ROTFLMAO
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Rob Studdert
> Even a relatively straight photo can be misleading. The following pic is
the
> Aussie PM (front) and the treasurer in session in the House Of Reps
Federal
> Parliament (not my pic):
>
> http://crazney.net/pics/Costello.jpg
On 7 Apr 2005 at 8:27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Sorry about that. I'll try an example: If you take a picture of Bush kissing
> Clinton on the mouth it doesn't really change the picture if you later remove
> the foot of a bird in the upper left of the frame. It does if the foot was
> sticking o
This one time, at band camp, mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thanks. Thought that was what you meant but, from the way it was
> written, I thought you might have some super-whizzo defence that
> prevents the viruses even getting _to_ your machine.
Sure, on my other network I simply
> fra: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> - Original Message -
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> >> What sort of alterations are you implying?
> >
> > Anything that according the honest photographer does not change the
> > content of the picture. It could be a plastic bag, some garb
I tend to agree, but bokeh was never realy a problem for my use. I use it
for candid portraits and panorama shots. So, to me sharpness and reslolution
is the main issue.
Like this: http://gallery13117.fotopic.net/p13541985.html
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
---
Hi Joe,
I've already got a 30gb Ipod photo, but I'm still trying to find the best
way of getting images from cards to the unit itself. There are a couple of
proprietry connectors, but they are hideously slow. I'm sort of fishing at
the moment, and hopefully I come up with something useable.
The I
- Original Message -
From: "Rob Studdert"
Subject: Re: Free image browser
Oops, I had Hepburn on my mind...
It's a man thing.
b...
- Original Message -
From: "Shel Belinkoff"
Subject: Re: A Small Gallery
Didn't say to ignore comments, just make 'em the way you want not
quite the same thing.
Understood.
One still needs to have an open mind that what they wanted yestrday is not
what they wanted today.
Peer press
On 6 Apr 2005 at 22:14, mike wilson wrote:
> > LOL, I prefer my women alive ;-)
>
> You'd better tell her:
> http://www.sophialoren.com/
Oops, I had Hepburn on my mind...
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~
Didn't say to ignore comments, just make 'em the way you want not
quite the same thing.
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: William Robb
> > Bill, They're your pics, make 'em any way you like, regardless of
> > comments and crits from others.
>
> To ignore comments from others negates th
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 6 Apr 2005 at 17:40, Quasi Modo wrote:
(this is all wa off-topic, and I think most of us, apart from Mr
Studdert, prefer talking about Sophia Loren if it must be
off-topic)...
LOL, I prefer my women alive ;-)
You'd better tell her:
http://www.sophialoren.com/
Back off t
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Apr 5, 2005, at 11:11 PM, mike wilson wrote:
No computer is "perfectly safe". My Apple iMac 20" and PowerBook G3
systems running Mac OS X are well managed to minimize security risks
and viruses, behind a security firewall and with proper user accounts
limiting access t
On 6 Apr 2005 at 23:16, William Robb wrote:
> I suspect we would get along well in the darkroom.
> The Mamiya 7 might be a good camera to look at.
> Kind of a Texas Leica.
Just did a Q&D shot of the M6 + 21/2.8 ASPH, M7 + 43/4.5 and LX + A20/2.8
together.
http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio/t
That's pretty nice! Recharging to 80% capacity in one minute
and can discharge 80% of its capacity in -40C temperature ... hmm..
the perfect LX-D energy source?
Antti-Pekka
Antti-Pekka Virjonen
Estera Oy Turku
www.estera.fi
www.computec.fi
> -Origin
> Also: I think Google has at least some of his pages archived:
> http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:SkpeJHaqM_4J:home.att.net/~alnem/html/equipment_review.html+pentax+lens+reviews+home.att.net&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
> Try archive.org:
> http://web.archive.org/web/20040716085338/home.att.net/~alnem/html
- Original Message -
From: "Shel Belinkoff"
Subject: Re: A Small Gallery
Bill, They're your pics, make 'em any way you like, regardless of
comments
and crits from others.
To ignore comments from others negates the entire exercise of putting images
up for critique or viewing.
