"frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>AP being Amateur Photographer, a British mag. The did a three camera
>shootout with the Pentax, a Nikon F75, and whatever the equivalent priced
>Canon are. They had some sort of point-scoring system, and the Canon and
>the Nikon scored 89% each, a
Hi!
BD> I bought a film *ist as a backup to my *istD. Overall, it is quite
BD> nice and has enough features. Pretty usable overall. Certainly not
BD> an MZ-S by any stretch of the imagination, but at 1/3 cost, there are
BD> not very many features on the MZ-S that it is lacking.
BD> My daughter
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Mark Roberts wrote:
> Pity it's (like all film cameras) being overshadowed by things digital.
Pity, also, that it's a cripple mount.
Happy New Year,
Kostas
essimist
fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
From: "John Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: AP liked the *ist 35mm best
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 12:59:06 -0500 (EST)
>
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Mark Roberts wrote:
&
t: Thursday, January 01, 2004 1:48 PM
Subject: Re: AP liked the *ist 35mm best
> You're right, John,
>
> We should call it a "differently-abled mount". Or maybe a "special
mount".
>
> I'm starting to feel better about it already...
>
>
>
> -f
"John Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Mark Roberts wrote:
>>
>> > Pity it's (like all film cameras) being overshadowed by things digital.
>>
>> Pity, also, that it's a cripple mount.
>
>It doesn't matter how many times you use that stupid description;
>Pentax aren't g
>
> You're right, John,
>
> We should call it a "differently-abled mount". Or maybe a "special mount".
>
> I'm starting to feel better about it already...
Well, in all honesty, we don't know what the real story is.
But, in any case, it's about time Pentax started using modern technology.
It w
- Original Message -
From: "frank theriault"
Subject: Re: AP liked the *ist 35mm best
> You're right, John,
>
> We should call it a "differently-abled mount". Or maybe a "special
mount".
>
> I'm starting to feel better about
>
> - Original Message -
> Think more positively:
> Pentax FA-E mount.
>
> The "E" stands for "Enablement"..
>
> an excuse to buy new lenses.
>
> William Robb
>
Damn.My first Newyears resolution out the window.:-)
Dave
On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 12:32:53PM -0800, Bruce Dayton wrote:
> I don't think that it is targeted at all those who still have pre 'A'
> lenses. Those people generally like the LX, MX, SuperProgram era
> bodies as well as the lenses.
This statement doesn't quite make sense to me.
It's not just pe
John Francis posted:
>
> So which mount is "crippled"? The one that offers the capability of full-
> precison, error-free control, or the one that relies on mechanical aids?
>
>From my POV, the one that can't use MY lenses!
ERN, shaking head with a half-grin: isn't it
obvious?
Me? I think today's photographers are crippled.
The problem with the new cameras is you have to carry them around. If they were
truely automatic, you could just tell them what kind of shots you wanted and
they would go out and get them for you.
I still say real photographers use the Speed Graph
> I still say real photographers use the Speed Graphic. Juat ask Weegee.
>
>
And wet glass plates as their medium? :-)
Bill
Tanya posted, among many other things:
..
>
> and i know who looks better in a skirt...
>
>
Who wears a skirt when taking photographs??
(oh, right, me -- both times I shot weddings. Moving on ...)
ERN
ERN asked:
> Tanya posted, among many other things:
> > and i know who looks better in a skirt...
> >
>
> Who wears a skirt when taking photographs??
#blink# Is this a trick question?
-- Glenn
ERN asked: "Who wears a skirt when taking photographs??"
Actually, you know what, I should have said that I was 'figuratively'
speaking when I typed that cause, guess what? I NEVER wear a skirt when I am
shooting - and especially not weddings. Last week I had 3 guys hoist me and
my tripod up onto
LOL! He'll be a bit out of fashion dressed like that though!
tan.
- Original Message -
From: "Pieter Nagel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 02, 2004 9:06 AM
Subject: Re: AP liked the *ist 35mm best
> On Fri, Jan 02, 2
> - Original Message -
> From: "graywolf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> > Very interesting, very very interesting...
> >
> > Looks like TV and Tanya will be out of jobs next year.
> >
- Original Message -
From: "Tanya Mayer Photography" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> hmmm, bet he can't cl
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
> we said already, the -10 does both. Why not a 1,200 pound camera?
Egads! - that would make the 6x7 seem a mere Minox
by comparison! Who could lift it, let alone carry it
about hour after hour through wilderness stalking the
ever elus
Christian said: "bet he can't drop his cameras"
hmmm, maybe so, and even if he did, he is probably equipped with the
technology to fix them himself anyways! lol...
