On 31.08.2006, at 17:50 , Rob Brigham wrote:
The bigger question I guess would be whether these new USM lenses also
have the mechanical linkages to work on older bodies? I have a strong
suspicion that they will not, but would love to be wrong... If not
then
it is less useful to have an
On 31.08.2006, at 18:48 , Jostein Øksne wrote:
LOL. That'll be hard to face for some, eh?
Yeah! And from rumours about K10D it seems that Cotty will be closer
eating his hat than ever before! ;-)
Cheers,
Sylwek
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On 30.08.2006, at 13:14 , KEN TAKESHITA wrote:
Nevertheless, the point is the same. The photo sensor size is limited
by the max size of a given stepper which can be produced by a one shot
exposure. Canon also produce steppers and it appears that they have
invested a bit more dedicated
On 29.08.2006, at 03:38 , Paul Stenquist wrote:
But that assumes no further progress in sensor design and capability.
I'm not an engineer, so my opinions aren't worth much, but it seems
that almost all techologies evolve. Based on lens production, it
seems makers like Pentax are betting that
You're not obliged to buy in Belgium :-) In Poland body is around 570
Euro, kit with DA 18-55 around 690 ;-)
On 28.08.2006, at 01:02 , Thibouille wrote:
In Belgium it goes for 650euros body only. Compared to the DL: 450
euros, it is pricey.
Best regards,
Sylwek
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss
Hi Mark,
have you received mail from me? I sent it to robertstech at mail(dot)
com?
Cheers,
Sylwek
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On 24.08.2006, at 13:02 , Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
What, already in that period? Wasn't Sony alpha a quick succession to
whatever the Minolta model was? I am trying to deduce if Sony really
start from scratch and where they are now, compared to where Minolta
left it.
Well, essentaily Alpha
On 23.08.2006, at 03:43 , Amita Guha wrote:
I have recently become frustrated by the fact that a couple of
third-party lenses I like are not available in Pentax mount.
Yesterday, I emailed Tamron to ask them if their 17-50 f/2.8 would
someday be available for Pentax, and they said no. When I
Stupi Metz. They are the only flash producer with no P-TTL support.
Sigma, Promax and even cheap Soligor all have P-TTL capable flashes
in their offer, so what's wrong with Metz???
On 23.08.2006, at 12:13 , Thibouille wrote:
Here it is, unfortunately ...
Dear Mr. Thibault,
of course,
On 23.08.2006, at 13:48 , Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
Thanks Thibault, good news. It seems only the support lot are at fault
for Europe. Have you a URL of a shop selling it in Europe to pick up
again the discussion with support?
Try www.fotokoch.de
Best regards
Sylwek
--
PDML
On 23.08.2006, at 15:50 , Digital Image Studio wrote:
All I can tell you is that I'm sick of my tired old *ist D, I can't
afford a bunch of new lenses and I have had the cash set aside for a
new body for the last two years.
We love you Rob :-
Cheers,
Sylwek
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail
On 22.08.2006, at 12:52 , Peter Loveday wrote:
Actually CompactFlash is capable of far higher speeds than SD. Not
that it
matters a whole lot, the I/O speeds on Pentax DSLRs is far from
stellar
(especially the *istD).
Although no cards are actually capable of this kind of speed at the
One more thing came to my head about what Aaron could like in K10D.
What about in-camera RAW development? ;-)
Best regards
Sylwek
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On 17.08.2006, at 12:19 , Paul Stenquist wrote:
We already have that. It's called shooting tiff or jpeg.
Paul
But we have very little control of this ;-) Much more can be done for
example in Olympus E-1.
Cheers,
Sylwek
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On 16.08.2006, at 17:06 , Mark Roberts wrote:
I think a lot of you are making too much of Aaron's statement that
he'd (possibly) give up his 67 for this. In fact I believe -- and I
think Jostein, who also knows the secret, will agree with me on this
-- that Aaron may be expecting too much.
On 16.08.06, at 20:43 , Mark Roberts wrote:
Right. Because the one in the D80 comes with the standard Sony A-D in
a single module.
