Sorry Tony but your explanation is way too simplistic. If only it were that
easy. There are artists and there are technicians so if you are not an artist
guys you may as well forget about ever trying to create a photograph that
even comes close to a piece of art. I think you are right in
Mike I will put together my guidelines for composition when I have a little
time over the weekend. But like I said before, once I tell you, I may have to
kill you.(LOL)
Vic
Somehow I have managed to collect a Tokina AT-X 90 2.5, a Pentax 100/f4 and a
Kiron 105/f2.8. I love them all and they were probably all made around the
same time. I think the golden age of fine photographic lenses with excellent
build quality was in the 70-80s. At least it was for me... There
I thought this month's PUG was supposed to be digital image. That's why I
submitted the image I did. Three shots photoshopped into one... When I saw
the PUG I realized I was either wrong or a scanned image counts as digital..
Vic
In a message dated 1/2/03 10:49:33 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In a message dated 12/31/02 1:17:22 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ryan,
I tried to buy an S3 before acquiring the Canonet. But they're considerably
thinner on the ground, and quite a bit more expensive when you do find
them.
I've heard nothing but good things about them, though.
--Mike
I have a
Here Here. Well said.
Vic
In a message dated 12/31/02 5:21:34 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
With all respect, the above is pure nonsense. Whether or not the rules
are done consciously or not has nothing to do with it. You cannot compose
music arbitarily; you cannot photograph without adhering
Exactly my point Bob. Mike seems to think he and all photographers don't need
to follow any rules. He is sorely mistaken. I don't feel like arguing the
point in every great detail because it is not worth it to me. There are
compositional rules and if he dosn't want to use them that's fine with
Mike you obviously don't get the point here that I and others have been
trying to make. This e-mail suggests to me that you obviously know the rules.
These rules, being generalized, have to be broad. Thus they are
things like the eye must have a way into the picture, so don't cut off
the
Hi Frank:
Thanks for your response. Sitting on the fence is often a good thing at least
you are looking at both sides before you jump.
Actually, let's look at it from that perspective. If a photographer takes the
time to learn the guidelines of composition we'll call them (rules) they
can then
Thanks Paul For your response on the Konica Auto S2...
Vic
I'm with you Fred. Convenience often wins out...
Vic
In a message dated 1/1/03 11:13:43 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Where I should be castigated, I think, is in my perhaps too-frequent
use of zooms that cover the 50-ish FL range. Because I often end up
using an A 28-135/4 or a VS1 35-85/2.8
Once again, I have to fully agree with Pål on this one. Any respectable book
on photography discusses the rule of thirds as a starting point photographers
should use. That's not to say you can't and should not break the rules. The
rules are a starting point and that's all. But, like I said
Paul i'm not having a problem and I'm on a Mac G3 with phone modem and AOL..
Vic
That's brutal
Vic
My 200 works perfectly on my LXs.
Vic
I'm glad you guys figured it all out. I've been worrying about this all my
life. LOL
Vic
Sorry, the Ad (second ad with muppets) is brutal. I really liked Thomas' ad.
I wrote a long reason why I liked TV's ad but it never got through to the
PDML. So, in short, Sophisticated, creative come to mind. And not seeing the
bride's face allows all brides to imagine themselves in the
For the past few weeks I have been unable to send my responses to the pdml
with members' comments attached. Every time I do it I get my message gets
sent back. The only way I can participate is to send only my comments. This
makes it hard for PDML members to figure out what the heck I'm saying.
Yes I own the M version and this is what is written around the front ring.
SMC PENTAX-M dental macro 1:4 100mm
my serial number 5566010
Vic
The real solution to this problem, of course, is to use fill flash to throw
some light into the band members face. Fill flash really is an underutilized
feature. It's a lot easier to use a flash than to try to fix the image in
photoshop...
Vic
I recently got a nice Polaroid Land Camera SX-70 from a friend and used it
over the holidays. It's great fun and takes pretty good pictures too. I have
discovered the usefulness of these cameras when they are matched together
with today's high tech scanners etc. Take a picture, out it pops. Put
You are aware that the Pentax Optio digital cameras have stereo photography
feature built right into them. If you are thinking of going this route, it is
worth checking out. I've seen the results and they are very cool..
Vic
In a message dated 12/23/02 2:22:39 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Pål: I can relate with you buddy. The beauty of slides or negs is people like
you and I can get around to filing whenever we want. I am a firm believer
that there is a place for digital but it is not the answer for most of us at
In a message dated 12/23/02 10:07:16 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The mailman delivered another christmas present to myself tonight. I
think if I had to limit myself to one lens, the 75-150/4 would be it.
