Re: My latest Pentax enablement...

None of the above. But I am minty. > On 25 Jan 2016, at 22:10, WILSON MICHAEL wrote: > > Coatings blemish-free? Helicoid smooth? No fungus? Get yourself on Ebay. > >> On 25 January 2016 at 21:53 Bob W-PDML wrote: >> >> >> Goes all the way to

Re: My latest Pentax enablement...

Been hitting the peppermint schnaps again? On 1/25/2016 5:40 PM, Bob W-PDML wrote: None of the above. But I am minty. On 25 Jan 2016, at 22:10, WILSON MICHAEL wrote: Coatings blemish-free? Helicoid smooth? No fungus? Get yourself on Ebay. On 25 January 2016 at

Re: My latest Pentax enablement...

Hey, I had one of those! fine lens. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Darren Addy wrote: > ...is at least as old as I am (but in a lot better shape): > https://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelsmithy/24611705305/ > >

Re: My latest Pentax enablement...

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016, at 08:22 AM, Darren Addy wrote: > ...is at least as old as I am (but in a lot better shape): > https://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelsmithy/24611705305/ I have one of those, too - bought several years ago during my collecting phase (it's a disease - fortunately I'm now over

Re: My latest Pentax enablement...

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 6:17 PM, Brian Walters wrote: > I've also got an all black version which, I assume, was a slightly later > issue. I've really got to start using some of these old Takumars. I believe the all-black preset version of the 135mm f/3.5 started around

Re: OT: Enablement? 4x5 film holders (Any ideas?)

ind of tape to block the light leaks... More fiddly than the TLR approach but it produces some nice results. Have fun! Mark On 1/16/2016 11:10 PM, Darren Addy wrote: Not that anybody has expressed any interest, but it is a slow weekend so I'm going to post a little follow-up. My recent 4x5 sh

Re: OT: Enablement? 4x5 film holders (Any ideas?)

On 2016-01-16 21:10 , Darren Addy wrote: My recent 4x5 sheet film holder enablement has reignited my desire to get into pinhole cameras. I've had such a hankering since at least back to 2009 when I bookmarked a bunch of resources. Never having enough books, I ordered Brian J. Krummel's

Re: OT: Enablement? 4x5 film holders (Any ideas?)

Cool Steve! Misery loves company, so cool to hear you have an easy path to a pinhole camera. You have the added benefit of being able to vary your focal length with the view camera. Here's a handy calculator to help make sense of the variables: http://www.mrpinhole.com/calcpinh.php Also, if you

Enablement of a sort.

As I have commented before. Every time an acquaintance has some old camera gear, since I'm a photographer, they seem to gift it to me. Today I actually got something I might use.* Included with the the beat to hell ZX-50, and desperately needing cleaning ME w/50mm f1.7 were a SMC Pentax FA

Re: OT: Enablement? 4x5 film holders (Any ideas?)

Not that anybody has expressed any interest, but it is a slow weekend so I'm going to post a little follow-up. My recent 4x5 sheet film holder enablement has reignited my desire to get into pinhole cameras. I've had such a hankering since at least back to 2009 when I bookmarked a bunch

Re: OT: Enablement? 4x5 film holders (Any ideas?)

There's a stall on Greenwich market which sells them as picture frames. B > On 4 Jan 2016, at 01:30, Darren Addy wrote: > > I call upon the PDML Collective Hive for ideas (and, optionally, > LINKS) to fun things to do with 4x5 film holders. I tripped across a > box of

OT: Enablement? 4x5 film holders (Any ideas?)

I call upon the PDML Collective Hive for ideas (and, optionally, LINKS) to fun things to do with 4x5 film holders. I tripped across a box of some, priced too cheaply, at a local antique store and bought the lot intending to sell the majority. However, I intend to keep 2 or 3 for myself. One

Re: Enablement

So when are you getting the Gold plated LX and Vivitar Zoom lenses to complete the ensemble. On 11/23/2015 3:12 AM, Larry Colen wrote: I suppose that if I were to list all of the photographic equipment that I need, a tiltall tripod, by all rational measure would be fairly low down on the