AFAIR sensor used in D200 has contrary to D80 four channel readout
enabling it to work at 5 fps - that has caused some problems with
banding in D200 in the
On 15.08.06, at 24:18 , Adam Maas wrote:
Oly shakes the filter in front of the sensor. I'm not sure if Sony
does
that, or shakes the entire assembly (Sony could do the latter
because of
the Anti-Shake unit).
Here are details:
http://www.olympus-esystem.com/dea/technology/usf/index.html
On 14.08.2006, at 17:08 , Dario Bonazza wrote:
Hmmm, the SR device could do that...
I think Dario that we are beginning to expect too much from K10D and
when it finally comes, despite being great camera, people will
complain about it on PDML :-P
Best regards
Sylwek
--
PDML
On 14.08.06, at 18:32 , Dario Bonazza wrote:
So, what about starting discussing the K1D? :-))
Yes, FF at the price point of D200 :-))) Finally Cotty could eat his
hat as he swore in the past AFAIR :-)))
--
Best regards
Sylwek
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On 07.08.06, at 17:58 , Bob Shell wrote:
That was the hardest part of shooting with the Minolta 7D for me.
I've been using Canon with its image-stabilized lenses for years and
was used to seeing it work in the viewfinder. With the Minolta
system, and presumably the Pentax system, you just
On 27.07.2006, at 16:23 , mike wilson wrote:
According to the update for lens information, it seems likely that
only K100D users will be able to download or use the software.
http://www.pentax.co.jp/english/support/digital/photo_lens3.html
(Line below the table)
Also, anyone with an OS
On 24.07.2006, at 00:22 , Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
That's true, but in use it's not really practical .. .Aperture runs
too slowly.
It depends. Since v. 1.1 it is usable on PB G4/1.67 GHz, 1GB RAM,
128MB Radeon 9700, and it is not that bad on G4 2x1GHz, 1.5 GB,
Radeon 9600 Pro - I tried on
On 24.07.2006, at 14:34 , Adam Maas wrote:
Those are supported systems, Godfrey was referring to unsupported
systems.
G4 2x1GHz is not officially supported ;-)
Aperture is VERY sesnitive to GPU performance.
True.
Cheers,
Sylwek
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On 23.07.06, at 20:33 , Doug Brewer wrote:
Turns out I don't have enough computer to run Aperture.
Guess that settles that.
What exact configuration of Mac do you have? There's a hack allowing
to install and use Aperture on some officially unsupported systems ;-)
--
Cheers,
Sylwek
--
On 22.07.06, at 12:59 , Mark Roberts wrote:
With an electronic system like Canon or Minolta, half this
mechanical stuff is eliminated.
Mark, Minolta has fully mechanical aperture coupling - similar to the
one in Nikon and Pentax ;-)
--
Best regards
Sylwek
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
On 21.07.2006, at 14:14 , Dario Bonazza wrote:
BTW, now PentaxPhotoLab 3 is a RAW converter you can truly use.
Silkypix
came to rescue and now edges are rendered well, without those odd
sawteeth
the previous releases did.
I had the chance to try a (alpha? beta?) release of that software
How do you know it? Version 2 was released as free for every Pentax
user, I hope they'll do the same with Browser/Laboratory 3 ;-)
On 21.07.06, at 20:31 , Aaron Reynolds wrote:
It won't be available for free without buying a new camera.
--
Best regards
Sylwek
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail
On 18.07.2006, at 21:33 , Mark Roberts wrote:
My other Limiteds (43, 31, 77) are all f/1.9 or faster. That's a lot
more than a third of a stop! F/2.0 and under is Limited territory for
me. I'd *consider* the upcoming 70/2.4 if it were under $500 (and if
I didn't already have the 77!)
Yes,
On 19.07.2006, at 11:06 , David Savage wrote:
They're cheaper because they're slower.