I conside
On Apr 5, 2005 3:12 PM, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3256532
I just saw this now, Frank, but just wanted to say, it's great! She
is obviously the predator. I hope he was able to read that body
language :)
Cheers,
j
--
Juan Buhler
ht
Bill, They're your pics, make 'em any way you like, regardless of comments
and crits from others.
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: William Robb
> Apparently, I like em softer than most people.
- Original Message -
From: "Shel Belinkoff"
Subject: Re: Pentax 645
Ahhh ...that's something I don't care for. It may be a bit irrational,
but
for some reason I prefer a horizontal, or landscape, orientation. That's
a
reason 9not the only reason) 6x6 appeals to me.
I suspect we would
Ahhh ...that's something I don't care for. It may be a bit irrational, but
for some reason I prefer a horizontal, or landscape, orientation. That's a
reason 9not the only reason) 6x6 appeals to me.
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: William Robb
> - Original Message -
> From: "Shel B
William Robb wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Ann Sanfedele"
> Subject: Re: GFM & PDML
>
> >
> > Frank made a reference to this as well - I think
> > I'm missing
> > this joke - must be a Canadian thing
>
> Actually, its an English thing, but we were dumb minions at the time.
- Original Message -
From: "Ann Sanfedele"
Subject: Re: GFM & PDML
Frank made a reference to this as well - I think
I'm missing
this joke - must be a Canadian thing
Actually, its an English thing, but we were dumb minions at the time.
maybe one that shouldn't be repeated in polite
c
On Apr 6, 2005 5:26 AM, David Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I still think the 2CV has more character, even though it is French.
"even though it is French"
Merci pour les Français..
De tels propos VOUS déshonorent.
Michel
Faîtes l'effort de traduire, je fais celui de lire l'Anglais
William Robb wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Ann Sanfedele"
> Subject: Re: GFM & PDML
>
> > I wish you both were coming -
> > am I gonna be the only um girl photog?
> > annsan
>
> We'll dress Frank up as a lumberjack.
>
> William Robb
Frank made a reference to this as well - I
- Original Message -
From: "Alan Chan"
Subject: Re: Backordered: SMC Pentax-FA 135mm f/2.8 (IF)
Or we are about to see some new lenses coming. Who knows?
He does?
WW
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C"
Subject: Re: peso: A Small Gallery
You crack me up.
It's what friends are for
b...
--- David Oswald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was about to place an order with B&H for the SMC Pentax-FA 135mm
> f/2.8(IF) lens. As recently as last week this was listed as being
> available as a special order item with a 7-14 day lead time. But today
> it now lists as backordered.
> I must
I need a shorter URL
Anyway, this is straight off the RAW converter, where I adjusted white
balance and exposure, and nothing else.
The files were resized for the web, no sharpening or softening.
Lens used was the 77mm at around f/8.
http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb//pictures/flannery/sharp/f
I was about to place an order with B&H for the SMC Pentax-FA 135mm
f/2.8(IF) lens. As recently as last week this was listed as being
available as a special order item with a 7-14 day lead time. But today
it now lists as backordered.
I must not be living right. I'm still waiting on my SMC Pen
You crack me up.
Tom C.
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To:
Subject: Re: peso: A Small Gallery
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 21:46:37 -0600
- Original Message - From: "Tom C" Subject: Re: peso: A Small
Gallery
Sure. I'll give anything a try once.
Ask
- Original Message -
From: "pancho hasselbach"
Subject: Re: peso: A Small Gallery
Well, others already have mentioned that the softening was probably
overdone...
The one I like most is IMGP7182_small.html, not just because it's the
least soft one, but because the young lady looks a li
- Original Message -
From: "John Francis"
Subject: Re: Re: Taking, Making, Creating Images
I really don't see any point in thrashing this out yet again.
The last time was only, what, a couple of months back?
..
So let's just drop it now, before someone gets overheated.
You are such
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
What sort of alterations are you implying?
Anything that according the honest photographer does not change the
content of the picture. It could be a plastic bag, some garbage, a lamp
post, a fellow photographer etc. We have to belive in
- Original Message -
From: "Cotty"
Subject: Re: peso: A Small Gallery
http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/pictures/flannery/flannery_index.html
7108a. Nailed.
Thanks, Cotty.
