Yes, I understood that, but my thinking was that perhaps now a redesign
with the smaller sensor and mirror areas in mind, and perhaps newer, more
advanced construction techniques and materials, could yield even smaller
lenses. Just wondering ...
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Adam Maas
Godfrey,
Kiron did make a quite good 28/2 in K mount. You may want to look around
to see if there is an SMC-A version of it (Mine's in plain K mount). I'm
not entirely sure, but suspect the Vivitar 28/2 is also the same design.
-Adam
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
The 50mm focal length for an SLR
On 16/9/06, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed:
All with the Panasonic point and shoot. Some from the hip. Lots of
fun for grandpa.
http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder.tcl?folder_id=643396
Lovely set. Number 4's a cracker.
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People,
I could be wrong but I think it was the 31mm Ltd. f1.8 a few years ago.
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
On Sat, 16 Sep 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
[Original Message]
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis
Yes Shel, but there is a way out of slow, variable aperture zooms, and
that's fast primes.
That reminds me, I saw an Aston Martin in town today. That makes one in
five years. I guess another may come through in 2011 grin.
--
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
Idiot Proof == Expert Proof
---
David J Brooks
Hockey is only a few weeks away, lads.
And i agree, network TV sucks, especially since Air Farce is not on yet.
Dave
Quoting Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Football, Mark, football. Not to mention almost every feature film
and a wide range of indy films available in high definition. By
David J Brooks wrote:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4947803
Pretty cars. I don't know much about '20s and '30s cars. Is that front
one a Duesenberg?
--
Christian
http://photography.skofteland.net
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
The FA limited lenses. All in the last few years. More will follow to
be sure.
Paul
On Sep 16, 2006, at 6:11 PM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
On Sat, 16 Sep 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
[Original Message]
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis
Yes Shel, but there is a way out of slow, variable aperture
On 16/9/06, Collin R Brendemuehl, discombobulated, unleashed:
I came close last night, but just missed it.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?
ViewItemih=002item=120029822978rd=1sspagename=STRK%3AMEDW%3AITrd=1
That wide a 20mm f4 ?
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People,
On 16/9/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed:
I would
not demean such a person by referring to her/him as a 'kid', even if
I were a crusty old curmudgeon.
Hey, some of us *demand* it ;-
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
Thanks Paul.
I noticed that the owners seemed to give me a look when shooting their
car(s), when i layed down or knealt down and took the shot. Most peple
were shooting higher up. Not a death look or anything like that, but
a, why are you taking a picture of my car like that, look.
Could
On 16/9/06, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed:
How dare people use language like
distal phalange when they know there are children reading this list?
I think Frank's away this weekend.
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
I've found that two cameras make you a pro even if you're shooting
Pentax:-)).
Paul
On Sep 16, 2006, at 6:16 PM, David J Brooks wrote:
Thanks Paul.
I noticed that the owners seemed to give me a look when shooting their
car(s), when i layed down or knealt down and took the shot. Most peple
On 16/9/06, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed:
I'm senile, but I'm not stupid:-).
I'm just stupid ;-))
Come on guys, break it up!!
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
--
It was on the dpreview forum:
Please see the K10D pentax catalogue at
http://www.pentax.no/accounts/433774/File/Datablader/8690.pdf
Looks like the 43mm LE is a goner, guess I am happy that I got mine
in time :-)
They are in the 13 page brochure that's been mentioned before, I
believe.
--
On 16/9/06, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed:
Sorry, that went right by me. Not having had a television since about
1988, I'm a bit out of touch with current programs! (With the 65-mile
commute to the university where I now work, I'm staying overnight in a
motel one night a week. There
it doesn't seem to work that way. The Olympus lenses designed for the
4/3 cameras seems to be pretty much the same size weight as their
135 equivalents.
However, they do seem to be able to do other interesting things, such
as a 35-100 fixed f/2 zoom, which is equivalent to a 70-200/2, and a
Thanks Cotty
On Sep 16, 2006, at 6:17 PM, Cotty wrote:
On 16/9/06, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed:
All with the Panasonic point and shoot. Some from the hip. Lots of
fun for grandpa.
http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder.tcl?folder_id=643396
Lovely set. Number 4's a cracker.