Enablement

I suppose that if I were to list all of the photographic equipment that I need, a tiltall tripod, by all rational measure would be fairly low down on the list. A third tiltall tripod is really kind of difficult for me to justify. However, I was able to get it for only $20, plus it is gold

Re: Enablement

That would certainly be the pimps' choice of tripod if they didn't have 3 hos to support their gold LX I have one of the original unbling Marchioni Tiltalls. B > On 23 Nov 2015, at 08:13, Larry Colen wrote: > > I suppose that if I were to list all of the photographic

Re: Enablement

I suppose we'll see you glistering in the sunset and moonlight as you make your long exposures now. :-) Pretty cool find for $20! I had a Tiltall for many years, bought somewhere around 1980 and sold to buy a set of Bogen legs in the middle 1990s; I believe the guy I sold it to is still using

Re: Enablement

That is one hell of a snazzy tripod! Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 3:12 AM, Larry Colen wrote: > I suppose that if I were to list all of the photographic equipment that I > need, a tiltall tripod, by all rational measure

Re: Latest Pentax Enablement...

Excellent! I had forgotten about couplers like that. Perfect. Thanks for the link. By the way, my sister took the morning off work to attempt to see the small flock of Whooping Cranes reported in Thayer County Nebraska. She succeeded, but says they are a long ways away. She also reports that the

Re: Latest Pentax Enablement...

Here's one way to do it... https://app.box.com/s/ocih5z0bdaqnhxysng635r7kr7wjrudq -p On 11/17/2015 5:03 PM, Darren Addy wrote: Interesting! Thanks for the pic. I wouldn't think it would be too hard to cobble something functional together that would duplicate the functionality. It's basically

Latest Pentax Enablement...

http://goo.gl/Teq6NE A while back I found a neat set of Pentax UCF Mini 8x21 binoculars (Made in Japan) and they are really nice. Incredibly lightweight, yet good image quality (though with small objectives, not made for low light). I liked them so well that when I tripped across a (New in the

Re: Latest Pentax Enablement...

I bought a pair of the 16x24 back when they were expensive. In a relate note, StarGate SG1 used a prop made out of the a PENTAX binocular Shell, which was used a few episodes. They do look pretty cool as well as being very good binoculars. The only issue is holding 16x24 steady. On

Re: Latest Pentax Enablement...

Interesting! Thanks for the pic. I wouldn't think it would be too hard to cobble something functional together that would duplicate the functionality. It's basically just 1/4"-20 threads on one end and a t-nut same thread at the other, held together with some kind of structure and/or epoxy like

Re: Latest Pentax Enablement...

I see they are $27 on Amazon. That was good for a laugh. On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 4:46 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: > On 11/17/2015 4:52 PM, Darren Addy wrote: >> >> I can see how their style would have made them a good futuristic looking >> prop. >> >> I believe that they

Re: Latest Pentax Enablement...

On 11/17/2015 4:52 PM, Darren Addy wrote: I can see how their style would have made them a good futuristic looking prop. I believe that they normally say that 10x is the most one should attempt to handhold (without it becoming annoying trying to keep it steady). I was pleased (and surprised) to

Re: Latest Pentax Enablement...

I have Pentax 8x24 UCF WR binox (made in Japan) that I'm very happy with. Since I usually use them hiking or at concerts, I've never tried using the tripod socket. Rick http://photo.net/photos/RickW On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 6:04 PM, Darren Addy wrote: > I see they are

Re: Latest Pentax Enablement...

I can see how their style would have made them a good futuristic looking prop. I believe that they normally say that 10x is the most one should attempt to handhold (without it becoming annoying trying to keep it steady). I was pleased (and surprised) to see that these have a tripod socket on the

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

I nominate Larry to go down the rabbit hole and report back if he finds anything interesting. On 11/6/2015 12:14 PM, Darren Addy wrote: Of course there is a Flash Bulbs group on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/groups/flashbulbs Interesting discussions and photo pool, if you want to go down

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

SHEESH, would you believe this PESO image was just picked for Flickr explore i'm actually embarrassed for them. On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 9:38 AM, John wrote: > I nominate Larry to go down the rabbit hole and report back if he finds > anything interesting. > > On

Re: OT: 620 film enablement, anyone?

