This along prove nothing,
let show us a nice side-by-side comparison with an equally chewed SD!
;)
danilo.
>
> > Only my dog chewed one. It's a bit finicky to insert into the reader
> > socked. But what would you expect...
> >
> > http://www.mindspring.com/~webster26/cfcardassnack.html
On Jan 8, 2006, at 4:03 AM, keith_w wrote:
but...I do quite clearly recall that during the days when I was
using OS 7.x and OS 8.x on my various Macs, those OS would NOT read
IIGS files of any kind.
The finder told me the floppies were not readable.
Actually, they would have been readable
Paul Stenquist wrote:
Mac OSX can read Apple II files from the IIe and IIc as well. Anything
that's in PRODOS format. I don't think it will read the original DOS 3
files. I have quite a few PRODOS files that I moved over to the Mac.. I
needed one a few years ago to prove authorship of some adv
Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>On Jan 7, 2006, at 4:31 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
>>
>>> I have all the software that I ever bought on floppies backed
>>> up to my hard drive and to a CD. And I re-burn the CD every couple of
>>> years. Just
Mac OSX can read Apple II files from the IIe and IIc as well. Anything
that's in PRODOS format. I don't think it will read the original DOS 3
files. I have quite a few PRODOS files that I moved over to the Mac.. I
needed one a few years ago to prove authorship of some advertising I
wrote for Me
Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Jan 7, 2006, at 4:31 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
>
>> I have all the software that I ever bought on floppies backed
>> up to my hard drive and to a CD. And I re-burn the CD every couple of
>> years. Just in case!
>
>Why would you want to back up obsol
> -Original Message-
> From: keith_w [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
> Compatible media becomes as or more important in the
> retrieval stratagem than the file structure...
>
> So it seems.
http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/cyber/overview.php
--
Cheers,
Bob
On Jan 7, 2006, at 2:09 PM, keith_w wrote:
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
I moved my entire archives that go back to 1983, stored on
400-500 3.5" floppies, to a single CD almost a decade ago
Impressive.
Of what did/does it comprise?
All manner of text and other files, such as images, spreadsh
On Jan 7, 2006, at 1:31 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Same here. I have all the software that I ever bought on floppies
backed
up to my hard drive and to a CD. And I re-burn the CD every couple of
years. Just in case!
I don't back up software applications, just data files. All text,
word pr
On Jan 7, 2006, at 4:31 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
I have all the software that I ever bought on floppies backed
up to my hard drive and to a CD. And I re-burn the CD every couple of
years. Just in case!
Why would you want to back up obsolete software? Just curious.
Paul
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
I moved my entire archives that go back to 1983, stored on 400-500 3.5"
floppies, to a single CD almost a decade ago
Impressive.
Of what did/does it comprise?
All manner of text and other files, such as images, spreadsheets, etc.,
all thrown together?
And once mov
Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I moved my entire archives that go back to 1983, stored on 400-500
>3.5" floppies, to a single CD almost a decade ago
>
>Just checked the CD. 100% readable. Of course, I made another backup
>in the course of checking it... ;-)
Same here. I have
I moved my entire archives that go back to 1983, stored on 400-500
3.5" floppies, to a single CD almost a decade ago
Just checked the CD. 100% readable. Of course, I made another backup
in the course of checking it... ;-)
Godfrey
On Jan 6, 2006, at 3:58 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
From recollection Sony used the floppy and CD for storage in some
of its early
digicams (Mavica range), I had the misfortune of having the use of
a floppy
unit for a while, talk about slow.
2-inch magnetic floppies in the original Mavica stil
"Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I still need to archive - who knows how many - diskettes from my Mavica.
>It'll probably require the purchase of a USB floppy drive to do it.
A few months ago my ancient floppy drive finally died and I decided it
would a good idea to have one around, just in c
E.R.N. Reed wrote:
Seems my children's school has some of those floppy-using cameras
available for the teachers to use.
I've had the occasional request from some of the teachers to take
pictures for them (with my ever-present camera) -- can't think why ...
They are (or were) great for educatio
On Jan 6, 2006, at 8:29 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
I'm just not sure why you think it's your job to attempt to curb my
comments?
I'm not. I'm voicing my opinion by asking a rhetorical question.
Godfrey
On 5 Jan 2006 at 16:03, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2006, at 2:58 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
> > ... Lastly I voice my opinion since I have every right as do you.
>
>
> Voicing an opinion is a good thing.
>
> Continually saying the same thing over and over again about the same
> subject
I still need to archive - who knows how many - diskettes from my Mavica.
It'll probably require the purchase of a USB floppy drive to do it.
Tom C.
From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re:
A Mavica was my first digi ... see Shel snore while pics are loading ;-))
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Rob Studdert
>From recollection Sony used the floppy and CD for storage in some of its
early
> digicams (Mavica range), I had the misfortune of having the use of a
floppy
> unit for a
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 6 Jan 2006 at 19:21, Toralf Lund wrote:
Or how about a unit that would transfer the images to CD/DVD on-the-fly?
