On Mon, 11 Dec 2006, P. J. Alling wrote:
> I think you're allowed to spell God, since it's a title not a name...
Dunno, ever practicing Jew I've known on the Internet has gone with G-d. I
jsut repeat what they say.
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
h
On Fri, 8 Dec 2006, Tom Lesser wrote:
> I don't know the specific rationale, but it's related to their
> orthodoxy in some manner. If you order from them frequently, you
> should get on their e-mailing list I think they're very good about
> sending out notices when they'll be down in obser
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, P. J. Alling wrote:
> I know this is stupid but did you try replacing the batteries?
Yes, and no. It had a set of the CR2 or whatever the little buggers are in
it, which don't register as low on the LCD. I didn't replae those because
I don't have another set. I did, however,
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> a few months and it worked just fine. A couple of weeks ago the mirror
> locked up just as I was about to sell it. So, there you have it - the
> mirror is still stuck. If interested, make an offer. Off list please.
> Thanks!
Mine did this last week
On Wed, 18 Oct 2006, Paul wrote:
> A35/2 - Good cosmetics and optics
I'm curious to know what you're asking or this lens, which is probably
more than I can afford (the CC is still warm from being used on teh K100,
but now I realize it needs some lenses...) :)
--
http://www.infotainment.org
My first camera? Some sort of little 110 thing. Then a disc camera of some
type. My first 35mm camera was some sort of rangefinder, I swear it was a
Ricoh, but I might be making that up. It was a heavy, shiny affair. It
stopped working once, on a trip, and I took it apart. To this day, I
regre
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006, Digital Image Studio wrote:
> On static subjects a combination of image combining (can secure
(1.21 jigawatts, etc, much deleted crunchy bits)
> to do manually but there are some really nice automation kits out
> there for serious work.
Yow, am I the only one who finds all the
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> Unfortunately, my friends either don't look the part or refuse to be
> photographed.
Clearly new friends are in order!
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photograph
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006, David J Brooks wrote:
> Maybe i'll just hang tight untill Leopard is released, unless it already is.
Don't wait, join us! JOIN US!
If/when they lump Boot Camp into the OS release, you'd still use it the
same way, so waiting won't make that much of a difference from that
asp
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006, Mat Maessen wrote:
> And as an added bonus, you can drive a second LCD or CRT display with
> it, if you don't have enough screen space on the built-in LCD. :-)
You may want to double check, that might be available with an Open
Firmware hack only.
The consumer line usually o
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006, Dave Brooks wrote:
> Am i to believe that the imac has all of its hardware in the screen, no
> tower to worry about kicking it with feet and knee's.??
Well, there's a power cord between the wall and the computer. ;)
I bought an iMac G5 the day they announced the Core Duo vers
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> Don't they have phones or email in Rochester?
Kodak never believed in modernization before, why start now??
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfo
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006, Roman wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hjKijLOj9s
With absolutely nothing to do with SR, aperature rings, or JCO...
Anyone know what kinda camera bag that is? :)
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercen
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, graywolf wrote:
> Maybe it reads the focal length from the lens to set the antishake
> profile, but with a K/M lens it just uses a generic setting?
When I use an A50, I'm required to choose the SR from a menu. When I use
an FA28 or the DA18-55, it selects it automatically.
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, Doug Franklin wrote:
> > Antishake is pretty clever. I'm hand holding below my old cutoff, 1/45.
> Awesome! I can't wait to try it.
I was playing around last night, and while I didn't pull the images off
the camera, using an FA28, I was able to handhold to non-blurriness fo
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
> Sorry for my error, isnt this a APS only format lens?
He zigs, he zags!
Wasn't that the topic of discussion here? Refusal to buy a Pentax DSLR
because you can't use your K mount lenses the way that God intended them
to be? That Pentax "professional"
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, Gonz wrote:
> I might just do that for any hope of avoiding a negative. I might still
> get one because of the discrepancy between the refunded amount and the
> purchase price + shipping.
Buyer's problem, not yours. You asked how much he wanted to insure it for
and he resp
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
> The pankcake 40mm F2.8 M lens is just another example
> Of a lens where there is NO NEW EQUIV.
> These lenses should be fully supported as you cant
> Even buy a new one like it if you wanted to.