I bet if they had made it f1.9, it would be similarly priced to
it's full
frame big brothers. Admittedly it would be physically larger
weightier as
well
Exactly - that's what we're talking about :-)
On 17.07.2006, at 10:02 , Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote:
I've tested the DA 16-45 f/4 (btw are you also dissapointed by it's
construction? There is a huge play in the focusing ring and the
barrel, almost as in the FA 28-80 f/3.5-5.6) with my MZ-6, after AF
locked, I was able to turn the
On 17.07.06, at 19:59 , Mark Roberts wrote:
I put my MZ-S on eBay last night.
http://cgi.ebay.com/Pentax-MZ-S-and-battery-grip-Pentaxs-Finest-
LN_W0QQitemZ220008061420QQihZ012QQcategoryZ15240QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
Woulodn't be surprised if it doesn't sell, though...
(Don't know whether I'll
On 16.07.06, at 18:36 , Doug Brewer wrote:
I've been sorely tempted to try out Aperture for my Mac at home, as
it looks to be a pretty good program. Have any of you run it through
any sort of testing?
I have been testing it along with beta version of Adobe's Lightroom.
Finally I choose
On 14.07.2006, at 06:01 , Peter Loveday wrote:
Hmm, interestingly this forum (I think?) seems to indicate DNG
support:
http://hobby7.2ch.net/test/read.cgi/dcamera/1140771650/
I hope this is only fake. With photographing setting inside MENU, AF
mode is changed single AF (AF.S)/continuous
On 13.07.2006, at 14:35 , Tom Reese wrote:
Pentax did make a flash distributor years ago that allows for multi-
flash TTL metering. I wonder how many they actually sold. I got one
at what must have been a very good price (or I wouldn't have bought
it) off of KEH a few years ago.
I
On 05.07.2006, at 06:19 , Bryan Vyhmeister wrote:
I was looking through the list of telephoto primes that Pentax has
made and I made a list of four I would be interested in. I am talking
to someone right now regarding a possible purchase of an FA* 300/4.5
but I am curious as to whether the A*
On 04.07.2006, at 04:41 , Aaron Reynolds wrote:
Are you saying that Samsung's or Pentax's line was unprofitable?
Pentax's PS digital cameras pushed Pentax Canada to the two most
profitable months in the company's history, very recently.
Same here, in Poland. Figure sales from Pentax PS are
On 04.07.2006, at 02:52 , Adam Maas wrote:
That 10MP sensor is far too small to be the one for the K10D. Expect a
Sony sensor, either the D200 sensor or the 3fps version from the
Alpha A100.
It is 1/1.8 sensor - at 10 MPix it will probably generate more noise
than some in-phone cameras :-/
Thanks guys for comments ;-) I often look in the mirror then on my
sister and come to a thinking that one of us must have been mistaken
in the hospital right after birth :-))
Paul wrote:
l I'll second Frank's comments regarding your sister. Beautiful lady,
excellent photo.
Frank
On 27.06.2006, at 16:06 , Adam Maas wrote:
ACR 3.x works with them. It's probably the best quality RAW conversion
for PEF's. You lose the advanced controls though.
Unfortunately ACR as well as Lightroom have problems with some red
hues in PEF files :-( Silkypix or Aperture are much better in
On 27.06.2006, at 16:24 , Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
I've not used PSE3-4 more than a couple of times at the store. It
does allow use of Camera Raw v3.4, which is very good, but then again
it does not allow access to anything but the basic features... I
don't think it does batch conversions
On 27.06.2006, at 16:28 , Jens Bladt wrote:
Are there less expensive alternatives to the AF360FGZ flash, which
is appr.
250 USD or 200 Euro?
Sigma flashes compatible with Pentax seem to be even more expensive
than the
AF360 FGZ.