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Stenquist"
Subject: Re: Taking, Making, Creating Images
I'm speaking of still photographers. Television news is another story
altogether, and one that I will not comment on here.
"The N.C. Press Photographers Association has rescinded three awards given
- Original Message -
From: "frank theriault"
Subject: Re: peso: A Small Gallery
She's not nearly fat enough to be an opera singer...
Give her time.. she's young yet.
Lovely shots, and a beautiful girl. I especially like the middle one
of the right column, the one with her hair back, o
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Stenquist"
Subject: Re: peso: A Small Gallery
Good work on the part of the photographer. The model was apparently ill
at ease. But I like the second and fourth ones in the right hand
column.
Thanks Paul.
b...
- Original Message -
From: "Ann Sanfedele"
Subject: Re: peso: A Small Gallery
H I vote for 7182
But I'm also (as someone else said) a bit put off
by the over-softness...
I think the young lady ws a bit self-concious
throughout.. am I right?
Thanks Ann
I'll get an undersoftened
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C"
Subject: Re: peso: A Small Gallery
Sure. I'll give anything a try once.
Ask Tom, he'll tell you...
Or was it that Tamron 28-300 zoom?
Was it really a 300? It seemed so
small
Or was it those Idaho Spud candies?
They weere
Or was it those sissy hard
- Original Message -
From: "John Celio"
Subject: Re: A Small Gallery
This young lady needed some portraits for a poster, and for her school
entrance.
She wants to be a opera singer when she grows up.
http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/pictures/flannery/flannery_index.html
William Rob
- Original Message -
From: "Kevin Waterson"
Subject: Changing file names
I was looking at the Pentax Photo Laboratory and noticed
an option under options spanner->Advanced to be able to
change the the regular file name eg. IMGP1234 to basically
whatever I want with 8 digits and letter
- Original Message -
From: "mike wilson"
Subject: Re: peso: A Small Gallery
Apart from the little bit of missing hair [8-)] I prefer 7183a
Thanks Mike, my aim was a bit off on that one, for sure.
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C"
Subject: Re: peso: A Small Gallery
William Robb wrote:
Sure. I'll give anything a try once.
Ask Tom, he'll tell you...
Are you referring to those dog treats we bought for your dogs to show we
were nice normal people, but that you ate youself so your d
- Original Message -
From: "Shel Belinkoff"
Subject: Re: Pentax 645
What don't
you like about the Pentax 645?
I don't like that the negatives are, by default, portrait orientation when
they are being printed.
I find it offputting.
Others may not.
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: "Ann Sanfedele"
Subject: Re: GFM & PDML
I wish you both were coming -
am I gonna be the only um girl photog?
annsan
We'll dress Frank up as a lumberjack.
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Roberts"
Subject: Re: Pentax 645
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You neglected to post some of the addendums that followed this message
.
The shutter bounce vibration in the 6x7 is largely myth.
Doesn't look like it to me:
http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/
He also sells M42 rear lens caps, but does not list them on eBay.
Glenn
John Whittingham wrote:
Just oreder some rear lens caps with protective flange for A/AF series lenses
from:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
He asked me to mention that they're available despite not being listed in
auctions on eekbay.
Joh
Anyway, it rather looks like this thread will soon be dying a natural
death anyway.
cheers,
frank
No way man. It ain't and I ain't gonna let it! It'll fill your inbox for
hours! :)
Tom C.
Hi!
Alternate titles:
The Hunter and the Hunted,
Body Language,
"What's Your Sign?"
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3256532
"And then she swings the beer bottle and the guy falls on the floor
unconscious... The girl's fellows grab the guy and bring him to her
apartment..."
Never mind
Jens Bladt wrote regarding "Sunday FS: Pentax fisheye zoom":
I think I noticed this lens at ebay. Isn't it USA only?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7505848119
My auction specifies USA only, but I've had two inquiries from Canada,
and have agreed to ship there. While I'm at i
Hi!
I must admit that this PESO was shamelessly inspired by Marco Alpert's
post few days ago (BTW very nice pic), anyway here is another picture
from my trip to Scandinavia:
http://www.misenet.sk/Norge/
The forest in the clouds... The country of fairy tales...
I do remember :).
Boris
Hi!