What do you mean, he just told you what they are, see bel
On Sat, 7 Oct 2006, Adam Maas wrote:
> > Some c'mon Pentax, where are the DA* or DA-Limited lenses? ;) And, since
> > you're omitting aperature rings, make 'em cheap for us thrifty types, I
> > can't afford the 31 Limited.
On the other hand, there's a Sigma 30/1.4!
Now, that's what I'm talkin
On Sat, 7 Oct 2006, Adam Maas wrote:
> DA Limiteds are already here. 21 f3.2 Pancake, 40 f2.8 Pancake and the
> 70 f2.4 Pancake due any moment. The 40 is quite cheap ($300CDN), the
> other two are more money, but still a lot cheaper than FA limiteds.
The downside is I don't want "pancake" lense
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
> Anybody bought the K100D and how do you
> Like it so far? Is the anti-shake working
> As well as touted? What are the pros/cons
> If any (other than K/M lens issues)???
I did, it came in Friday morning.
I haven't had much of a chance to use it, yet, bu
On Sun, 8 Oct 2006, David Savage wrote:
> On 10/8/06, gfen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I feel so...dirty.
> (Re: DSLR purchase)
> Mark!
Que?
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-&
or DA-Limited lenses? ;) And, since
you're omitting aperature rings, make 'em cheap for us thrifty types, I
can't afford the 31 Limited.
gfen, who'd like it known his DSLR order did come with a box of 4x5 film.
;)
--
http://www.infotainment.org <->
On Tue, 3 Oct 2006, P. J. Alling wrote:
> I thought the 645 users were the junior brothers of the brotherhood,
Ahem, that was the "Little Brotherhood." ;) We were better than those
Brotherhood types, if for no other reason than our backs were unbowed from
lack of weight 'round our necks.
I we
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
> The monitors are nothing special anymore. At the time they were
> pretty high-resolution ([EMAIL PROTECTED] or so), but now you'd just need an
> adapter to physically connect to a VGA monitor. That's how I got mine up
> and running... soldered
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
> You too, eh? I got a TurboColor Slab awhile back and put a virgin
> OpenStep 4.2 install on it. Wish I had the correct cables to connect to
> the sound boxes and monitor. Really was a purdy machine.
I have two complete units at my desk, inclu
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006, Aaron Reynolds wrote:
> it with the thing I love most about 6x7, which is not resolution.
A giant wooden handle?!?
First I've paid attention to this thread, but is it removable prisms?
That' dbe kinda clever, eh?
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a
On Wed, 26 Jul 2006, Aaron Reynolds wrote:
> Tell me why I'd want to keep it.
Its smaller and lighter than your other three lenses combined, ergo its
convienent when you are packing for size and weight considerations. Also,
sometimes its just more convienent to have an all-in-one answer.
That's
On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, Aaron Reynolds wrote:
> While a head on a monopod certainly can be useful in a number of
> situations, I've never seen one in the camera bay at a ball game. I
> personally don't have one. It would take some real convincing to get
> me to use one, especially with a long len
On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, Ed Maruyama wrote:
> Of course it's not enough for slow shutter speeds... but I think it's more
> stable than my jello
> tripod (at least with the 500mm lens)
I love my monopod, and its easily as good as a tripod in some cases..
Where you can jam it into the ground, lean it
On Thu, 6 Jul 2006, Adam Maas wrote:
> Yep, that's almost velvia-ish saturation from the Ultra Color. I don't
> touch the stuff, if I want ungodly saturation, I shoot E100VS or Velvia
> chromes.
I'm lazy, and chromes require extra work for my little amatuer self.
I'm gonna have to pick me up a
On Thu, 6 Jul 2006, Adam Maas wrote:
> Plus-X is still available, but can be hard to find. Tri-X will likely
> outlast every other Kodak B&W film. Tri-X is my do-everything film, I
> shoot it from EI 200-6400 on a regular basis.
I knew they killed it in sheet format a few years back, I assumed r
On Thu, 6 Jul 2006, Adam Maas wrote:
> Fuji Acros, Kodak Tri-X, Ilford PanF+.
I'm a little out of touch, as I've been living off of frozen stockpiles in
35mm film and don't really shoot it often anymore.
In B&W, from Kodak, I used Tri X for high speed and Plus X for low speed
film. I'm unsure i
by factory default. You can change the trans
ECU to allow for Porsche-like shifting times, though.
gfen, tiptronic VW owner.
