:57:
>
> > Which of the many 50mm lenses, made by Pentax, is
> > considered to be the best in terms of image
> quality?
> You may find interes
George gave us the url for some adobe white papers these other day.
They explain the browser and the CS RAW converter in considerable
detail. I found these to be very valuable and an interesting read. I
don't agree with everything the author says, but it's very informative.
(For example, with P
Found whilst surfing and lurking! Shots from the new 14:
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/pentax/smc_da_14_28_ed_if
--- Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I appreciate the finance aspect, but a used 10D
> and a 70-200 with IS
> and you will be very impressed with what you can do
> in a soccer match.
> Hire or borrow and try it ;-)
>
Unfortunately there are some indoor venues that just
aren't light enough ev
"...the A20/2.8 goes pretty mushy in the corners"
Hmmm. This is the first negative comment I have seen on this lens. I
have ordered the FA 20 f2.8, which has the same optical formula, based
on rave comments and an online photo showing good sharpness at f2.8.
Well, come to think of it, that i
I agree with Graywolf's post. It simply doesn't make sense to enlarge both
images so that the magnifications are equivalent. If that were the case,
then one could use the same lens on 35mm and 4x5 film and then claim that
there is no difference between the two. The same comparison could also be
An addendum to my previous post:
What your test has succeeded in demonstrating is that a a full frame
(36x24mm) sensor with about the same resolution as the sensor in the *ist-d
(~6mp @ 15.7*23mm) would have resolution that can compete with (or beat)
35mm provia 100f in terms of resolution and n
- Original Message -
From: "Joseph Tainter"
Subject: Re: *ist Ds + A20/2.8 or 24/2.8 - will it work?
"...the A20/2.8 goes pretty mushy in the corners"
Hmmm. This is the first negative comment I have seen on this lens.
I have ordered the FA 20 f2.8, which has the same optical formula
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Anyone shoot hockey with their digital?
I know my camera and the istD can do present WB for unusual
situations, like this.
Hi Dave, I haven't shot hockey, but our show this spring was in a
hockey arena. I set the white balance off
Joe,
My experience with the FA 20/2.8 on the *istD is good. On 35mm film,
the lens has a problem with droplet distortion towards the corners,
which reduce sharpness of course. With the digicrop this is very much
reduced. I haven't looked meticulously close, but so far I haven't
seen any droplet sy
- Original Message -
From: "Kevin Waterson"
Subject: Re: Scrim System
I had thought of this also. Would be rather cheap using some
plastic tube
and material. Do you have any pointers on this?
What sort of tubing?
What sort of fabric (reflective and diffuse)
Do you have an elastic throug
On 25/11/04, Steve Larson, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Hello,
Yo Stevo!
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
On 25/11/04, wendy beard, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Last Sunday my son-and-heir was playing in a Soccer
>dome in Montreal. At best, I was scraping 1/200s @ 2.8
>with ISO3200.
>It just wasn't enough!
>http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/soccer
Looks fine to me Wend. That with an IS lens?
Cheers
Kinetronics makes kits which are engineered to solve the problem.
Check out these sites.
http://www.kinetronics.com/cgi-local/SoftCart.100.exe/online-store/scsto
re/LOK_industrial.html?L+scstore+dzwg6364ff0d7f0d+1113915842
http://www.kinetronics.com/cgi-local/SoftCart.100.exe/online-store/scsto
re
People who work with electrnics have compressed air in cans. Try to get a TV
repair guy to blow the hair away.
Jens
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: cbwaters [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 25. november 2004 15:30
Til: [EMAIL
IMO nothing can be judged from a scan made by Epson 3200. I've got an Epson
Perfection 3200 Phot scanner. For film it's not great. It's better for
prints.
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Mishka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt:
That's probably a tuff question. As for MTF tests it must be Pentax-F
1.4/50mm. One of the best 50mm ever made at all.
I have owned several different 50mm Pentax lenses, and I believe my SMC
Pentax FA 1.4/50mm is pretty good.
I guess there was a famous screwmount M42 lens once, wasn't there?
Je
"...the A20/2.8 goes pretty mushy in the corners"
Look at http://www.digitalfotonetz.de/ --> Pentax digital --> Objektivtest
or direct link:
http://digitalfotonetz.de/img/Testfotos/Objektive/Urs/ausschnitte.jpg
Best, Bernd
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:30:03 -0500, cbwaters wrote:
>I have a hair on my sensor. I tired blowing it off with a squeeze puffer to
>no avail. I couldn't tell if it moved at all. What can I do to get rid of
>it?