It has a focal length range that covers about half of what I usually
shoot. It is
I'm not sure I buy that argument about only using Pentax glass. I am a firm
believer that it's very difficult to go wrong with Pentax glass, but there
are gems out there from other manufacturers that are as good, better or at
least more useful to a particular photographer than a similar Pentax
Merry Christmas to all and to all a GOOD night..
Vic
In a message dated 12/22/02 12:53:16 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think the tripod collar helps to balance and center the mass of
camera+lens over the center of support. I would not use any lens over 200mm
if it doesn't have a tripod collar (and anything faster than 200/4) simply
because
I keep getting message back that server won't accept mail from AOL. Never had
big problem before sending PUG pics. Any suggestions??
Here's the return reply.
The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(reason: 550 {mx006-rz3} The recipient does not accept
In a message dated 12/14/02 5:52:08 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We've been through this before. Bigger is only better when the image is
considerably larger than the size of the film. For macro-photography there
is no advantage in using medium format unless the subject is large enough to
In a message dated 12/14/02 9:34:59 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
i don't do many people pictures, so i don't use any blurring very much. the
few times i do, it is to remove film grain. that usually requires a smaller
radius than you use and probably less percentage too. i probably stay at no
In a message dated 12/11/02 2:58:10 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yes, but it is debatable whether we are talking about bokeh then or simply
just annoying backgrounds.
Even the best of lenses regarding bokeh cannot perform wonders with annoying
backgrounds.
Pål
I'm not a big believer in
In a message dated 12/11/02 3:59:08 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I seem to recall hearing good things about this TC, but a search of the
PDML archives didn't turn up anything useful. Has anyone got one? How
do you like it? If I did pick one up, I'd be using it with a 135/2.5
and a 50/1.7.
In a message dated 12/11/02 4:58:34 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Boy, the matte heavyweight paper gobbles up ink fast -
Is there any evidence that glassy papers abosorb less ink?
DO you epsonites milk the cartridge right down to the very end? I seem
to be getting
ok stuff after it has told
In a message dated 12/11/02 8:28:33 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
FA* Zoom 250mm-600mm f/5.6 ED [IF]
A* 1200mm f/8 ED [IF]
M Reflex 2000mm f/13.5
I'm really quite curious!
Brad
No but a friend has the 135-600f/6.7 mint with carrying case etc that he
wants to sell to me for $1200
In a message dated 12/11/02 9:45:22 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hey Everybody,
I thought up of a great new topic for discussion:
Flash Guns, Flash Guns and more Flash Guns.
How many flash guns are enough and why? How big and
powerful do you want your flash guns to be? ect.
I'm not sure
There are so many great photography Web sites around that are not strictly
Pentax related. I'm wondering if we should put together a list of the users'
favourite (non-pentax photography web sites
Could be a good resource and we could certainly kill some serious time
checking them out.
Vic
Oops forgot to start it off. I like to go to
http://www.naturepix.com/
just to check out the galleries once in a while
Vic
In a message dated 12/10/02 7:05:32 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As Bob Rapp said, a Pentax-M 35mm f/3.5 is a superior lens, and better
than most other 35 mm lenses from anyone.
That is HIS opinion. It is also my opinion.
I have 35/3.5 lens and agree that it is a very good lens. But one
In a message dated 12/8/02 8:14:51 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have to mention it explicitly. At the moment I intend to shoot
macro handheld. So such thing as weight of the whole installment is
important.
That's not a good idea. In macro mode everything is magnified including
camera
Brad, if you were to ask me, I wouldn't get tied up in it right now. Use the
400mm. Get used to it. You will likely find that you will not want to add a
2X to it or even a 1.4 convertor. i would invest in other things before these
two. In saying that, I have both the 2XS and 1.4XS convertors
In a message dated 12/5/02 1:07:25 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
N*K*N sells 2 element diopter close up lenses in several strengths (5T,
6T) all I believe are 58mm. The two element diopter is supposed to be
superior (sharper images) than the single element. Haven't done any testing
but I have
You are entirely right Bruce. A friend of mine shoots professional sports
shots for Football, baseball hockey Opeegee (Sp?)card company and admits that
it's the time after he has his shots that is killing him. he still loves
digital, but did not realize the work involved after he has the
it for the big companies..
But even if it's not lucrative, it's a heck of a lot of fun.