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio.
--
PDML Pent
On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, John Francis wrote:
> Get some "new" lenses (that's anything made in the last 25+ years)
Sometimes they really don't make 'em like they used to, y'know...A moot
argument for me, but not for everyone here.
> Pentax. Oh, wait - there aren't any. Still, switch anyway - that
>
On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, John Francis wrote:
> as it is on the MZ bodies. But, instead, we got cameras with the
> control interface of the PZ bodies, where the lens is left set to
> the "A" setting, and everything is controlled by the finger/thumb
> control wheels on the body. My *ist-D is, operation
On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, William Robb wrote:
> Some people want the machine to do all the work for them.
Damn skippy.
Robocamera better do it all, otherwise its not much of a convienence.
Look, maybe I'm just rehashing 4 year old arguments that no one right
cares abotu anymore, I can acknowledge th
On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, Bruce Dayton wrote:
> Not sure why you are saying alas. You haven't tried it. I have used
I'm lazy, that's why. Incredibly lazy. And forgetful. Incredibly
forgetful.
Its something I don't desire to have to do, I ratehr apprechaite that the
camera is smart enough that I do
On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, Jostein wrote:
> Sisterhood, if you please. :-)
Wait for it...No, I do not approve this namechange. :) I'll be sticking
with "Little Brother," thank you very much. ;)
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.
On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, P. J. Alling wrote:
> We'll have to see about the K10D but the K100D seems to have the same
> mount as the D/DS/DL/2...
Pentax has released this many digital cameras? Yow, I have been gone a
long time...Although, I see most of the same names on the list as the last
two time
On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, John Francis wrote:
> automatically during exposure. And while metering has to be done
> stopped down, rather than at full aperture, a single push of a button
> will stop the lens down, take a meter reading, select an appropriate
> shutter speed, and open the aperture again.
On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, Thibouille wrote:
> It will because the camera allows you to manually select the focal
> length of the lens you put on it.
Can someone fill me in? Its been more than a few years since I've paid
attention to anything that didn't require a tripod. :)
I don't even know anythin
What sort of mount does it use? Are M and A series lenses going to work
properly?
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net
> > Simon
> > me, but then again they had automatic weapons and BFO weapons with them.
I know the first two letters, but O?
Big Freaking Ordinance?
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio.
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, Peter J. Alling wrote:
> Wouldn't that be down his crack?
Somethings are better left unexplored, CottyCrack rates very high on my
personal list of such items.
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, Cotty wrote:
> Tom, can we have a goody box full of Twinkies and things for the journey?
> I can't get that junk in the UK and I'll have to have a little splurge
> while I'm there. Oh yeah, Cap'n Crunch too - several boxes :-) And while
> we're on the subject, Tootsie Roll, Ore
On Sun, 18 Apr 2004, Tanya Mayer Photography wrote:
> Digital wins hands down - read: "instant gratification" (I said INSTANT and
> not SELF before the rude jokes start thanks! )
You vaslty underestimate Cotty if you think that's gonna stop him..
(ok, and now I got my first Cotty-crack in, I can
On Sun, 18 Apr 2004, William Robb wrote:
> I photographed some curling one time on a Pentax.
The kind with a moustache or the kind with a broom? :)
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio.
On Fri, 16 Apr 2004, Jostein wrote:
> According to production figures for MedF, the future looks very dark indeed.
If the 700 bodies figure thrown out earlier by Frank is correct, sound
slike al lthe MF folks might as well close up shop and go home. That's
just dismal, I mean, I always figured t
On Sat, 17 Apr 2004, frank theriault wrote:
> Pentax can't keep up with the demand for 67II's and 645N's Last year alone,
> all Japanese manufacurers combined sold around 700 medium format bodies,
> worldwide. No, I didn't forget a zero. I really did mean seven hundred.
If they can't keep up
t D lived up to what people hoped it would? When I left, it was
just starting to make it to people for use.
Is the Altoids-sized Optio still the darling of the Pentax crowd?
And what's all this PAW stuff?
gfen, settling back in.
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Sigma 70-300MM F4-5.6 APO Macro Super
I recevied the Quantaray-branded version of this about two years ago.