Or maybe a magneto-optical thingy would be more realistic?
From recollection Sony used the floppy and CD for storage in some of its early
digicams
On 6 Jan 2006 at 19:21, Toralf Lund wrote:
> Or how about a unit that would transfer the images to CD/DVD on-the-fly?
> Or maybe a magneto-optical thingy would be more realistic?
>From recollection Sony used the floppy and CD for storage in some of its early
digicams (Mavica range), I had the m
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
May I humbly suggest punch cards ... more in keeping with the 1960's
tradition
I was thinking that the floppies would have to be 8-inch at least, but
of course - punch cards would be even better ;-)
- T
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Toralf Lund
Se
May I humbly suggest punch cards ... more in keeping with the 1960's
tradition
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Toralf Lund
> Seems to me that SD *and* CF are too high-tech/modern for a camera
> truly in the K1000 spirit. It should ideally have a floppy drive (what's
that
> you say? Too s
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 4 Jan 2006 at 18:57, Glen wrote:
Why the bias against SD cards? They supposedly have superior contacts. I
can't think of any real advantage for CF cards.
Seems to me that SD *and* CF are too high-tech/modern for a camera truly
in the K1000 spirit. It should idea
Glen wrote:
I still don't think the SD / CF issue is very important. I was an XD
user before I bought my *istDS. If you think SD is tiny, take a look
at XD sometime! They're much smaller physically. :)
I also didn't complain when I had to buy an SD card for my Pentax
*istDS, instead of usin
ddert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 30 years of the K1000.
On 5 Jan 2006 at 0:00, Kenneth Waller wrote:
>>We used to discuss the merits of various films, now we discuss the size
>>of
>>memory chips.
The chip discussion has even less relevance to photography than the
On 5 Jan 2006 at 0:00, Kenneth Waller wrote:
> >>We used to discuss the merits of various films, now we discuss the size of
> >>memory chips.
>
> The chip discussion has even less relevance to photography than the film
> discussion.
But of course is still more relevant to photography than a la
On Jan 5, 2006, at 2:58 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
... Lastly I voice my opinion since I have every right as do you.
Voicing an opinion is a good thing.
Continually saying the same thing over and over again about the same
subject is not 'voicing an opinion'. It's whinging. I ask why it is
ne
On 5 Jan 2006 at 9:50, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> If your camera equipment is not generating your income, that means
> buying it or any other photographic equipment is purely a hobby/
> luxury/disposable income choice. At which point, why whinge about it?
> Buy what you like/can afford and enj
On Jan 5, 2006, at 1:17 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Christian, get an image tank of some sort. Then you'll need only
two RAM
cards, no matter which camera you use :-)
It's much faster and more efficient to swap cards in the middle of a
job. Also helps organization to keep different jobs physica
"Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Christian, get an image tank of some sort. Then you'll need only two RAM
>cards, no matter which camera you use :-)
It's much faster and more efficient to swap cards in the middle of a
job. Also helps organization to keep different jobs physically
separate
e: Re: 30 years of the K1000.
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> Is it really necessary to
> complain and complain and complain about something as trivial as what
> memory card format a camera uses?
Trivial? If I change cameras from one that uses CF to one that used SD
and I have 10GB of CF
Perhaps lower cost!
Jens Bladt
http://www.jensbladt.dk
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Glen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 5. januar 2006 00:58
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: RE: 30 years of the K1000.
At 06:43 PM 1/4/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Of course, a KD1000 should h
On Jan 5, 2006, at 1:13 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
This whole thing about "I need a larger card so I don't lose them"
or "I find the smaller cards hard to handle" seems silly. Smaller
cards are easier to transport. I can fit 2x the number of SD cards
into a given wallet compared to CF car
On Jan 5, 2006, at 4:41 AM, E.R.N. Reed wrote:
Don't you realize that flash is a "perishable" commodity? Whatever
you pay for flash now, it will probably be nearly worthless by the
time your camera is in serious need of upgrading or replacement.
At that point, you will almost certainly wan
On Jan 5, 2006, at 5:35 AM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Yep, but the pro devices generally use CF cards, in part *because* the
cards are larger: Less likely to get lost and *much* easier to write
meaningful amounts of text on. These are the reasons I prefer CF cards
for cameras, too.
"... write meani
On Jan 4, 2006, at 8:11 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
On 4 Jan 2006 at 19:00, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
So go buy a 5D. Why whinge about it? ]'-)
You seem to misinterpret my comments often. A 5D would be lovely,
unfortunately
like the majority of average earners my cash flow is limited and
has
Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>Of course, a KD1000 should have full K lens compatiblity that the others
>>don't have. I would skip doing the RAW thing. Instead of SD cards, it
>>would use CF cards, or both.