--
At 06:16 PM 9/16/2006, you wrote:
Message: 10
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 15:04:08 -0700
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: OT: Bummer
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Why not just say what it is you
It's fly agaric - magic mushroom - where the fairies live! Plenty
round here this time of year. Plenty of mushrooms too.
My that's pretty, and probably poisonous. Nice capture and
rendition.
Jens Bladt wrote:
My *ist D has caught a huge fungus today:
10 a penny round here! Although I did see a very beautiful DB5 last
week, and they're not so common.
--
Cheers,
Bob
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of graywolf
Sent: 16 September 2006 23:15
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re:
What are you when you use three?
Paul Stenquist wrote:
I've found that two cameras make you a pro even if you're shooting
Pentax:-)).
Paul
On Sep 16, 2006, at 6:16 PM, David J Brooks wrote:
Thanks Paul.
I noticed that the owners seemed to give me a look when shooting their
car(s), when i
A masochist. (Although I admit to using a 35mm SLR, a Mamiya TLR and
a Speed Graphic 4x5 when shooting drag racing from the starting line
some thirty years ago.)
Paul
On Sep 16, 2006, at 6:56 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
What are you when you use three?
Paul Stenquist wrote:
I've found that
Vivitar built a Series 1 28/1.9 in both screwmount and K-mount.
Always wanted one. Couldn't afford it new and haven't found a used K
version. But it's reportedly a superb lens.
Paul
On Sep 16, 2006, at 5:55 PM, Adam Maas wrote:
Godfrey,
Kiron did make a quite good 28/2 in K mount. You may
A lot of them in Detroit as well. The owners drive them. You know,
Ford execs.
Paul
On Sep 16, 2006, at 6:39 PM, Bob W wrote:
10 a penny round here! Although I did see a very beautiful DB5 last
week, and they're not so common.
--
Cheers,
Bob
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
The single most important character in that show is Horatio's sunglasses.
The show would only last 40 minutes if they deleted all the scenes of the
sunglasses being taken off before the delivery of a supposedly deep and
meaningful line and then being put back on before he enters a dark crime
Steve Larson, who used to frequent the list more frequently, had one I
believe. And if my failing memory hasn't let me down, I had a chance to
use it while we were in Santa Barbara a few years ago. Nice lens, although
I'd much prefer the SMCP-A 28/2.0 that, for some reason I stupidly sold a
year
The DB4 and the DB5, especially the DB4-GT Zagato, have always been my
favorite Astons.
http://www.astonmartins.com/db4_5_6_s/db4gt_zagato.htm
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Bob W
10 a penny round here! Although I did see a very beautiful DB5 last
week, and they're not so common.
--
That wasn't the point... Paul... I think you know that.
The fact is that some of you can't stand to hear objectivity expressed.
Tom C.
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: popphoto.com
At 06:40 PM 9/16/2006, you wrote:
Message: 5
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 23:22:24 +0100
From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: OT: Bummer
To: pentax list PDML@pdml.net
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
On 16/9/06, Collin R Brendemuehl, discombobulated,
FWIW:
I had both the K20/4 and the M20/4 at the same time
For a while. I did extensive tests and I couldn't
Find any differences (on fine grain film) so I sold
The M because I like the feel of the K better, its
Certainly no beast, slightly bigger (longer)than say a
50mm/1.4. Tbe M was too small
On 17/09/06, graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can you provide a reference on that? A quick goggle search* finds
nothing the contradicts my explanation. Your comment may be accurate on
the quantum level but I do not think we can quite apply it to current
image sensors, but would be interested
The Pentax lens is undoubtedly quite a bit lighter, and of course it
gives you all the metering options on a DSLR. I suspect that the
Vivitar, like all the early Series 1 lenses, is an all-metal little
tank. Probably quite heavy. But there's something to be said for
that. I love my Series
On 17/09/06, Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because you need a 35.7mm diameter front element for a 50mm f1.4, or a
41.6mm front element for a 50mm f1.2. The Pentax FA 50mm f1.4 is already
about the smallest on the market, at it's size, I'd suspect the size of
the optics necessary for the
Of course we can stand to hear objectivity expressed. We're still
waiting to here it from certain quarters:-). And that is the point.