That's pretty much what I do, with my Kodak Medalist II. There's also a guy on eBay, or maybe used to be a guy on eBay, I haven't bought looked to buy from him in several years, who machines down 120 roll film and inserts a machined aluminum insert into the key slot that matches the 620 key

Re: OT: 620 film enablement, anyone?

Coolio Cheers, frank On November 6, 2015 1:16:10 PM EST, Darren Addy wrote: >I've got a soft spot for psuedo-TLR cameras. I think they are cool >looking and there is something about looking down at the world through >their distorted waist level viewfinders that feeds my

Re: OT: 620 film enablement, anyone?

Blast from the past! My grandmother gave me her old Ansco Rediflex when I was 11 or 12 years old (early 1960s). The cost of film and #5 flashbulbs was prohibitive, and I scarcely used it. Somehow that red shutter release brings it all back... Rick http://photo.net/photos/RickW On Fri, Nov 6,

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

I actually own two Instamatic 500s. Both meters appear to work but neither is in the least accurate. Sadly I never got to run any film through either as Ferrania the last manufacturer of 126 cartridges stopped supplying film about the time I acquired them. They are beautiful cameras in the

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

Thanks (again) for the links, John. That video is FANTASTIC and the images shown in it are beyond impressive. On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 12:35 PM, John wrote: > It might tell in the photographer's book: Northern Light: A Portrait of > BC Rail. > >

Re: OT: 620 film enablement, anyone?

On 11/6/2015 1:16 PM, Darren Addy wrote: I've got a soft spot for psuedo-TLR cameras. I think they are cool looking and there is something about looking down at the world through their distorted waist level viewfinders that feeds my soul. One of my favorites is the Ansco Rediflex. Last night I

Re: OT: 620 film enablement, anyone?

Site, site, site... Damned spell checker. On 11/6/2015 2:14 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: According to this sit it's circa 1950. http://web4homes.com/cameras/ansco.htm On 11/6/2015 1:16 PM, Darren Addy wrote: I've got a soft spot for psuedo-TLR cameras. I think they are cool looking and there is

Re: OT: 620 film enablement, anyone?

Let me know if you need some film developed. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

Re: OT: 620 film enablement, anyone?

Good point John. I'll have to check that once it arrives. (I'm also hopeful that the exposed roll is still in the camera. I've got another exposed roll of 620 B, found inside a purchased camera, sitting on the shelf awaiting development.) On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 1:03 PM, John

Re: OT: 620 film enablement, anyone?

According to this sit it's circa 1950. http://web4homes.com/cameras/ansco.htm On 11/6/2015 1:16 PM, Darren Addy wrote: I've got a soft spot for psuedo-TLR cameras. I think they are cool looking and there is something about looking down at the world through their distorted waist level

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

Thanks for the trip down memory lane, Darren. My first thought was that belonged on a nice Instamatic. Yonnie On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Darren Addy wrote: > https://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelsmithy/22788622966/ > > > -- > Life is too short to put up with bad bokeh.

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

Thanks for the link, Frank, but *ouch!* on the price. My mother had a cow when I wanted that particular extra when I was a kid. If she were still here, she'd have said much more than, "Ouch." Yonnie ... nostalgic moment: waiting for postman to deliver finished prints and a new roll for the 126

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

Glad everyone got "a kick" out of it. Of course, it is just a gag shot. I've got at least one pack of "new in the box" flash cubes around here. I also still have three sealed rolls of 126 film that I bought from one of those last places to still sell them (probably had them for close to 10 years

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

Darren, If you like I'll do my regular thrifting for flash cubes. They frequently sell for .50 or .90 per pack. Does anyone use AG1/B, #11, press (25), or 25B bulbs on digital? You'll just love the GN on those things! If you happen to come across press bulbs grab them. (#25 press bulbs do not

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

Thanks for the offer, Collin, but I don't really use them (although do I have some in various sizes). It is interesting that "for it's relatively small size, the humble flashbulb carries more light output power than many other portable light sources". That quote is from http://www.meggaflash.com/

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

Remind me why I'd want to pay $13.50 for 12 flashes. -Original Message- >From: knarf <knarftheria...@gmail.com> >Subject: Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit > >http://www.amazon.com/General-Electric-Flash-Cubes-Cameras/dp/B002KA9XPQ &