>
>To get the real spirit of the K1000 in a DSLR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Of course, a KD1000 should have full K lens compatiblity that the others
>don't have. I would skip doing the RAW thing. Instead of SD cards, it
>would use CF cards, or both.
To get the real spirit of the K1000 in a DSLR it should be manual focus,
manual exposure, RAW
>>We used to discuss the merits of various films, now we discuss the size of
>>memory chips.
The chip discussion has even less relevance to photography than the film
discussion.
Kenneth Waller
-Original Message-
>From: Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: R
Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Jan 4, 2006, at 5:59 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
>
>>> there are plenty of CF using cameras out there to ensure that
>>> they'll be around forever in practical terms.
>>
>> Not just cameras. There are a lot of pro digital audio recorders that
>> use so
- Original Message -
From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 11:32 PM
Subject: Re: 30 years of the K1000.
> Only my dog chewed one. It's a bit finicky to insert into the reader
> socked. But what wo
Glen wrote:
Don't you realize that flash is a "perishable" commodity? Whatever you
pay for flash now, it will probably be nearly worthless by the time
your camera is in serious need of upgrading or replacement. At that
point, you will almost certainly want newer, better, and larger flash
me
> -Original Message-
> From: P. J. Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Only my dog chewed one. It's a bit finicky to insert into
> the reader socked. But what would you expect...
>
> http://www.mindspring.com/~webster26/cfcardassnack.html
>
Who's going to be first to say something ab
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Yep, I'm calling it a conspiracy...
>
> Tom C.
>
> Yeah, sounds right. Being most things are.
>
that's what They want you to believe...
Bob
At 01:51 AM 1/5/2006, Rob Studdert wrote:
I came from having several cameras that used CF cards and I'd guess that
one of
my cards cost nearly as much as you paid for your *ist DS body which was
probably half as much as a lot of use paid for our *ist D bodies.
A man who can afford all that, s
Kind of sick isn't it? Wanta see a pretty picture?
Tom C.
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
We used to discuss the merits of various films, now we discuss the size of
memory chips.
William Robb
On 5 Jan 2006 at 0:24, Glen wrote:
> I also didn't complain when I had to buy an SD card for my Pentax *istDS,
> instead of using the XD form factor I was used to. To me, that would seem
> to almost as productive as complaining that the *istDS wouldn't accept 8x10
> film holders. ;)
I came fr
I still don't think the SD / CF issue is very important. I was an XD user
before I bought my *istDS. If you think SD is tiny, take a look at XD
sometime! They're much smaller physically. :)
I also didn't complain when I had to buy an SD card for my Pentax *istDS,
instead of using the XD form
- Original Message -
From: "Rob Studdert"
Subject: RE: 30 years of the K1000.
apart from Bill sharing his pleb/kiosk stories I can't recall anyone else
here
mentioning that they had problems with a CF cards contacts.
We haven't had a mishap for quite some
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C"
Subject: Re: 30 years of the K1000.
That's what I think too...
We used to discuss the merits of various films, now we discuss the size of
memory chips.
William Robb
On 4 Jan 2006 at 23:32, P. J. Alling wrote:
> Only my dog chewed one. It's a bit finicky to insert into the reader
> socked. But what would you expect...
>
> http://www.mindspring.com/~webster26/cfcardassnack.html
LOL, you would have had to collect an SD from the other end :-)
Rob Studdert
That should be socket of course.
P. J. Alling wrote:
Only my dog chewed one. It's a bit finicky to insert into the reader
socked. But what would you expect...
http://www.mindspring.com/~webster26/cfcardassnack.html
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 4 Jan 2006 at 18:57, Glen wrote:
Why the bias
Only my dog chewed one. It's a bit finicky to insert into the reader
socked. But what would you expect...
http://www.mindspring.com/~webster26/cfcardassnack.html
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 4 Jan 2006 at 18:57, Glen wrote:
Why the bias against SD cards? They supposedly have superior contact
That's what I think too... I haven't lost one yet, but I've lost plenty of
postage stamps...
Tom C.
From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
They're small and too easy to lose.
They're small and too easy to lose.
Glen wrote:
At 06:43 PM 1/4/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course, a KD1000 should have full K lens compatiblity that the
others
don't have. I would skip doing the RAW thing. Instead of SD cards, it
would use CF cards, or both.
Jim A.
Why the bia
Just a hunch, but I suspect Pentax will go with CF on the top of the
line camera. They'll want to make it a clear upgrade from the *istD.
However, I wouldn't be surprised if it accepts both cards.