Vic
http://hometown.aol.ca/Pentxuser/myhomepage/artgallery.html
I suspect you are talking about the equivalent of the Vivitar 2xmacro
convertor. I have this convertor and it is A) a very good convertor in its
own right. B) Even better because it has the helicoid which makes it an
exceptional cose-up tool. I paid about $100 Cdn. --$60U.S. for it. I don't
In a message dated 12/4/02 10:05:17 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nice lens. Welcome to the wonderful world of addiction...I mean e-Bay.
Cheers
Shaun
Brad Dobo wrote:
Bought this lens several years ago from Henrys in Toronto for $500. Cdn in
mint. I guess it's gone up in price since then.
an LX package
of goodies, (Camera, winder, FBI with action eyepiece, magni-viewer ... I now
us LXs and PZ1s with a whole host of lenses...
PS-I just pulled out the old Konica auto S2 with Hexanon 45. f1.8 any
comments on this...
Vic
http://hometown.aol.ca/Pentxuser/myhomepage/artgallery.html
In a message dated 12/3/02 1:13:26 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am currently using an FB-1 and FC-1 combination on my LX.
I am taking a few rolls of film on the everyday world through the eyes of my
4 year old daughter, and so I need to have the camera mounted on a tripod at
her eye
In a message dated 12/1/02 7:47:36 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is the Dine a rebaged Kiron?
Thanks for any input.
-Lon
My understanding is that the Dine is the exceptional Kiron lens. It is an
excellent 105mm macro lens. I just recently got a PK version after craving
one for many years.
In a message dated 11/27/02 12:05:43 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Can't comment on the MX as I've never owned one; nor the LX since all
three
screens I've used in mine have been Pentax ones, not Beattie.
I have a beattie screen in one of my LXs and it is quite nice. Brighter than
the
In a message dated 11/26/02 9:18:55 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is a feature (similar to one that Minolta had) that long ago earned
the
Darwin Camera Award. In the early 90's Pentax, and Minolta in particular,
came up with technological answers to questions nobody ever asked. At the
In a message dated 11/26/02 10:24:43 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I distrust the AF lenses (the Limited lenses are the exception)
on general principles. They have a really sloppy feel to them
that I find offensive. I don't believe lenses with that much
slop in them are as good as they could
I was shooting my daughter's figure skating tonight and toying with the PZ's
power zoom clips. I was thinking that it would be extremely useful for a
sports photographer and thought I would explore them further. A lot of
photographers and critics don't see a use for this feature but I'd bet
In a message dated 11/23/02 11:51:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am really dissapointed with Pentax products; they have had a marvelous
history, and have some marvelous lenses, but at this point in time, their
35mm cameras truly suck.
Still waiting impatiently,
Cameron
Jim, I've
In a message dated 11/24/02 2:31:02 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Even were it included I doubt I would ever use it, prefering to rely on
the dial for the shutter speed and have the aperature either auto or
use it manually.
I tend to not use aperature control a great deal manually as I follow
Alan I won't respond. It was not based in fact. Just my opinion. People will
pick it apart. That's fine. I'll just sit back and enjoy it and maybe get out
and do some shooting...
Vic
In a message dated 11/21/02 1:52:21 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I fear that some new photographer is going
I know, I read all about them. There are exceptions to any rule..
Vic
In a message dated 11/21/02 1:53:14 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My Lx's were pretty expensive too. Have I told you about my
LX's?
William Robb
I had a feeling we were headed here
Hold on to your lenses this is going to get ugly..
Vic
I agree Paul. I wrote it tongue in cheek bacause I fear I've become a
collector in the worst of ways Thank God I still find time to shoot once
in a while...
Vic
In a message dated 11/21/02 6:31:00 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Amen. An excellent summary of what most of us know to be
Fred, you obviously took it in the spirit it was intended. Hell, I don't even
agree with everything if you take it to the nth degree. Just generalizations
worth pondering. I think a lot of people here feel they need to pick
everything apart and come up with an example to prove someone wrong.
You are mixing up the joy of using it, the feel the fine tuning and the
beauty with the end result— getting from point A to point B. I doubt anyone
at point B could tell if you arrived in a Jag vs a Chevy.
In a message dated 11/21/02 11:27:23 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If something is
Dan I happen to have a few Porsches and diamonds in my lens collection..
Vic
In a message dated 11/21/02 11:09:56 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think the real problem is one of if I can't tell the difference
between paste and diamonds, there is no difference. Which leads to
other
In a message dated 11/20/02 12:04:00 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, I've bought a ZX-5N (not arrived yet).