Its does its job remarkably well, although when in macro, even stopped
down to f19 or thereabouts, its still soft. I also don't know if mine
I own a very cheap, simple Sekonic model. It was the cheapest thing I
could find when I wanted a meter for starting with 4x5, and supplemented
my YM124G's not-quite-right internal meter. Eventually, I'll replace it
with a spot meter, when I have money to spare.
Which isn't likely anytime soon.
> CH> Macs are fabulous, and as a former Windoze user who has switched, I
Myself as well...
> CH> Do yourself a favour - get one - they are not just better for
> CH> graphics, or video, or music, they are just better machines for
> CH> everything, they really are.
What sold me was t
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, Patrick Wunsch wrote:
> I am looking for a decent wide angle lens, perhaps something in the 18mm to
> 20mm range, and would like to hear your recommendations. Money is major
Awhile ago, I was going to purchase one of the Russian lenses for use with
my Pentax. I want to say i
On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, T Rittenhouse wrote:
> Film may actually be with us for another 25, or more, years though any real
> need for it may disappear in the not too distant future (5 years or so).
Most film will dissapear, as you say.. but I am willing to bet that B&W
film in major sizes (135, 120,
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, jerome wrote:
> Tomorrow, I load up all of my earthly belongings into a 20' truck (with car in
> tow) and start the trek to my folks' house in East Stroudsburg, PA. The house
> is just recently built, with the keys being handed over last friday...
You're moving to the Stroudsbu
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003, [iso-8859-1] Pål Jensen wrote:
> Well, if Pentax indeed market KAF3 with USM, and I think they wil
> along with the pro DSLR, theres no reason really to keep the aperture
> ring as such lenses won't make much sense on older cameras anyway. I
> fear the aperture ring is on its wa
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
> Appeared on dpreview. Nothing special - I thought it will have broader
> manual focusing ring... instead it has nice green ring near mount :-) But
> it's just first look. That's optical performance that will be most important
> to me :-) Adter all it
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003, Brendan wrote:
> I have a feeling that the "PRO" Dslr will be 645
> sized, meaning the DA lenses are for the aps Dslr.
So, who knows enough about film planes, distance-to-film, etc to say if
that K mount compatability would theoretically live on in a K->645 adapter
to use those
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
> Anyway, today is spoken for with other chores. I does appear that I can't
> just treat a
> CD like a floppy on the A drive though. The really bad thing is my friend
> unhooked my
> D drive so I cant backup stuff to the zip nor can I get at what Ive alrea
On Mon, 4 Aug 2003, Butch Black wrote:
> Ritz camera announced it will soon be selling a digital single use camera.
> Digital Photography Review report:
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0307/03073101dakotadigital.asp
The geeks will be all over this, in a month they'll be re-selling 2mp
cameras with
> frank theriault wrote:
> > I wasn't trying to say that Amsterdam is a bad place, or that we
> > shouldn't go there. I was just wondering why Doug chose Amsterdam over
> > all the other cities in the world, that's all.
Drugs and hookers, of course.
--
http://www.infotainment.org <->
On Thu, 24 Jul 2003, Keith Whaley wrote:
> Wheww! Thanks. I thought I'd missed one!
> keith <== due for a new CPU soon... Have a G3 300, like Paul. Looking
> at G4 towers. Used.
My $72 G3 became a modern, useful computer with the addition of a $100
used G4/500 CPU. Browse ebay for a cheap CPU mo
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
> What do you mean by better viewfinder? I don't really care about the
> technical superiority, the effect is what I am after. I cannot really
> understand the numbers on the technical spec, and, from the search I
> made on the archive, it does not l
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
> According to Boz's site and also Pentax UK's, they both have
> DOF preview, but according to Pentax US, the MZ-6 (OK, MZ-L)
> does not. Can someone (preferably from the UK) clarify this
> for me please?
Its been awhile since these discussions, but
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003, William Robb wrote:
> Kodak Wedding Film, but it's actally 160 iso.
Well, there's Kodak Weddings Under Dismal Weather Film, formerly known as
Portra 400UC. Kodak Weddings Under Dim Weather Film, formerly known as
Potra 400VC. Then of course there's Kodak Weddings Under Partly
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003, Ed Matthew wrote:
> Did the original 645 have a removable finder so it could be used as a waist
> level camera?