There are two P-TTL capable Soligors. They are very cheap
On 24.06.06, at 18:50 , Bruce Dayton wrote:
I don't think the A* and FA* 85/1.4 are the same optical formula. The
A* is a little more general purpose like the 77 limited. The FA* is
really designed for portrait work. It's sharpness in the longer focus
ranges is not as good as the A* or
On 26.06.2006, at 08:57 , Boris Liberman wrote:
Just got my hands on basically pristine F 17-28/3.5-4.5 fish eye
zoom... The most fascinating thing about this lens that it is almost
constant aperture. Ever so slight movement of the zoom ring and it
becomes f/4 and it keep this way just a
Worth reading all ;-) And unfortunately it is all true :-/
http://theonlinephotographer.blogspot.com/2006/06/great-photographers-
on-internet.html
Cheers,
Sylwek
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On 25.06.06, at 24:44 , Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Where the 30mm came from is likely just a mistake. It is, after
all, Popular Photography ... They're not exactly known for the
accuracy of their technical data or proofreading. ;-)
They are good in being inaccurate. In the last article about
On 24.06.06, at 2:38 , Jens Bladt wrote:
A 1.4/85mm IS very expensive. But I guess a FA 77mm does rather
well too, at
lesser cost..
Used FA* 85/1.4 will be as good as A* version, but less expensive -
rather around price of 77/1.8 Ltd ;-)
--
Best regards
Sylwek
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss
Translated. Includes interesting interview with one of developers.
Ken was right - SR was in development for about 20 years!!! And
results are very good, even with shutter speeds 3 stops lower than it
would be normally required.
On 20.06.06, at 18:56 , Jens Bladt wrote:
They don't make the AF version for Pentax. And it's expensive.
I have the F. 6.9 (Adaptall) - no SP. I'm not very impressed, even
though
it's a nice and good lens.
Does anyone here have any experience with the F.5.6 SP version,
please?
AF
On 20.06.06, at 19:02 , Lon Williamson wrote:
I've read with interest what PDMLers say about Pentax antishake,
but I remember reading, I think on DPreveiw, about the Optio A10
where antishake results were inconsistent. Mind, many think those
folks have a bias against Pentax. I would guess
On 14.06.2006, at 18:34 , Joseph Tainter wrote:
The question in my mind will be performance relative to the FA 20
F2.8.
I do hope to get the DA 21, and will test it against my FA 20.
Some have criticized the FA 20 for being weak in the corners at wider
apertures. With the restricted FOV
On 16.06.2006, at 16:24 , Mark Roberts wrote:
Which versions of the OS have these features? One of the Macs I'm
dealing with is a G3 Powerbook. Don't know which version it's running
yet, but it's at least 5 years old. maybe older.
So it can have Mac OS 9.x installed. If you have original OS 9
On 2006-06-16, at 17:34, Mark Roberts wrote:
Just fired it up. It's running OS 8.1
So use the power of Drive setup to zero all data on disk ;-)
Cheers,
Sylwek
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Mark,
I wish you health, love and money - all other wishes will come true
automatically then ;-)
BTW - is there any chance to send private e-mail to you? My mails are
bounced back as spam :-(
Cheers,
Sylwek
Hi Mark,
my mails are still bounced, even when sent to your another e-mail
adress, I tried my three different mail accounts without any success :-(
Cheers,
Sylwek
On 15.05.2006, at 15:06, Mark Roberts wrote:
Wow. 193.17.41.51 is list in five different block lists that I could
find. Including one that's in Poland!
Ok... Last try: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If that one doesn't go through you really need to have a word with
your email provider as to why they're so
Godfrey,
thanks for invitation! If only I would live in the USA... :-) Right
now it is too far away from Poland for visiting even as good
exhibition as yours :-( But one day when I come to the USA who
knows? ;-) Thanks again!
Cheers
Sylwek
On 2006-05-05, at 02:12, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On 2006-04-26, at 22:31, mike wilson wrote:
Not what we were expecting:
http://www.fotocommunity.com/pc/pc/channel/54/extra/new/display/
5529649
It resembles somewhat you, Mike doesn't it? :-)
--
Best regards
Sylwek
Igor Roshchin wrote on 14.04.06 3:22:
Sylwek, you are mostly correct!
I am not sure if anybody who reads Russian has provided more details,
so I would risk to do that.