Paul
On Jan 4, 2006, at 93 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
A lot of us, and a lot of people outside the
On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 01:47:03PM +1000, Rob Studdert wrote:
> On 4 Jan 2006 at 18:33, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
>
> > A lot of us, and a lot of people outside the online world, don't have an
> > investment if CF cards, and some even have a few SD cards. No matter what
> > choice is made, someone, s
In a message dated 1/4/2006 7:25:44 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have both CF and SD devices. Except for those devices which because of
their size, benefit from a smaller card... like Optios for example, I think
the big truth behind SD and the smaller size formats is t
From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Um, I have SD cards for a variety of other devices, I don't like them, they
aren't necessary, they don't offer significant enough advantage to cause me
to
wish to hit my CF cards with a hammer and more on ... nor do they fit in a
5D.
I have both CF a
On 4 Jan 2006 at 19:00, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> So go buy a 5D. Why whinge about it? ]'-)
You seem to misinterpret my comments often. A 5D would be lovely, unfortunately
like the majority of average earners my cash flow is limited and has more jobs
to do than I can afford, so a 5D is a long
On Jan 4, 2006, at 7:47 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
Um, I have SD cards for a variety of other devices, I don't like
them, they
aren't necessary, they don't offer significant enough advantage to
cause me to
wish to hit my CF cards with a hammer and more on ... nor do they
fit in a 5D.
So go
On 4 Jan 2006 at 18:33, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> A lot of us, and a lot of people outside the online world, don't have an
> investment if CF cards, and some even have a few SD cards. No matter what
> choice is made, someone, somewhere, will be unhappy. Technology moves on
> ... when cameras chang
A lot of us, and a lot of people outside the online world, don't have an
investment if CF cards, and some even have a few SD cards. No matter what
choice is made, someone, somewhere, will be unhappy. Technology moves on
... when cameras changed to being more electronic and automatic, those that
a
On Jan 4, 2006, at 5:59 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
there are plenty of CF using cameras out there to ensure that
they'll be
around forever in practical terms.
Not just cameras. There are a lot of pro digital audio recorders that
use solid state memory instead of tape or disc media. All the one
Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>there are plenty of CF using cameras out there to ensure that they'll be
>around forever in practical terms.
Not just cameras. There are a lot of pro digital audio recorders that
use solid state memory instead of tape or disc media. All the ones I
hav
On Jan 4, 2006, at 3:57 PM, Glen wrote:
Of course, a KD1000 should have full K lens compatiblity that the
others
don't have. I would skip doing the RAW thing. Instead of SD
cards, it
would use CF cards, or both.
Why the bias against SD cards? They supposedly have superior
contacts. I
Unless they take after the MX and make it a little digicam :-)
Christian
- Original Message -
From: "Glen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 6:57 PM
Subject: RE: 30 years of the K1000.
> At 06:43 PM 1/4/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jolly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 26. oktober 2005 14:39
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: 30 years of the K1000.
Cesar wrote:
Anyone want to hazard a guess as to how Pentax will 'acknowledge' the
30th anniversary of the K100?
I vote for either a gold-plated 3
On 4 Jan 2006 at 18:57, Glen wrote:
> Why the bias against SD cards? They supposedly have superior contacts. I
> can't think of any real advantage for CF cards.
What about the simple fact that at any give point they can physically contain
at least 4x the RAM for any given RAM package size over
My arthritic fingers prefer CF cards.
Actually it seems they like bigger things more every year. ;-(
Don
> -Original Message-
> From: Glen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 5:58 PM
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: RE: 30 years of the K10
At 06:43 PM 1/4/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course, a KD1000 should have full K lens compatiblity that the others
don't have. I would skip doing the RAW thing. Instead of SD cards, it
would use CF cards, or both.
Jim A.
Why the bias against SD cards? They supposedly have superior con
mer
> RTF flash
> Most important: A price tag around 300 USD.
>
> Call it Pentax KD1000
>
> Jens Bladt
>
>
>
> http://www.jensbladt.dk
>
> -Oprindelig meddelelse-
> Fra: Steve Jolly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sendt: 26. oktober 2005 14:39
> Til: p
ime - only.
ISO: 100-800
Self timer
RTF flash
Most important: A price tag around 300 USD.
Call it Pentax KD1000
Jens Bladt
http://www.jensbladt.dk
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Steve Jolly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 26. oktober 2005 14:39
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: 3
Cesar wrote:
Anyone want to hazard a guess as to how Pentax will 'acknowledge' the
30th anniversary of the K100?
I vote for either a gold-plated 30th anniversary edition, or another
DSLR that's really a slightly-modified *istDS. ;-) A digital
equivalent of the MZ-M, perhaps? I guess they p
Did anyone notice this on the Pentax site?
Aptly named THE NEW CLASSIC, the microsite touches on the solid PENTAX
legacy and devotion to SLR users. Since its first SLR introduction in
1952, PENTAX has remained devoted to delivering the most lightweight and
compact SLR products including the P
77 matches
Mail list logo