Nope.
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio.
On Mon, 14 Jul 2003, Amita Guha wrote:
> So what constitutes a "good" monopod? I might be heading to Adorama this
> week to look at their Podmatic and others. I'm mainly looking for
> something portable and the Podmatic's the shortest one I've heard of
> (14" folded). Anything else in particular I
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, Gasha wrote:
> What is the best way to scan these negs? I can use some kind of flatbed
> scanner with transparency adapter. HP ?? Epson ??
I had a Umax Astra 4450, a flatbed scanner with a light up lid. You had to
lay the negs onto the glass, which lead to newton rings. It als
On Wed, 9 Jul 2003, Lon Williamson wrote:
> What we need is a good ole fashioned thread where
> everyone gets to justify a magic piece of Pentax
> equipment. So: If you had to go photograph, and
> you didn't know where or what or why, what lens would
> you take with you? You get only one.
645 A
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, gfen wrote:
> Count me as interested, but I have no idea where this is, and am too busy
> to really look into it, now. I also think that the fact I have to bus into
> NYC and from there move on will probably make this an impossibility. But,
> feel free to ke
On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Christopher Comer wrote:
> I ordered a film scanner on the cheap and I would like
> to put together a pseudo darkroom. I'd like to be able to
> develop b&w film and then scan the neg. into the computer for
> manipulation. I think all I need is a developing tank and
This
On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Thomas Haller wrote:
> Unfortunately I haven't bought anything from Adorama myself, and the group
> here doesn't seem to respond to questions like this.
I've jsut been ignoring the list, lately.
> a) no one on the list has bought used equipment from Adorama, so they cannot
>
On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Any one use change bags to transfer film to
> developing tank(s) or is a dark room the way most home developers go.
I use a changing bag to load and unload IR film in 35 and to load and
unload 4x5s. I've never tried to load a ree
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=816&ncid=816&e=3&u=/ap/20030621/ap_on_en_ot/lithuania_shooting_blind
(I deleted alot of PDML messages yesterday, I apologize if this made the
rounds)
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighte
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Caveman wrote:
> >>What is the base of your assumption that it will take existing lenses ?
> > 645 lenses are all A or FA.. ;)
> What about a new FAJ 645 series ? ;-)
No way, the 645 is all black.. that means its PRO!
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun th
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Caveman wrote:
> What is the base of your assumption that it will take existing lenses ?
645 lenses are all A or FA.. ;)
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio.
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Paul Eriksson wrote:
> Let's say I win an auction for $10, I pay $10 for a item, do I have to pay
> 3% or does the seller pay it (out of the $10)?
Seller eats the cost.
(currently very hateful of paypal for having to endure verifying my
account, and now i see either the vendo
On Sun, 15 Jun 2003, Brendan wrote:
> Get a revesal ring and a 28mm F2.8 and enjoy ( Aaron
> where is my reversal ring!!!)
Reversing an FA28/2.8 onto my bodies yields teh worst possible results
I've ever had. There's massive flare in the middle of each and every
image.
--
http://www.infotainment
On Wed, 11 Jun 2003, [iso-8859-1] Pål Jensen wrote:
> Yep. And that probably explains why the can't afford an expensive lens
> mount and a more expensive metering system.
I totally ignore all the threads about this, so I have no idea of someone
threw this out yet..but is it possible there's to be
I need to purchase a hood for my 645 45mm lens. Now, I'm just happy enough
purchasing a generic rubber hood for it, however, do I need to buy the
"wide angle" version, or would a regular hood be sufficent?
I wonder only because I'm sure on a 135 45mm lens, it wouldn't vignette,
but is the angle o
On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, Steve Desjardins wrote:
> I'll be curious to hear your reactions. I'm looking at (maybe) buying
> another 645 lens and was trying to decide between a wide (45) or a tele
> (150 or 200).
The key to deciding what lens to buy for your 645 is what you already use
for your 35. Whic
On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Uh, anybody got advice for slowing them down enough to shoot?
> The one that starved to death curled up in a rather un-lifelike
> posture. Do I need to get ahold of some ether somehow, or are
> there more accessible tricks?
Put them in the freezer wh
On Sun, 8 Jun 2003, Cesar Matamoros II wrote:
> I have just added an FA-45/2.8, FA Macro 120/4, and an A* 300/4.