Thanks Igor for more complete translation! I finished my Russian education
16 years ago in high school, so I don't remember
Boris Liberman wrote on 14.04.06 8:06:
Sylwek, you're generally right... The rest of that forum discussion is
very much like PDML - nitpicking mostly ;-)
Glad to hear that from you ;-) But generally the most important wishes seems
to be slowly fulfilled by Pentax ;-)
--
Balance is the
Incoming? Russian discussion with photos:
http://forum.ixbt.com/topic.cgi?id=20:12774-305
As Russian wrote: direct successor for Ds, still 6 MPix, built-in SR
(some good shots at 200mm and 1/30 s), very, very fast AF (at last!),
and some other, minor changes including slightly modified body.
On 2006-04-13, at 19:48, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Saw this come up on DPReview.com forum:
http://forum.ixbt.com/topic.cgi?id=20:12774-305#10143
It's in Russian ... someone please help translate?
Godfrey, I was the first :-P I wrote what I understood in my post,
now Boris can tell if I was
And some more photos, including back of new camera with new switch
marked trembling hand :-)
http://tinyurl.com/zp575
--
Best regards
Sylwek
On 2006-04-13, at 22:58, Scott Loveless wrote:
Considering that Pentax announced a while back that there would be
some sort of commemoration of the K1000 this year, I'm guessing it
should be the K1000D.
Download photos from this Russian page and look at the EXIF - IT IS
already named K100D
On 2006-04-13, at 22:57, Mark Roberts wrote:
That's the new 10 Megapixel camera shown at PMA, but clearly much
later in the development stage from the looks of it. Probably a
working pre-production prototype. The mysterious switch on the back is
now labeled with a Shake Reduction or Image
Mishka wrote on 06.04.06 6:55:
K500/4.5 -- a quick shot from the balcony (kinda brick wall test,
f11, 1/180, iso 1600) with *istdl shows that it clearly outresolves
the 6mp sensor. what a treat!
http://www.stat-arb.org/photos/IMGP0348.JPG
now need to find an adequate tripod head...
Shel Belinkoff wrote on 05.04.06 11:37:
How does that help make a better photograph? If the camera/lens will focus
where the photographer wants the focus to be, what difference does it make
if the camera knows the focusing distance?
For instance P-TTL uses distance information for more
Thibouille wrote on 05.04.06 14:57:
Mmm would interesting to test A agains F/FA lenses.
A are supposed to allow PTTL right? So How does it work without
distance information?
I want to know !
It works, maybe a little less precise in certain situations. All is
described in P-TTL patent filed a
David Oswald wrote on 03.04.06 5:02:
SMC Pentax-FA* 85mm f/1.4
Pros: It's an FA*! It's super fast.
Cons: Big, expensive, reportedly not ideally suited to digital.
That's not true. FA* 85/1,4 is an absolute top performer on digital. It is
very useable at f1.4, getting razor sharp at f2.8 and
Lucas Rijnders wrote on 03.04.06 15:44:
Will the *ist-D trigger the infrared beam from an external flash?
As long as it is connected with suitable cable, yes.
--
Balance is the ultimate good...
Best Regards
Sylwek
Jens Bladt wrote on 03.04.06 8:22:
If the new 10 MP Pentax body doesn't support ordenary TTL flash, I won't be
buying it.
I have too many flashes - I guess 7 or 8 TTL flahses, one of which is a Metz
60-CT2.
Sell all these oldies and buy one solid, modern, P-TTL, HSS and wireless
capable flash
Mike Nosal wrote on 03.04.06 15:54:
1) My 28-80mm zoom lens was frozen at 50mm. Dang, switch to the 85mm.
I guess your lens has converted itself to varifocal type :-P
2) My Sigma flash decided not to fire - everything looked normal, but just
didn't fire. Then it just sat there blinking. Dirty
Today, thanks to the biggest Polish photo portal I had an opportunity
to be on official Polish presentation of Mamiya ZD - for these who
are not aware - 22 megapixel medium format DSLR ;-) The camera
appeared to be a very interesting tool for professional photographers
(with its price
On 2006-04-03, at 23:04, Jostein wrote:
As Mike Wilson has already mentioned, we spent Saturday evening
strolling along the river Tyne. Here's one shot from the session,
with the blue arc of the Millenium Bridge in the background.
http://www.oksne.net/paw/20060403-0139.html
No comments.