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

That's great capture! Its caption indicated multiple bulbs were used for the trestle image. Now, I'm curious to know how many were used. Yonnie On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 10:38 AM, Darren Addy wrote: > Thanks for the offer, Collin, but I don't really use them (although do > I

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

Hell, where are you going to get film for the camera? On 11/6/2015 11:39 AM, Ken Waller wrote: Remind me why I'd want to pay $13.50 for 12 flashes. -Original Message- From: knarf <knarftheria...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

I've seen photos of the custom rigs used to take those types of photos in the 1950s and 60s and it could be hundreds. On 11/6/2015 11:47 AM, Yolanda Rowe wrote: That's great capture! Its caption indicated multiple bulbs were used for the trestle image. Now, I'm curious to know how many were

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

Sweet. (or not). Somewhere I've got a shoe mount unit that takes every bulb with a standard bayonet base, through M to AG1, sort of a universal unit. In fact I think it was sold as a universal flash unit. The battery was honking expensive though, and probably no longer made. When I saw

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

Of course there is a Flash Bulbs group on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/groups/flashbulbs Interesting discussions and photo pool, if you want to go down that rabbit hole. :) On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 11:06 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: > Sweet. (or not). Somewhere I've got a

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

Dwayne's Photo in Parsons, KS still does C41, traditional B and E-6 processing for 110, 126 and 127 film. They only do C41 processing for Disc Film. On 11/6/2015 10:56 AM, Darren Addy wrote: Glad everyone got "a kick" out of it. Of course, it is just a gag shot. I've got at least one pack of

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

It might tell in the photographer's book: Northern Light: A Portrait of BC Rail. http://shop.whiteriverproductions.com/collections/books/products/nlbc The book might have contact information for the author/photographer. OTOH, just guessing, he might have used the three bulb holder shown in the

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

Super! Thank you for that info, John. On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 11:51 AM, John wrote: > Dwayne's Photo in Parsons, KS still does C41, traditional B and E-6 > processing for 110, 126 and 127 film. They only do C41 processing for > Disc Film. > > > On 11/6/2015 10:56 AM,

OT: 620 film enablement, anyone?

I've got a soft spot for psuedo-TLR cameras. I think they are cool looking and there is something about looking down at the world through their distorted waist level viewfinders that feeds my soul. One of my favorites is the Ansco Rediflex. Last night I picked up (on that infernal auction site)

Re: OT: 620 film enablement, anyone?

On 11/6/2015 1:16 PM, Darren Addy wrote: I've got a soft spot for psuedo-TLR cameras. I think they are cool looking and there is something about looking down at the world through their distorted waist level viewfinders that feeds my soul. One of my favorites is the Ansco Rediflex. Last night I

Re: OT: 620 film enablement, anyone?

Cool... NO idea wrt to the history of the camera. I fiddled with some 620 cameras in the past and picked up some 620 spools on ebay for re-spooling 120 film. It was pretty easy even using a changing bag (would have been easier in a darkroom). Have fun! On 11/6/2015 1:16 PM, Darren Addy

Re: OT: 620 film enablement, anyone?

By the way, if you want to play with working 620 film cameras you can do so with 120 film: http://www.instructables.com/id/Using-120-Film-in-620-Era-cameras/ or 35mm film (you get the exposure all the way through the sprockets, of course):

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

This conversation made me want to dig through some boxes to find my other 126 camera, since I couldn't remember what it was. I just remembered it was a "good one". FOUND IT and I was right. It is the Kodak Instamatic 500 which (you wouldn't know from the name) was a Made in Germany metal BRICK of

Re: OT: 620 film enablement, anyone?

Thanks for the info/link P.J. You gave me the idea to search Google Books to see if I could narrow it down through advertisements. Here is what the Rediflex "Outfit" looked like in 1950: https://goo.gl/82gLZw Mine is clearly later. Found this description (but no picture) from a 1952 publication

Planning more enablement: My next camera (it's probably not what you think).