The *ist cameras were better than many of us expected to see from
Pentax. Many of us think this camera will be better. That' s
objective. And it's
On 17/09/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Talk like what, Rob? Do you mean the more ready acceptance of slower
lenses? I think we've seen that dumbing down with the prevalence of
slower, variable aperture zooms.
Yes, I fear the fastest lenses we'll see from Pentax from now on are
Not sure, but i don;t think so. Most of them today were from the big 3.
Dave
Quoting Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
David J Brooks wrote:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4947803
Pretty cars. I don't know much about '20s and '30s cars. Is that front
one a Duesenberg?
--
Seems we've visited this place before... Reminding me there was a 38mm
f/1.8, 40mm f/1.4, 60mm f/1.5, and 70mm f/2 all made for 18x24mm coverage...
by Olympus for the Pen F. They didn't do as much with wide angles; their
fast 25mm coming in at f/2.8. Unfortunately these lenses are not
applicable
On 17/09/06, Eric Featherstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 16/09/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm talking about the lens diameter, not the barrel diameter. For example,
the diameter of the front element of my 35mm Summicron (f/2.0) is about
1-inch while the front element of
IMO there is nothing wrong with the pancakes. In fact I'm debating myself
buying the 21mm. With the tiny 21mm I can have the camera in my pocket and
flip it up and shoot from the hip. Don't know if I'll ever do it, but the
idea is tempting. I imagine myself walking around slick pony tail, dark
Since we're getting 1.8 zooms, I think we'll get some fast primes as
well. It all hinges on camera sales. If the demand for a higher spec
camera like the K10 exceeds demand for the K100, Pentax will answer
the market's call. It's just good business.
Paul
On Sep 16, 2006, at 8:35 PM, Digital
On 17/09/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steve Larson, who used to frequent the list more frequently, had one I
believe. And if my failing memory hasn't let me down, I had a chance to
use it while we were in Santa Barbara a few years ago. Nice lens, although
I'd much prefer the
On 17/09/06, Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMO there is nothing wrong with the pancakes. In fact I'm debating myself
buying the 21mm. With the tiny 21mm I can have the camera in my pocket and
flip it up and shoot from the hip. Don't know if I'll ever do it, but the
idea is tempting. I
On 17/09/06, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
LOL.
Tom, Adam Rob received an ear bashing were labeled negative a
couple of days ago for saying that.
I guess we can add Paul to the list of negative naysayers.
I prefer to be labeled as realistic, cautious and practical, you ain't
heard
Adam Maas wrote:
It certainly appears to. I do have to read the instructions though.
Powell Hargrave wrote:
Nice shot.
So panning with SR on works? I think Pentax recommends turning it off when
panning.
http://static.flickr.com/98/244670476_9452ca7abf_b.jpg
K100D, SMC-M 50mm f2 wide open
David Savage wrote:
I guess we can add Paul to the list of negative naysayers.
This whole line of conversation reminds me of Spiro Agnew's and Richard
Nixon's Nattering Nabobs of Negativism. And of the classic anagram of
Mr. Agnew's name.
--
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss
P. J. Alling wrote:
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
On Sat, 16 Sep 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis
Yes Shel, but there is a way out of slow, variable aperture zooms, and
that's fast primes. What is the way out of slow primes?
Fast primes ...
Yup, and the last one such that
Jens Bladt wrote:
My *ist D has caught a huge fungus today:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/24451/
Woohoo! They'll love you in Amsterdam. :-) I haven't seen an /Amanita
Muscaria/ since college.
--
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4948475
Not much of a car shot, but i liked the message.
istD, 16-45 f4, Raw-CS conversion.
Comments??
Dave
Equine Photography in York Region
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
P. J. Alling wrote:
My that's pretty, and probably poisonous. Nice capture and rendition.
Poisonous or hallucinogenic, depending on who you ask.