On 2006-04-01, at 19:43, Jostein wrote:
Chiming in late on this one...
Better late than never as Englishmen used to say ;-)
Congrats, Sylwek!
Thanks!
Sounds like your intial experience with the A* is very similar to
mine. I'm sure
you will be happy with it. :-)
I already am (don't even
Rob Studdert wrote on 31.03.06 3:35:
I did mean the 1.4X-L, the lens is designed to accommodate the long snout of
the X-L TCs and the pair seem to work quite well together.
http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio/temp/IMGP8906.jpg
Wow! What a lovely combo. They must love each other very much
keith_w wrote on 31.03.06 13:44:
I missed something!
What IS that lens? An A* what?
A* 200/4 macro :-)
--
Balance is the ultimate good...
Best Regards
Sylwek
Cotty wrote on 30.03.06 0:17:
That was one of the very few lenses i was thinking of converting to
Canon EF fit... I went for the 65mm 5X macro instead...
Wow! That's a very interesting lens. Do you have any samples from that?
--
Balance is the ultimate good...
Best Regards
Sylwek
Aaron Reynolds wrote on 30.03.06 6:29:
Hey, congrats.
Thanks.
If it's anything like the A* 200mm f2.8, it'll be
spectacular. I wish the 2.8 had a tripod collar, actually!
Well, I can't say for A* 200/2.8 as I have never used one. AFAIR Rob used to
have both of them, so he could probably
Cotty wrote on 30.03.06 10:26:
Lemme see
http://www.cottysnaps.com/snaps/nature/images/pic20.html
and
http://www.cottysnaps.com/snaps/nature/images/pic24.html
and
http://www.cottysnaps.com/snaps/nature/images/pic22.html
and
Thibouille wrote on 30.03.06 11:12:
I knew about the content, but I didn't know any noticed it was present
on Tekade which is (it seems) weel informed usually.
Yeah, exactly! All these things are confirmed by my reliable source too. So
I think we can be sure of SR, fast AF (finally) and 10 MPix
Jay Taylor wrote on 30.03.06 10:31:
At least to me it is major!
I've bee reading about all over for this great lens. After losing
out on one in an eBay auction a few months back by being too cheap to
bid a decent price for it, I was really wanting very badly to add
this one to my
Lucas Rijnders wrote on 30.03.06 11:32:
Hmm, I have my doubts about that. They've missed the mark repeatedly while
claiming to have official information. Best example is when they confirmed
the 9 Mp cypress sensor in the first Samsung D-SLR. They seem more
interested in generating or
Rob Studdert wrote on 30.03.06 14:58:
I tend to use my FA* 200/2.8 mostly because it's in my standard travel kit,
the
A* 200/4 macro is pretty much a special purpose lens for me though I agree it
can easily double up as a standard long lens. My only concern in doing that is
that its bokeh
If you remember my post from about two weeks ago I was asking some questions
about FA* 200/4 macro. Unfortunately it happened that it wasn't FA* but
rather A* version that Polish Pentax dealer had for sale. I decided not to
buy it. But after my complains about dealer's mistake and that this old
Don Williams wrote on 29.03.06 14:51:
Hi all,
What is the current feeling about the Optio S4? I'm thinking of getting
one for my wife who
expressed a desire to take pictures recently. Or is there something
newer, or better, in the
Pentax PS line that might do? I used a friends S5Z last
On 2006-03-29, at 19:02, David Oswald wrote:
Do you use it on a digital body?
Yes.
Do you find it difficult or easy to hand hold it steady?
Yes, it is quite easy to handhold because of its relatively small
size and weight. For handhold shots however it is a good idea to
remove tripod
Thibouille wrote on 30.03.06 9:42:
After my post on the flash trigger voltage problem I noticed something
else on Tekade.