I'm working on putting together a rather ambitious outdoor HD time lapse photo project that (unfortunately) I can't discuss the details of yet. (I've got a lot of hoops to jump through to make it a reality). Frankly, my goal is to get the equipment in place and functional in the fall of 2016. The

Re: Planning more enablement: My next camera (it's probably not what you think).

On 2015-11-05 11:06 , Darren Addy wrote: The camera must run at a remote location - unattended (hopefully for month's) and it can't run out of power OR fill up a memory card. The remote location has no power and is about 1/2 mile (line of sight) from civilization and a Wi-Fi network connection.

Re: Planning more enablement: My next camera (it's probably not what you think).

Interesting. Thanks for the link Steve. I remember seeing the trailer for "Chasing Ice" and wanting to see it, but then promptly I forgot about it. Will need to hunt it down. I'm especially interested in how they programmed things to only photograph during daylight hours. That would be a Good

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

Wow. Can you even get flashcubes anymore? http://photo.net/photos/RickW On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 7:56 PM, Darren Addy wrote: > https://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelsmithy/22788622966/ > > > -- > Life is too short to put up with bad bokeh. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail

Re: PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

http://www.amazon.com/General-Electric-Flash-Cubes-Cameras/dp/B002KA9XPQ Cheers, frank On November 5, 2015 11:38:40 PM EST, Rick Womer wrote: >Wow. Can you even get flashcubes anymore? >http://photo.net/photos/RickW > > >On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 7:56 PM, Darren Addy

PESO: Enablement? Just showing off my new flash unit

https://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelsmithy/22788622966/ -- Life is too short to put up with bad bokeh. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Stanley Halpin wrote: > If you aren’t going to use it, maybe you should send it back? Where are > your priorities?!? Exactly where my wife left them! Malcolm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

On 10/31/2015 12:06 AM, Larry Colen wrote: David Mann wrote: On Oct 30, 2015, at 9:24 PM, Malcolm Smith wrote: The next issue I have is more about acquiring skills than equipment But equipment is such a good substitute for skill! It has worked for me for

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

David Mann wrote: > But equipment is such a good substitute for skill! *Sigh!* If only Anyway, many thanks for your replies. I can report a rather nice parcel has arrived with a 16-85mm WR lens. As is the way of things, I'm now in and out of the house doing family jobs until tomorrow night,

RE: Fighting Enablement - Lens Choice Question

Bipin Gupta wrote: > Congratulations Malcom, You now have an excellent lens in the 16-85 WR, > that Ricoh-Pentax could have labelled "STAR". > > I am glad that I had pointed you out to this lens as your first choice. > Suggest you check it out thoroughly as some manufacturing defects have > been

Fighting Enablement - Lens Choice Question

Congratulations Malcom, You now have an excellent lens in the 16-85 WR, that Ricoh-Pentax could have labelled "STAR". I am glad that I had pointed you out to this lens as your first choice. Suggest you check it out thoroughly as some manufacturing defects have been discovered. The latest one is a

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

> On Oct 31, 2015, at 4:17 AM, Malcolm Smith wrote: > > David Mann wrote: > >> But equipment is such a good substitute for skill! > > *Sigh!* If only > > Anyway, many thanks for your replies. I can report a rather nice parcel has > arrived with a 16-85mm WR lens.

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Boris Liberman wrote: > Malcolm, > > Sorry to join late... > > If you *absolutely* have to have WR lens, then I think that 16-85 is > preferable. The difference between 18 and 16 mm on wide end is > significant. It will give you more interesting compositional > opportunities. The difference

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Igor wrote: > Malcolm, > > I haven't used any of these lenses, but I was thinking about a similar > question. > Just in case you haven't seen this review, - it might give you some > impression of this lens, and answer some technical questions, including > some comparisons between different

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Boris Liberman wrote: Igor, personally I translate "limited" designation into "unusual and therefore costly". And the "*" designation to "professional and hence expensive". While wikipedia is not a definitive source, it can still be valuable: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentax_(lens) FA

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

I think Limited has more to do with build quality than optical excellence. Don't get me wrong, I love the 43mm limited, and I love it's optical characteristics, but honestly the FA 20-35mm is easily as sharp at f4.0 it's maximum aperture, and has just as pleasing a rendition under most