Scanned from fiber based prints...
direct links just to the images on my homepage.
http://users.rcn.com/annsan/kidsinparis.jpg
http://users.rcn.com/annsan/guardianangelversaille.jpg
http://users.rcn.com/annsan/girlatthelouvre.jpg
Ann, you definitely know some secret that you don't tell :).
I pe
On Apr 6, 2005 1:42 PM, John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I really don't see any point in thrashing this out yet again.
> The last time was only, what, a couple of months back?
>
> It's obvious that there are some people on the list for whom
> even as trivial an alteration as removing a g
- Original Message -
From: "Shel Belinkoff"
Subject: Re: Taking, Making, Creating Images
We're just gonna have to disagree. I know it's possible ... as I said,
one
must pay attention to a myriad of details. Surprisingly, some of what I
learned that has helped me get repeatable results I
On Apr 5, 2005 8:11 PM, David Chang-Sang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> My happy go lucky assistant Rebecca
She is so cute. One of the reasons I like buying my film there...
-frank
--
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Not to mention that the 67II has TTL flash metering along with a new
finder that supports matrix, center weighted and spot metering and
also supports aperture priority. And the finder doesn't have that
telescoping view that you have to perfectly position your eye over.
--
Best regards,
Bruce
W
> I'm not sure, but I believe there were two ST 35/3.5 lenses, one
> that stopped to f16 and another to f22, and that they were different
> optical formulas.
>From what I can tell, there were indeed basically two versions of the ST
35/3.5, although to my eyes they optically seem not all that diffe
On Apr 6, 2005 11:07 PM, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> No I'm not.
>
> Okay, yes I am.
>
> I was going to make a further comment about FoxNews, but due to your
> (implied) exhortation to let it drop, I will. List decorum must be
> paramount.
>
> I was just poking a bit of f
On Apr 6, 2005 8:34 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I replied to Cotty's message. That will be the extent of my comments. You're
> fishing, Frank.
No I'm not.
Okay, yes I am.
I was going to make a further comment about FoxNews, but due to your
(implied) exhortation to l
> Pentax made two versions of this lens. One is identical to the K version,
> the other is reportedly not quite as good. I believe the better version
> shows an f4 designation on the aperture vs. distance scale, while the
> other doesn't. If I'm wrong, someone will undoubtedly correct me.
And, if
On Apr 6, 2005 10:39 PM, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >On Apr 6, 2005, at 8:33 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
> >
> >> Doesn't look like it to me:
> >> http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pentax67ii.shtml
> >> Mind you, it *is* just at
Bruce Dayton wrote:
>
> In light of the discussion of how much post processing one does, I
> have submitted a photo that obviously could have used a clone job on
> the wires. It was taken in a parking lot while getting ready to go
> into a nearby building. I could see the sun was setting so hung
Yep, this is the 'newer' F16 one.
Don
> -Original Message-
> From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 9:32 PM
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: RE: (Sort of a) 135/2.5 for cheap!
>
>
> Paul, I'm not sure, but I believe there were two ST 35
On Apr 6, 2005 10:29 PM, Don Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
! (Focus is optional) ;-)
It always is...
Thanks, Don,
frank
--
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
On Apr 6, 2005 10:32 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Have fun, Frank. But I really think you should leave the Sigma home and take
> the VS1 70-210, particularly if it's an early constant ap version. Perhaps we
> should vote on what lenses you should take. After all, you have at
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005 20:31:35 US/Eastern, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey group.
> Found myself in St. Catharines Ontario (near the Niagara Falls US/Canada
> border xing) last
> Tuesday,
> and after my dealings with the local land registry office were complete, i
> played tourist
Have fun, Frank. But I really think you should leave the Sigma home and take
the VS1 70-210, particularly if it's an early constant ap version. Perhaps we
should vote on what lenses you should take. After all, you have at least nine
hours before youhave to leave. Ah well, take what you wish, but
Sounds like a very cool weekend, enjoy, and bring lots of
pics back! (Focus is optional) ;-)
Don
> -Original Message-
> From: frank theriault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 9:23 PM
> To: PDML
> Subject: OT: Off on a Trip
>
>
> Tomorrow morning bright and ear
Paul, I'm not sure, but I believe there were two ST 35/3.5 lenses, one
that stopped to f16 and another to f22, and that they were different
optical formulas.