German too of course:
VORBESTELLBAR, (Auslieferung Herbst) 10 Megapixel-Topkamera mit
Shakereduction und verbessertem sehr schnellen Autofokus
So basically you can
On 2006-03-26, at 19:36, Dario Bonazza wrote:
1 - Provided that the D2 will sport KAF3 mount, capable to drive
USM lenses, my idea is that the D2 will include a rather weak AF
motor (at best, the same used in previous D-series, or maybe even a
weaker type), as it could be seen (by Pentax,
Aaron Reynolds wrote on 24.03.06 0:16:
Yes... but Cristian's Sigma shows up as a Pentax A lens?
But this Sigma is an AF lens and has its own ROM ;-)
--
Balance is the ultimate good...
Best Regards
Sylwek
Dario Bonazza wrote on 24.03.06 19:52:
Of course, I'd love that. However, I'm trying to stay awaken.
No matter what, but after all these discussions here Pentax has no other
option - they must introduce USM driven lenses and KAF3 with D2 ;-)
Otherwise there will be too much complaining on PDML
On Mar 23, 2006, at 2:45 PM, Dario Bonazza wrote:
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/other/2006/03/23/3486.html
DA 21 has funny sun shade and new DA 70 is on the display ;-)
Otherwise nothing new since PMA.
Cheers,
Sylwek
K.Takeshita wrote on 23.03.06 14:32:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036message=17714426
Can't be, but who knows :-).
I bet this price will be true but rather in USD than in AUD ;-)
--
Balance is the ultimate good...
Best Regards
Sylwek
On Mar 23, 2006, at 6:43 PM, Dario Bonazza wrote:
What's that?
http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/whats.jpg
Yes, I noticed it on PMA ;-) I think it can be SR activity indicator
or just place for button that will appear in final version.
--
Best regards
Sylwek
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote on 22.03.06 3:01:
The DS viewfinder is a little larger and a bit brighter, which makes
it easier to use manual focus.
Godfrey, it is viewfinder in Dl that is noticeably brighter than the one in
Ds - mainly thanks to new matte screen called Natural Bright Matte II. I
think
K.Takeshita wrote on 22.03.06 3:30:
http://www.cypress.com/portal/server.pt?space=CommunityPagecontrol=SetCommu
nityCommunityID=208PageID=218DirectoryID=717110
Is it possible then that new, 10 MPix sensor in D2 would come from
Cypress???
--
Balance is the ultimate good...
Best Regards
Sylwek
On Mar 22, 2006, at 6:41 PM, John Francis wrote:
I think you'll find that the increased brightness of the DL is
principally
due to the lower magnification, not to any difference in screens or
eyepieces.
I think in this case it is a matter of focusing screen. For instance
Konica-Minolta
Adam Maas wrote on 21.03.06 2:15:
I don't think it will be a huge issue as long as the USM lenses are
full-on pro lenses for the first few years. The rate of obsolescence and
upgrading with DSLR's is such that most of the current bodies will be
out of use in 3-4 years. If I were Pentax, I'd
Jostein wrote on 21.03.06 12:38:
Touch wood; my *istD has performed flawlessly all the time since I bought it
in
late October 2003. But I'm not impressed with the clutch-focus mechanism in
the
16-45.
Yes, that's ot encouraging for people living in cold countries. But maybe
clutch mechanism
K.Takeshita wrote on 25.02.06 19:44:
OTOH, I do not believe Pentax abandoned FF lenses altogether. We still need
fast tele (200/2.8, 300/2.8 etc etc) and I just cannot imagine, Pentax
being so well recognized as a superb lens maker as well, simply drop out of
normal lens biz. I think the
Rob Studdert wrote on 20.03.06 15:17:
The RAW eggs will be bigger than the *ist D's though.
On D200 compressed RAW (NEF) takes approx. 15.8 MB - not that much more than
RAWs from *istD ;-) I guess if new D would save RAWs in .DNG format these
files would be even smaller than that.
--
Balance
201 - 300 of 1516 matches
Mail list logo