>CW
>great, hair leaving my head and going where I don't want it. growing older
>
Following up on my earlier post of a test opinion: I disagree with the
praise of the Ricoh 50/1.4 at least when testing my own lenses. I just
finished comparing the SMC-M 50/1.4 with the Ricoh 50. From 1.4 to 8.0 the
Pentax 50 was sharper and had better contrast at every stop. The test setup
was a
Wow, what a lead in for a long political rant! Instead, I will just offer this:
For all the have-nots in the US, no money, no family, no health, no future,
etcetera, the holidays only last a short while. You can hang in there for a
month and a half. YOU CAN!
Yes, I realize that not many of those
I have only had that problem on an MX myself. In that case it was cased by a
drop and the pentaprism was knocked askew. It was a farely easy fix.
For the original poster: Yes run some film through it. Always verfy you actually
have a problem before attempting to fix it. Save lot of time, money,
On 25 Nov 2004 at 10:43, Joseph Tainter wrote:
> Hmmm. This is the first negative comment I have seen on this lens. I
> have ordered the FA 20 f2.8, which has the same optical formula, based
> on rave comments and an online photo showing good sharpness at f2.8.
> Well, come to think of it, that
On 25 Nov 2004 at 12:44, William Robb wrote:
> It's kinda soft in the corners wide open, but you won't likely find a
> sharper 20mm lens in the corners either.
> I had an FA20/2.8 on my LX a while back, and it was about the same as
> the A20/2.8.
Har, don't I wish I could somehow whack a K moun
Any of the manual focus 50/1.7's. I love the 50/1.4 but I have never had one
that was quite as good as a 1.7 at the same f-stop. I have never used an
autofocus version of those, so can not comment on them.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
--
One of the secrets of being a good photographer is to be good at choosing
the right gear, isn't it?
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Sylwester Pietrzyk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 25. november 2004 09:37
Til: [EMAIL PROTECT
The poor in this country are much better off than the middle class in
many countries. We all have much to be thankful for. You can flame all
you want, I won't respond to childish nonsense.
On Nov 25, 2004, at 3:50 PM, Graywolf wrote:
Wow, what a lead in for a long political rant! Instead, I will
On 25 Nov 2004 at 9:11, TIMOTHY STARK wrote:
> Found whilst surfing and lurking! Shots from the new 14:
>
> http://www.pbase.com/cameras/pentax/smc_da_14_28_ed_if
Is everyones DA 14 this soft in the corners?
http://www.pbase.com/tcom/image/31162980/original
Cheers,
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AU
On 25 Nov 2004 at 11:45, Paul Stenquist wrote:
> George gave us the url for some adobe white papers these other day.
> They explain the browser and the CS RAW converter in considerable
> detail. I found these to be very valuable and an interesting read. I
> don't agree with everything the autho
Some times it helps to shop abit out of the photo supply area.
For instance one of those metal rimmed twist to store car windshield reflectors
makes a great photo reflector (if you get the neutral silver one) at a cost of
$6-7 instead of $40.
Pieces of black formcore (by it cheap at Wal-Mart) ma
It would be interesting to compare the M15mm f3.5 lens to the DA14.
Jonathan
-Original Message-
From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 2:33 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Samples from 14 2.8
On 25 Nov 2004 at 9:11, TIMOTHY STARK wrote:
> Fo
På 25. nov. 2004 kl. 23.33 skrev Rob Studdert:
On 25 Nov 2004 at 9:11, TIMOTHY STARK wrote:
Found whilst surfing and lurking! Shots from the new 14:
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/pentax/smc_da_14_28_ed_if
Is everyones DA 14 this soft in the corners?
http://www.pbase.com/tcom/image/31162980/original
--- Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 25/11/04, wendy beard, discombobulated,
> unleashed:
>
> >Last Sunday my son-and-heir was playing in a Soccer
> >dome in Montreal. At best, I was scraping 1/200s @
> 2.8
> >with ISO3200.
> >It just wasn't enough!
> >http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/soccer
I work at our local homeless shelter and at the food bank,
I don't need pompous sermons from the likes on you, especially on
a photography list.
-- Original Message --
From: Graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 15:
On 25/11/04, wendy beard, discombobulated, unleashed:
>> >Last Sunday my son-and-heir was playing in a Soccer
>> >dome in Montreal. At best, I was scraping 1/200s @
>> 2.8
>> >with ISO3200.
>> >It just wasn't enough!