Christian asked: "have you seen tv in a skirt...?"
*eek*, i really didn't need *that* picture in my mind's eye, that is going
to
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 22:00:00 + (GMT) Kostas Kavoussanakis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: "I am open to suggestions for something
better. If PC is your style, we could go "disabled-mount". If you like the
lack of backwards compatibility, we can try calling them "perfect-mount",
"way of the future
Tanya wrote:
> Pieter Nagel wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 02, 2004 at 08:53:24AM +1000, Tanya Mayer Photography wrote:
> > > and i know who looks better in a skirt...
> > True. Lewis the Robot Photographer is more suited for a corset and hoop
> > dress.
> LOL! He'll be a bit out of fashion dressed like t
On 1/1/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
>> Tanya posted, among many other things:
>> > and i know who looks better in a skirt...
>> >
>>
>> Who wears a skirt when taking photographs??
Do nappies (diapers) count?
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
Ok, I SO didn't need THAT mental picture just before going to sleep...
Cotty, I blame you if I have nightmares tonight!
tan.
ERN wrote:
"Tanya posted, among many other things: and i know who looks better in a
skirt...
Who wears a skirt when taking photographs??"
To which, Cotty responded:
"John Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I believe the FA lenses also incorporate aperture-sensing encoders on
>the inner mechanism, so it is possible for such a lens to accurately
>report aperture setting over the digital communication pin. I fully
>expect to see a future Pentax body that reli
On 2/1/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
>Ok, I SO didn't need THAT mental picture just before going to sleep...
>
>Cotty, I blame you if I have nightmares tonight!
>
>
>
>tan.
>
>ERN wrote:
>
>"Tanya posted, among many other things: and i know who looks better in a
>skirt...
>Who wears a skirt w
Hi Bruce,
BD> I bought a film *ist as a backup to my *istD. Overall, it is quite
BD> nice and has enough features. Pretty usable overall. Certainly not
BD> an MZ-S by any stretch of the imagination, but at 1/3 cost, there are
BD> not very many features on the MZ-S that it is lacking.
could you
Cotty asked:
> >> Who wears a skirt when taking photographs??
> Do nappies (diapers) count?
I think that'd be a separate category.
[ponders a bit]
Oh. Oh my. I've done that, too. Hallowe'en costume a couple of
years ago -- nappies (do you have any idea how many diapers one
has to layer atop
Peter Jordan commented:
> Although around here men have been seen in skirts, (they call them kilts,
> but if it looks like a skirt, call it one).
*shrug* Context context context. According to clothing taxonomy,
dictionary definitions, fashion history ... a kilt is a type of
skirt. A type of ski
This may be technically correct, but I wouldn't suggest standing in the
centre of Glasgow or Edinburgh and shouting it out loud.
Not unless you want to be hear the traditional Scottish farewell, "Pick your
window". (a rough translation of this is "please choose how you wish to
leave this room")
:
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004, Chris Brogden wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Jan 2004, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Mark Roberts wrote:
> >
> > > Pity it's (like all film cameras) being overshadowed by things digital.
> >
> > Pity, also, that it's a cripple mount.
> >
> > Happy New Year,
> > Kos
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2004, Chris Brogden wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 1 Jan 2004, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Mark Roberts wrote:
> > >
> > > > Pity it's (like all film cameras) being overshadowed by things digital.
> > >
> > > Pity
I bought a film *ist as a backup to my *istD. Overall, it is quite
nice and has enough features. Pretty usable overall. Certainly not
an MZ-S by any stretch of the imagination, but at 1/3 cost, there are
not very many features on the MZ-S that it is lacking.
My daughter has been "testing" it fo
I don't think that it is targeted at all those who still have pre 'A'
lenses. Those people generally like the LX, MX, SuperProgram era
bodies as well as the lenses. They might be enticed by the MZ-S (much more
the same style in handling and feel), but certainly not enough of them
would go for an
ter about it already...
ft>
ft> -frank (on his lawyer's advice)
ft> "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist
ft> fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
>>From: "John Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Reply
Hello Pieter,
We were talking about the FILM *IST - not the DIGITAL *IST D. The
film *ist is a very inexpensive camera targeted more at first time
users who are going to buy the FAJ zooms.
My point was, that the people who complain about the lack of support
of older lenses (people who have the l
Hello Peter,
I only have a ZX-10 to compare with. The sound of the *ist is louder
than the ZX-10. It is a much more confident sound (solid - less
cheesy), but is louder. If stealth is important, the ZX-10 is the
better choice (lot less features). I can't really say how loud the
ZX-10 is compar
37 matches
Mail list logo