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Date: 4/6/2005 7:05:17 PM
> Subject: RE: (Sort of a) 135/2.5 for cheap!
>
Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Apr 6, 2005, at 8:33 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
>
>> Doesn't look like it to me:
>> http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pentax67ii.shtml
>> Mind you, it *is* just at shutter speeds of under 1/60, but long
>> shutter
>> speeds are part of the wa
Tomorrow morning bright and early, I'm off to Nova Scotia for an
extended long weekend, returning Monday evening. Plane leaves about 7
am tomorrow, so it will be a long day.
In the camera bag are the LX, Zenitar 16mm fisheye, Vivitar S1 3.8
constant aperture 24-48 zoom, Pentax K 1.2 50mm, Sigma A
It's a bit smaller then my K35/3.5, the coating looks different and
I don't think it gives as pleasing a rendition of colors.
Reds always seem very 'hot' with it.
This one's pretty beat up compared to the K which is virtually new
condition. I'm probably not being very fair in the comparison.
The K3
If you have to ask, it's probably too young :-)
Dave S
On Apr 7, 2005 12:30 AM, John Celio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This young lady needed some portraits for a poster, and for her school
> > entrance.
> > She wants to be a opera singer when she grows up.
> >
> > http://users.accesscomm.
On Apr 6, 2005 8:12 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Good grab of a nice moment. Nice tonal range for a flash shot. Did you use a
> reflector?
> Paul
>
Thanks, Paul.
No, actually, that was taken quite some time ago, using an old Vivitar
flash 2500 that I no longer have, no ref
I think that's supposed to be a very good lens as well. I have one but haven't
used it in years. Isn't it the same as the K-series lens?
> Sorry Shel, brain cramp. ST 35/3.5, the one that only goes to F16.
>
> Don
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECT
On 4/6/05 9:58 PM, "KT Takeshita" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/6/05 9:38 PM, "Joseph Tainter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Do you know if Pentax changed the wonderful optical formula of the FA 50
>> f2.8 or just added more coating?
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> Optical formula.
>
> Ken
But it was a
Joseph Tainter wrote:
>
> http://users.rcn.com/annsan/kidsinparis.jpg
> http://users.rcn.com/annsan/guardianangelversaille.jpg
> http://users.rcn.com/annsan/girlatthelouvre.jpg
>
> I greatly enjoyed these, Ann, especially the guard at Versailles.
>
> OT: The only time I visited Versailles was Se
On 4/6/05 9:38 PM, "Joseph Tainter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do you know if Pentax changed the wonderful optical formula of the FA 50
> f2.8 or just added more coating?
Hi Joe,
Optical formula.
Ken
Double check this before buying, Shaun. I believe these cannot read CF
cards. They are basically for looking at your photos while you play music.
I have used a 40 GB Flashtrax with 95% satisfaction. All images came
through (from a trip to Hungary last September), which is what mattered.
The uni
On Apr 6, 2005, at 8:33 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Doesn't look like it to me:
http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pentax67ii.shtml
Mind you, it *is* just at shutter speeds of under 1/60, but long
shutter
speeds are part of the way I use of medium format.
I've shot many times with the 6x7 a
"BTW, as I understand it, the triggering reason for redesigning these
macros came from an innocent and casual report from a user of FA50/2.8
macro/*istD who experienced a flare in the centre when used with a flash
at close range at near minimum aperture. This was apparently repeatable
but neve
http://users.rcn.com/annsan/kidsinparis.jpg
http://users.rcn.com/annsan/guardianangelversaille.jpg
http://users.rcn.com/annsan/girlatthelouvre.jpg
I greatly enjoyed these, Ann, especially the guard at Versailles.
OT: The only time I visited Versailles was September 11, 2001. I had
arrived in Paris
I've never really trusted this site. Some of the results don't make
sense. He shows the FA 77 to be a weak lens. Har!
Joe
On 6 Apr 2005 at 20:53, Herb Chong wrote:
> when i remember, i get mine from B&H. they never have very many in stock,
> but they do stock them. it seems KEH frequently replaces the rear cap with a
> generic slip-on one and i always replace it with a genuine Pentax one when i
> get
> a lens from
On 6 Apr 2005 at 14:49, Powell Hargrave wrote:
> Found this:
>
> PDML Lens Testing Procedure
> http://www.takinami.com/yoshihiko/photo/lens_test/pdml-procedure.html
>
> I didn't know the list had an official lens testing procedure.