--
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
I have my Nikon 70-200 VR on all the time and pan quite a bit with the
flat work, equine wise. Seems to work that way, so i'd suspect it
would Pentax wise.
BTW Adam, nice shot
Dave
Quoting Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Adam Maas wrote:
It certainly appears to. I do have to read the
On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 05:45:09PM -0400, graywolf wrote:
Can you provide a reference on that? A quick goggle search* finds
nothing the contradicts my explanation. Your comment may be accurate on
the quantum level but I do not think we can quite apply it to current
image sensors, but would
Wow!!! Someone got a steal of a deal there.
--- Collin R Brendemuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I came close last night, but just missed it.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemih=002item=120029822978rd=1sspagename=STRK%3AMEDW%3AITrd=1
Sincerely,
Collin Brendemuehl
Collin, are you a ham too?
I wonder how many hams we have on this list. :)
I'm a technician class ham, soon to upgrade to general
or extra.
--- Collin R Brendemuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
At 06:40 PM 9/16/2006, you wrote:
Message: 5
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 23:22:24 +0100
From: Cotty
Aperture ring? For what?
On Sep 16, 2006, at 9:18 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
On 17/09/06, Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMO there is nothing wrong with the pancakes. In fact I'm debating
myself
buying the 21mm. With the tiny 21mm I can have the camera in my
pocket and
flip
By one measure, you could actually say the shot from the small-sensor
camera actually has more magnification, as you're magnifying a
smaller image on the sensor to fill the same sized print. But,
despite that, the small-sensor camera still ends up with more DOF.
On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at
On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 04:16:42PM -0400, Mark Roberts wrote:
John Francis wrote:
On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 01:28:26PM -0400, Mark Roberts wrote:
Ryan Brooks wrote:
Adam Maas wrote:
At f2.4, the 70 is about perfect for me. Essentially the same length
and
speed as the legendary
Depending on which variety of Amanitas it might be. Some are
psychoactive, some can kill you.
Paul
On Sep 16, 2006, at 9:30 PM, Doug Franklin wrote:
P. J. Alling wrote:
My that's pretty, and probably poisonous. Nice capture and
rendition.
Poisonous or hallucinogenic, depending on who
On 9/16/06, Rick Womer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An ugly time of day, for sure...
I'm now polishing off my second lager of the evening. Once again, life is good.
--
Scott Loveless
http://www.twosixteen.com
Shoot more film!
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On 9/16/06, Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 16 Sep 2006, Scott Loveless wrote:
Typical PS shutter lag.
Standard Pentax PS gripe. Thanks for the long report. Any comments on
the lens?
The lens is fine, as far as I can tell. It is SMC and the front
element is recessed
On 9/16/06, John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I actually managed to bend the hinge on a Canon PowerShot G1.
It (the hinge) still worked, but it was very stiff to operate,
and the screen didn't lie quite flat when in the closed position.
It eventually got replaced when the camera had to go
I just dug out an old CD of a local hot air balloon rally and played it as a
slide show on the media edition. It's really neat. Landscape oriented
shots zoom to slightly more than fit the screen and portrait oriented shots
scroll to more than fill the screen, yet also end up showing the entire
Wow. Looks like they are converting all the DA lense lineup to be USM?
I better start saving up, or selling my non-USM DA lenses now!
rg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It was on the dpreview forum:
Please see the K10D pentax catalogue at
Jon Myers wrote:
Collin, are you a ham too?
There are a few of us. I'm also a Technician license, but I haven't
been active much the last two years or so.
--
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
IIRC there were people with 77's on the list when the 31mm was
announced. In fact the 43 and 77 look like the work of the same design
team. The 31 is almost a different family all together.
Mark Roberts wrote:
P. J. Alling wrote:
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
On Sat, 16 Sep 2006,
On 17/09/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aperture ring? For what?
You've already forgotten? It's simply one of the two primary controls
that photographers have over how a photographic exposure is set.
--
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
Quoting Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Depending on which variety of Amanitas it might be. Some are
psychoactive, some can kill you.
Is that why i have a problem remembering the 60's.
G
Dave
Paul
On Sep 16, 2006, at 9:30 PM, Doug Franklin wrote:
P. J. Alling wrote:
My that's
Sounds like your back Bill.