I actually purchased an A45/2.8 over a month ago.. I have yet to use it
once, its been absolutely miserable weather every day I've had off, I
think. -sigh-
--
http://www.infotainmen
On Wed, 4 Jun 2003, Butch Black wrote:
> A friend of mine gave me some MF and LF scans done on an Epson 2450. The
> files were 20-30MB PSD files (Photoshop) I was amazed at the quality. It's
> still not ideal for 35mm although it may compare favorably with the S20.
All this talk finally inspired m
On Fri, 4 Apr 2003, William Robb wrote:
> Bruce, it was the Germans who were doing that.
> The French were putting ox blood in theirs.
One more reason to stick to gin martinis.
Well, two more reasons...
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.ei
>From the IR list, in case anyone is interested...
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 00:13:19 +0200
From: Willem-Jan Markerink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: For Sale: 70mm backs for Pentax 645 + viewfinder
For Sale:
On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Steve Desjardins wrote:
> This is definitely the "constant companion" camera. Trivial to carry,
> fairly full featured, and fully PUGable. I am looking for a car
> adaptor, however, so I don't have a "cotty".
A generation from now, people will being having cotties all the t
On Mon, 31 Mar 2003, Adelheid v. K. wrote:
> the April PUG is ready to go.
> Another month with great pics.
-sigh-
Y'know, its sobering when you see others' "cliche" shots are not only the
same things you've taken and really liked on your own, but are better than
yours, too.
(haven't submitted t
On Fri, 28 Mar 2003, Jostein wrote:
> After having had a look at Grepstad's book, and some other resources
> around, I'd say it's probably not that difficult to do. There are only
You've, obviously, never seen me with a tool. :)
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke
On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, Nick Zentena wrote:
> Building smaller cameras like 4x5 doesn't make sense to save money.
I think it has less to do with money and more to do with the fact that you
can design and build your own camera with your own hands. How many people
do you know who can say they've built
On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, T Rittenhouse wrote:
> I don't know about that. My Graphic weighs about the same as a Nikon F5.
> Film holders are bulky and heavy I admit. But the real problem in this day
> and age is finding ashtrays to pop the used flashbulbs into .
An F5 weighs as much as a Speed or a Cro
On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, collinb wrote:
> I must say, too, that JCO spent a lot to start with 4x5.
> One can get a nice outfit for less than $1000US.
This is where I'll pop in and say I got a Speed Graphic with a 135/4.7
press lens and a 111/8 WA Dagor, four film holders, for $60 (or was it
$75?). Dea
On Sat, 22 Mar 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> -The first comment was in regards to trying to tear off the smaller bit of
> leader to so the film can be loaded.When i tear Tmax, Delta 100, etc it
> splits fine.This stuff was like trying to tear a phone book(not really but
> you see what i'm gettin
On Thu, 20 Mar 2003, Keith Whaley wrote:
> No, it's convenience VS. better results. Not MORE convenience.
> Well, I guess there might really be no distinction there, come to
> think of it...
Nope, there's distinction there, and you've stated which way you feel you
want to go.. You see no more conv
On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, Keith Whaley wrote:
> Okay, the old stuff-it-in-an-Altoids box gets old in a hurry, I'd guess...
You think? If I had money to spend on stuff like that, I'd own one so I
really could have a camera with me always and everywhere..
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> m
On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, Feroze Kistan wrote:
> For the life of me Boz I cannot see any reason for you to leave the PDML, I
> for one would never ask you too just because you using canon gear, and I
> don't think anyone else here would either.
Hey, we let Cotty hang around...
(why does it seem like a
On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, Bill Owens wrote:
> I have the 30mm and it's really a fine lens, especially for the money. One
> heck of a big piece of glass though.
I think you were one of the reasons I decided I wanted one, you're a big
fan of yours, and I'm quite satisfied with the Zenitar.
I'm still up
On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, Clive evans wrote:
> that appear on ebay. or ibdeed the 16mm fisheye zenitar kmount?
I own the Zenitar 16/2.8. I like it, quite alot.
I'm actually thinking of adding the Arsat 30mm medfo fisheye, and perhaps
even one of their mirror lenses as well.
--
http://www.infotainmen
1 - 100 of 756 matches
Mail list logo