>> >http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/soccer
>>
>> Looks fine to me Wend. That wit
Fractions of a second.
I don't know how to measure it, though.
Your own reaction time might very well be longer, but you could try to shoot
a moving object (known speed) to see how far the moving object has come in
the picture - compared to where it was, when you (think you) fired the
camera :-). P
"Is everyones DA 14 this soft in the corners?"
These images were announced on dpreview during the summer. Someone else
pointed out that one image in particular had noticeable corner softness.
I don't know what the outcome was for this particular lens, but it
seemed at the time that the lens migh
After a quick skim last spring, I'd tend to agree with you, Paul.
But there are more levels to povery. Even in US.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/05/0517_040517_pathwayscobb.html
Anyways, to be able to take part in an online community like this one
has a lot to be grateful for indeed
Re: A/FA 20 f2.8
Wheatfield wrote:
"It's kinda soft in the corners wide open, but you won't likely find a
sharper 20mm lens in the corners either."
Thanks everyone. Of course it's nearly the only game in town at that
focal length. The alternative is the Sigma 20 f1.8, which I have used
but not
Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi, Boris.
>>
>>
>> 1. On DS the viewfinder most likely will be penta-mirror. For me
>> the D's viewfinder was like a blessing compared to penta-mirror of
>> my MZ-6.
>>
>A penta-mirror might not be my ideal (unless it would indeed be as
>good as a pent
Hi,
Thursday, November 25, 2004, 10:59:21 PM, Joseph wrote:
> I do note that the A 20 f2.8 was introduced in 1985. That's an old
> optical formula to still be in production. It has no aspherical or ED
> elements. Did these even exist in 1985?
According to Cecchi's book "In 1985 the family grew b
Quoting Graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Wow, what a lead in for a long political rant! Instead, I will just offer
> this:
>
> For all the have-nots in the US, no money, no family, no health, no future,
>
> etcetera, the holidays only last a short while. You can hang in there for a
>
> month and
Quoting Graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Some times it helps to shop abit out of the photo supply area.
>
> For instance one of those metal rimmed twist to store car windshield
> reflectors
> makes a great photo reflector (if you get the neutral silver one) at a cost
> of
> $6-7 instead of $40.
On 25 Nov 2004 at 14:01, jayers wrote:
> It would be interesting to compare the M15mm f3.5 lens to the DA14.
It sure would, has anyone anywhere put them head to head? I'm pretty pleased
(and a little surprised) with the performance my A15/3.5 on my *ist D, it's
better than the A20/2.8 in the co
- Original Message -
From:
Subject: Re: *ist DS versus *ist D for the "Digital Newbie"
What is the advantage of a pentaprism compared to the penta-mirror?
I have an MZ-6 with a penta-mirror.
Pentaprisms tend to be brighter, and probably stay alligned better as
well.
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: "Rob Studdert"
Subject: Re: Samples from 14 2.8
Is everyones DA 14 this soft in the corners?
http://www.pbase.com/tcom/image/31162980/original
Hell, I don't even think my 15 is that bad
William Robb
There's a 3 page review of the *ist DS in this months Popular Photography
(DEC04) magazine. They had a pre-production model and there are no acual
test results, just a description of the various features.
One of their negatives 'Rechargeable AA's not included' - yes,
I'm really concerned that I do
- Original Message -
From: "Fred Widall"
Subject: *ist DS review in this month's (Dec04) Popular Photography
There's a 3 page review of the *ist DS in this months Popular
Photography
(DEC04) magazine. They had a pre-production model and there are no
acual
test results, just a descripti
On 25 Nov 2004 at 23:06, DagT wrote:
> No
>
> In some cases I´ve got some CA (or purple fringing) as you can see here:
> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2478716
Thanks for pointing me to your example images, I assume you are pretty pleased
with the lens?
Also think it wise to cons
Hell, I don't even think my 15 is that bad
I am surprised to see purple fringing when the lens was purposely designed
for digital. Maybe the FA*24/2 is not so bad afterall.
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
What's being supplied seem to be different in every country. I suppose many
US users simply prefer Maha or other US famous brands, instead of the
Japanese 4hr chargers which are also good, but not recognized in North
America.
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
One of their negatives 'Rechar
On 25 Nov 2004 at 17:56, William Robb wrote:
> I expect that they get used to having batteries supplied, since most
> of the cameras are using proprietary (and heathenly expensive)
> batteries that come shipped with the camera so that the poor suckers
> don't know what they are getting into rig
1 - 100 of 141 matches
Mail list logo