Dave
Quoting Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I just dug out an old CD of a local hot air balloon rally and played it as a
slide show on the media edition. It's really neat. Landscape oriented
shots zoom to slightly more than fit the screen and portrait oriented
I didn't mention that some of the shots need to be deleted. I was using the
MZ-S at the time and some of the shots of the afterglow (burning at night to
light up a tethered balloon like a light bulb) show a fair amount of camera
movement.
Phyllis has a few days off for fall break in October, so
On 9/16/06, Jon Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Collin, are you a ham too?
I wonder how many hams we have on this list. :)
There's a bunch of us lurking around here. I've got my Extra ticket.
-Mat, N2NJZ
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
But you no longer need the ring to set the aperture. The dial works
just fine.
Paul
On Sep 16, 2006, at 10:29 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
On 17/09/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aperture ring? For what?
You've already forgotten? It's simply one of the two primary controls
KG4LOV, not active at the present time.
Bill
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mat
Maessen
Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 10:45 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Hams (was Re: OT: Bummer)
On 9/16/06, Jon Myers [EMAIL
Just got one of these (refurbished grade A stock) for my son - anyone
have one? Any comments?
I LOVED that camera when we had it in stock at my store. The lens was very
sharp, and the super macro mode was a lot of fun to play with on slow days.
It was a little difficult to sell because of
I always assume mushrooms are poisonous, there are a number of varieties
that are quite edible, which have mimics which will kill you dead
quickly or slowly. I have a friend who's a mycologist, he collects
mushrooms to eat occasionally . If he gets just one he's not sure of in
a batch he
On 17/09/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But you no longer need the ring to set the aperture. The dial works
just fine.
It might work fine, but it's not my preference, my preference is to
use the aperture ring, as it is on my Mamiya and Leicas. I'm not happy
that I am being steered
Very nice, Dave! I like the soft light. Have you
considered a tighter crop, maybe just above the
headlights and just in front of the bumper?
Rick
--- David J Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4947803
Horse show season, for me anyway, is pretty
Well, now I feel a little better - at least not so alone in my
foolishness.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Digital Image Studio
Shel Belinkoff
I'd much prefer the SMCP-A 28/2.0 that, for some reason I stupidly sold
a
year or so back. I found the 28/2.0 to be a bit soft at the
I know that aperture dials are not your preference. I also am very
familiar with the purpose of an aperture ring. I was turning them
when you were still in knickers. But I responded to your post in like
manner. I own a number of lenses that have aperture dials rather than
aperture rings.
I ordered five, one for everyone in my family, plus one more backup. :)
Not. I'm waiting for the (hopefully) eventual price drop and to see
what kind of image quality we are going to get from 10Mp.
rg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I now personally know three people who have actually ordered a
Hmm. I think I want the A28/2 as well. Much more practical than the
Vivitar, although I wonder which is better. We may never know.
Paul
On Sep 16, 2006, at 11:01 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Well, now I feel a little better - at least not so alone in my
foolishness.
Shel
[Original
I now personally know three people who have actually ordered a K10D, at
least one of which ordered some accessories and a lens along with it. Just
curious who else may have actually ordered the camera, and, if you care to
share, from where did you order it?
Shel
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail
I ordered and paid for a K10D from Amazon, which seems to be the only
internet provider who is taking orders. I've also asked to be
notified when available from BH. I would prefer to buy from them,
but they are not taking orders. According to them, the few they took
were a mistake.
Where
I didn't order the camera - three people I personally know did, and you're
now the fourth person I know, although I don't know you personally. Bob
Sullivan ordered from BH, another from John Celio @ Reed's Camera here in
the East Bay. I don't specifically recall where the third person ordered
i did exactly the same.
mishka
On 9/16/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I ordered and paid for a K10D from Amazon, which seems to be the only
internet provider who is taking orders. I've also asked to be
notified when available from BH. I would prefer to buy from them,
but they
Amateur Extra KD2L
- Original Message -
From: Jon Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 6:48 PM
Subject: Hams (was Re: OT: Bummer)
Collin, are you a ham too?