It was recommended to me that I try a prime Pentax lens, 50mm, instead of my
off-brand (and not so off-brand) zooms. Try it for more picture clarity and
also try it for the
In a message dated 11/20/02 6:57:54 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have tried with a 135 1.8 and the results were good, but not good enough.
I also tried the 85 1.4 (nice lens) but need the extra length, even a 105mm
1.4
would cut it.
I have tried various films but the added grain of higher
In a message dated 11/20/02 5:32:22 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OK that's not entirely unreasonable but would the 135/1.8 cut it, it's
only a
half stop away? Your best bet is to find a suitable lens (it will be older as
no one makes such a beast at the moment) and have a new rear end
You know I can't help reading all these posts and shake my head. I know we
need something to talk about here and this is as good a topic as any but I
fear that some new photographer is going to read this discussion and think
that if they don't have a ltd lens, a prime lens of every focal
In a message dated 11/19/02 11:46:43 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thanks everyone for advices!
Rob - why oh why did you write this ;-) You made me thinking again.
Ergghhh... I will postpone this purchase. I have holded Sigma 100-300/4 in
shop (sadly no Pentax mount) and it is really nice
In a message dated 11/19/02 10:57:16 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, I have a job that requires a lense that does not exist, in pentax.
It may well be worth the $$ to have one made. Just scoping possibilities.
Kind regards
Kevin
Exactly what kind of lens would that be?
Vic
Brad, Imagine how expensive they would be if they were made of steel.
You're seeing all these expensive plastic lenses because that's what they are
making these days. I don't think it's the plastic that is expensive, it's the
lenses and the little motors and stuff in them that make them
In a message dated 11/14/02 8:03:11 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But to the core of the matter. Which is better? The SMCP FA 20-35mm f/4
AL
or the FA* 24mm f/2 AL? I know the general opinion, and I just won't
comment. Except that any difference in image quality is small, very.
I
Shaun I was not referring to the 19-35. Tokina made a 20 -35 which is much
better than the 19-35 in my understanding.. It is the one with the Yellow
stripe on the lens. There are a few listed on E-bay I believe. These have
gotten very good reviews. They came out before the 20-35 At-X /2.8. I
In a message dated 11/14/02 8:39:53 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, I plan on keeping both the A* 300/4 and the F* 300/4.5. The
F* is ultimately a sharper lens (as much as I hate to admit it -
g), with a very effective hood, with pretty good manual focus
feel, and with a solid if bulky
You said it Dave..
In a message dated 11/14/02 12:05:09 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Great stuff Vic.I can see some usefull applications
at the horsey end.I'm sending my yearbook to the
copiers Monday,i dont think i can fiqure that
out in a couple of days.Have to stick with what i got
for
Brad I agreed with you that I would buy the 20-34/4 over the 24/2 but not
because they are equal and that modern zooms are equal to primes.
Life is a compromise and so too are lenses. The problem photographers get
into (I think) is getting too anal about the quality of the lenses. You can
have
In a message dated 11/14/02 12:30:39 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1) The other factor of zooms vs. primes is purely what one enjoys
using. Much like saying that a PZ-1p or MZ-S can run circles around a
SuperProgram or MX. Some just prefer the style and handling and
subsequent flow that goes
Yes all but one photo is mine Paul. She does enjoy it very much I thought
maybe your daughter might have an e-mail my daughter could reach her at to
get a little bit of information on Synchro skating at the big leagues...
Vic
In a message dated 11/14/02 5:41:46 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In a message dated 11/14/02 8:55:23 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think when choosing between the wide angle zoom and prime. One important
fact is the hyper-focal distance scale. I constantly use this scale when I
use the FA*24/2 on tripod to take landscape pictures. Sometime on the 43/1.9
In a message dated 11/14/02 9:11:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://www.home.aone.net.au/audiobias/grips.html
Rob do you have a price on those grips..
Vic
Shaun a cheaper alternative might be to look for the older Tokina
20-35/3.5??? it's an excellent lens and could be picked up much cheaper than
the f2.8. It takes a 77mm filter ring as well..
Vic
In a message dated 11/13/02 4:32:05 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Shaun,
I believe that if the
In a message dated 11/11/02 8:13:20 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
LIke what? I'm curious what I should continue to teach myself.