It's actually a set of instruction to PDMLers on how to produc
Thanks, that's what I thought.
I think I'll just go take a card full of shots and
then see if it needs a trip to the Pentax doctor.
I have really only used it in the 16-24 range so far,
I was pretty surprised when it didn't do all that well
at longer FLs.
Maybe it's just a learning curve thing.
Do
Sorry Shel, brain cramp. ST 35/3.5, the one that only goes to F16.
Don
> -Original Message-
> From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 7:51 PM
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: RE: (Sort of a) 135/2.5 for cheap!
>
>
> I didn't realize there
i don't understand it either. every time my DA 16-45 isn't focused right,
it's because i wasn't paying enough attention.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Don Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 8:45 PM
Subject: RE: The DA retested and loved again!
It
that's what individual art buyers want, i guess, but i don't. that what
Galen Rowell called "Dead Guys Who Shot B&W" the ultimate limited edition.
being identical means they are exactly what i want someone to see and not
just my best effort, or whoever did the printing.
Herb
- Original
On 6 Apr 2005 at 17:50, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> Great ammo: "Yeah, Mac OS X has no viruses and yeah, Mac OS X comes
> with everything you need to make it nearly 100% virus proof, but Apple
> doesn't set up your security configuration for you. They must be
> wankers."
Has anyone told you you'
Godfrey DiGiorgi mused:
>
> Anyone who knows anything about security knows that the *only* way to
> get good security is to use open standards components because peer
> review and stress testing of open standards security components makes
> them strong.
Proof by assertion never works.
Some of
On 6 Apr 2005 at 17:58, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> I think there were about 15 rolls I processed for you - that about right?
Yep, but only about three were 67, I came home with about 15 rolls from the 67,
I should have shot a whole lot more. I put over 100 rolls thought the Leicas.
Rob Studdert
H
On 6 Apr 2005 at 19:58, Don Sanderson wrote:
> I know we've been through this before but would you explain
> "back focus" again? My brain hurts tonite! :-)
In really basic terms consider it the distance that the rear of the lens has to
move in and out to acheive focus. WA lenses move a very smal
only because there was such a large loss going from the original slide to
any other format. direct positives like Cibachrome added contrast and you
were stuck with its color renditions. copy slides at their best are good,
but not great. scanning has its own problems, the most important of which
On Apr 6, 2005, at 5:00 PM, Tom C wrote:
To me at least, there seems to be know transparency equivalent in the
digital world. All images receive post-exposure digital manipulation.
It's just a factor of how much is done where and when.
Transparency films require processing after exposure too. C
Godfrey wrote:
Why not go for a 20x24" banquet camera and be done with it? ]'-)
1. My back?
2. My wallet?
Kidding aside, for me 645 netted the maximum benefit for the minimum
equipment size increase over 35mm. I tend to prefer 6x6 for convenience
(never have to turn the camera on its side for a v
I think there were about 15 rolls I processed for you - that about right?
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Rob Studdert
> > Rob, I remember looking at some of your world tour vacation
transparencies
> > taken with the Mamiya through a loupe and was quite stunned by the
quality. A
> > friend
I'm going to test (use) it some more and see what happens.
If it continues to be wierd it'll go back to Pentax for a
checkup.
I know we've been through this before but would you explain
"back focus" again? My brain hurts tonite! :-)
Don
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Studdert [mailto:
On Apr 6, 2005, at 5:15 PM, Tom C wrote:
For me, the decision to go 6x7 was all about the bottom line as Mark
mentioned. The primary reason to move to MF was the larger
negative/frame. So why not maximize the move?
Not intending to be contrary to anyone... to me the 645 format always
seemed l
That was the first thing I thought of too.
The Takumar (Bayonet) 135/2.5 is still one of my favorite
"Wide open for portraits of people with bad complexions"
lenses though. ;-) Dirt cheap Soft Focus.
Don
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wedn
1 - 100 of 329 matches
Mail list logo