I wonder how many hams we have on this list. :)
I'm a
On 9/17/06, Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 17/09/06, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
LOL.
Tom, Adam Rob received an ear bashing were labeled negative a
couple of days ago for saying that.
I guess we can add Paul to the list of negative naysayers.
I prefer
I agree...
As I was telling Godfrey, the loss of the aperture
ring is just crazy to me. I noticed in the question
posed by Shel about the 50mm lenses that I'm not alone
in this. Many folks wanted a 50mm for digital as long
as it came with an aperture ring.
I'm going to have to get used to not
Sullivan ordered from BH, another from John Celio @ Reed's Camera here in
the East Bay. I don't specifically recall where the third person ordered
from, although I think it was from John as she's local..
Only one person so far has asked for me and mentioned you, Shel. Thanks
very much for
Hi Shel,
You know me personally. You've just been spared the pain of seeing
me:-).
Yes, Bob Sullivan was one of the few orders BH took. I tried to
order and asked them about that. They admitted a mistake. They soon
changed their Out of Stock nomenclature to New- coming soon. I
think that's
Rob...I'm totally with you on this.
Using a dial on a camera body to control the aperture
is nuts to me. I don't see it as an advantage either.
To me it seems cumbersome and ridiculous.
-Brendan
--- Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 17/09/06, Paul Stenquist
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 17/09/06, Brendan MacRae [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm going to have to get used to not having them I
suppose, but I don't see the advantage...I just don't
see it.
That's because the advantage is not yours, it's to the manufacturer,
they can produce a cheaper interface and then add a heap
There's no significant advantage to eliminating the aperture ring
other than reduced complexity. But, likewise, there is no advantage
to retaining it. The camera functions just as well without it.
Paul
On Sep 17, 2006, at 12:07 AM, Brendan MacRae wrote:
I agree...
As I was telling Godfrey,
No, it wasn't Marnie ... but in all honesty, I'd not post it publicly on
the list if it were. It would be her choice to do that.
It's a woman I know, but I was just guessing that she may have ordered from
you. She may have ordered before your announcement.
Well, my meds are kicking in, time
Ason one of the guys pushing a D-FA 50, it has nothing to do with the
aperture ring and everything to do with loving my LX.
-Adam
Brendan MacRae wrote:
I agree...
As I was telling Godfrey, the loss of the aperture
ring is just crazy to me. I noticed in the question
posed by Shel about the
Digital Image Studio wrote:
On 17/09/06, Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMO there is nothing wrong with the pancakes. In fact I'm debating myself
buying the 21mm. With the tiny 21mm I can have the camera in my pocket and
flip it up and shoot from the hip. Don't know if I'll ever do it, but
I do kinda wonder why they didn't use a variation of that mount for 4/3rds.
-Adam
Doug Miles wrote:
Seems we've visited this place before... Reminding me there was a 38mm
f/1.8, 40mm f/1.4, 60mm f/1.5, and 70mm f/2 all made for 18x24mm coverage...
by Olympus for the Pen F. They didn't do as
Thanks
-Adam
David J Brooks wrote:
I have my Nikon 70-200 VR on all the time and pan quite a bit with the
flat work, equine wise. Seems to work that way, so i'd suspect it
would Pentax wise.
BTW Adam, nice shot
Dave
Quoting Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Adam Maas wrote:
You may not like it. You're entitled to your preferences, as is Rob.
But it's neither ridiculous or cumbersome. In fact, it's considerably
less cumbersome than an aperture ring. And that's from someone who
used aperture rings for forty years.
Paul
On Sep 17, 2006, at 12:12 AM, Brendan MacRae
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I now personally know three people who have actually ordered a K10D, at
least one of which ordered some accessories and a lens along with it. Just
curious who else may have actually ordered the camera, and, if you care to
share, from where did you order it?
Shel
On 17/09/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You may not like it. You're entitled to your preferences, as is Rob.
But it's neither ridiculous or cumbersome. In fact, it's considerably
less cumbersome than an aperture ring. And that's from someone who
used aperture rings for forty
201 - 300 of 313 matches
Mail list logo