Try working with Layers to create soft focus effects on a picture that was
never taken that way. Try combining one image with another to create a whole
new
the couch so t speak.:)
Dave
Here's a few things and some ideas I've done with photoshop and another
program called painter
http://hometown.aol.ca/pentxuser/digital.html
Vic
My daughter is on a synchronized skating team and I have great fun using
photoshop to create types of collages for the team's website. I take about a
half dozen photos of the team, individuals whatever and create an 8X10. Some
of the images are close cropped, others have shadows etc etc. They
Guys if you have limited experience with photoshop, I highly recommend
photodeluxe which is also made by adobe and comes free with many decent Epson
printers and various scanners. It really is simple to use and guides you
through most steps with ease. It can do most of what photoshop can do
In a message dated 11/11/02 10:05:50 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've never bother to do anything of note in it, until recently.. The last
few times I've turned the PC on, I've learned how to use curves and levels
to make a nicer looking image, and how to clone out dust. Then I learned
how to
Might be an idea to do a whole month of our pets
Vic
In a message dated 11/11/02 6:05:12 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is only meant to be a semi serious objection, but
The PUG, as I understand it is to be as inclusive as possible,
within the scope of it being a Pentax equipment website.
I recall a few ideas being shot down for the
If a camera could have Bokeh the LX would be loaded with it..
Vic
In a message dated 11/10/02 5:05:14 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Pal,
There's no need to get the camera checked as I have sold it now. However,
the slight overexposure of the z-1, and the hunting of AF lenses on said Z-1
here are the shots/ (also includes a shot of my home made light table with 4
lights (top, bottom, back and auxiliary...
http://hometown.aol.ca/pentxuser/200lens.html
In a message dated 11/7/02 1:40:32 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I wonder what experience people have photographing
unposed children with a monopod or tripod. I used
a tripod for this purpose before. A long zoom lens
helps, but still it's not easy.
One thing about children is that you'd need
I just brought the 28-105 Kiron that I bought marked dusty to my favourite
camera store that does on-site repairs. Showed it to the owner. He checked it
out and said not to worry. It was no big deal and would not do anything to
the quality of the images. He knows I'm particular about things.
In a message dated 11/7/02 4:24:42 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There is some dust inside this 200mm, so to the 1st one I returned.
However,
what concerns me is the scratches present behind the 1st element (on 2nd or
3rd I think). There are many of them in all different directions actually,
In a message dated 11/6/02 9:14:21 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Heh, just had a funny thought, do we all have trucks or SUV-type vehicles?
Seems many do, and fits with the gear we may carry or the places we may want
to go 4WD :)
Brad
Subaru Legacys one for me and one for my wife. They
Brad the store in Burlington I told you about has this lens. I think it's
around $800 Cdn.
Vic
In a message dated 11/6/02 1:00:25 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I would think that, if you have a lens that is the optical twin of
the more-well-known VS1 90/2.5 Macro, and that (at 4.6 out of 5.0)
tested better than almost all others of the literally hundreds of
lenses tested by Photodo,
In a message dated 11/6/02 1:12:00 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The fault is erratic exposures on Auto when set at 3200 ISO. I am aware
that no film in the camera will cause longer exposures due to the reduced
reflectivity of the pressure plate. The fault occurs with film and without
film.
In a message dated 11/6/02 1:24:08 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Vic:
My Tokina 400mm did the same thing to me a few years ago when we
were in Kodachrome Basin.
I pulled the lens mount off and the aperture worked fine, so I
put the mount back on, and it has continued to work fine.
I don't
In a message dated 11/6/02 5:01:14 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A 105mm f/2.8 macro or a 50mm f/1.4 combined with a 2x
teleconverter.
Thanks.
105 macro no question...
Vic
://hometown.aol.ca/pentxuser/abstract.html
In a message dated 11/6/02 6:55:21 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Gang,
I have discovered to my delight that the LX is a superior macro photography
instrument. I am currently using mine with an FA 100mm macro, and it
produces some wonderful results. I
://hometown.aol.ca/pentxuser/abstract.html
In a message dated 11/6/02 6:55:21 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Gang,
I have discovered to my delight that the LX is a superior macro photography
instrument. I am currently using mine with an FA 100mm macro, and it
produces some wonderful results. I
Sorry about the doubling up, AOL is acting up tonight..
Vic
In a message dated 11/6/02 11:42:33 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BTW, I feel its best to shoot portraits at maximum
sharpness and use photoshop techniques to create
a soft lens effect. I create a second layer of the
primary image andad BLUR it heavily. I then adjust
opacity with the underlying
301 - 400 of 583 matches
Mail list logo