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

On Oct 30, 2015, at 9:24 PM, Malcolm Smith wrote: > The next issue I have is more about acquiring skills than equipment But equipment is such a good substitute for skill! Cheers, Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

David Mann wrote: On Oct 30, 2015, at 9:24 PM, Malcolm Smith wrote: The next issue I have is more about acquiring skills than equipment But equipment is such a good substitute for skill! It has worked for me for years. Cheers, Dave -- Larry Colen

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Bipin Gupta wrote: > Hello Malcom, choice of lenses have always been the most difficult > decision for most of us. So how do we finally decide. > Ask simple rational question like: > a) Genre of photography > b) Predominantly wide or tele user. > c) Bright or Low Light photography > d)

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Clearly you need to purchase both. :) On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 2:48 AM, Malcolm Smith wrote: > Brian Walters wrote: > >> I have the 18-135 and it's become my most used lens. My 16-45 has got >> very little use since I got the 18-135. Maybe my IQ standards are not >> as

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Darren Addy wrote: > Clearly you need to purchase both. > :) Aaah!! You mustn't make comments like that! Horrifying thought :-) Malcolm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

While it is not weather sealed, the Tamron 18-250 is a surprisingly sharp lens. It's the lens equivalent of what motorcyclists call a UJM. It's not swimmingly good at any one thing, but does almost everything well enough. On October 29, 2015 10:01:37 AM PDT, Malcolm Smith

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Malcolm, I haven't used any of these lenses, but I was thinking about a similar question. Just in case you haven't seen this review, - it might give you some impression of this lens, and answer some technical questions, including some comparisons between different lenses in this range:

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Alan, I don't know if it was just a rhetorical question or not. Until recently, I had thought that "Limited" designation was limited [sic!] to primes lenses. And for the "*" designation zooms had to have constant aperture and be parfocal (as opposed to varifocal). (Of course, those criteria

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Darren Addy wrote: > Rereading your original post... > I like to look at my lens line-up as a "team" that I am constantly > working to upgrade, sometimes in incremental ways. > What you are describing gives you the opportunity to upgrade yours: > The 18-55mm you have is essentially just a kit

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Brian Walters wrote: > I have the 18-135 and it's become my most used lens. My 16-45 has got > very little use since I got the 18-135. Maybe my IQ standards are not > as stringent as those of other people but I have absolutely no problem > with the lens. > > Having said that, reviews suggest

Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Hello Malcom, choice of lenses have always been the most difficult decision for most of us. So how do we finally decide. Ask simple rational question like: a) Genre of photography b) Predominantly wide or tele user. c) Bright or Low Light photography d) Percentage of use for a particular zoom or

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

pdml.net Subject: Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question Alan, I don't know if it was just a rhetorical question or not. Until recently, I had thought that "Limited" designation was limited [sic!] to primes lenses. And for the "*" designation zooms had to have constant

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Malcolm, Sorry to join late... If you *absolutely* have to have WR lens, then I think that 16-85 is preferable. The difference between 18 and 16 mm on wide end is significant. It will give you more interesting compositional opportunities. The difference between 85 and 135 mm on the long end

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Igor, personally I translate "limited" designation into "unusual and therefore costly". And the "*" designation to "professional and hence expensive". Boris On 10/29/2015 22:57, Igor PDML-StR wrote: Alan, I don't know if it was just a rhetorical question or not. Until recently, I had

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 8:23 PM, Brian Walters wrote: > I have the 18-135 and it's become my most used lens. the same is true for me. It is very versatile and convenient, and produces good results. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola -- PDML

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

how it missed "limited" or "*" status. Alan C -Original Message- From: Darren Addy Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 2:32 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question Rereading your original post... I like to look at my

Fighting enablement - lens choice question

I have the opportunity to add either an 18-135mm WR lens, or a 16-85mm WR lens to my collection at a discount. In the past I would have jumped to add another lens, but as I already have the 18-55mm WR & 55-300mm WR lenses, I am struggling to see what advantage I would gain by acquiring either of

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Malcolm Smith wrote: I have the opportunity to add either an 18-135mm WR lens, or a 16-85mm WR lens to my collection at a discount. In the past I would have jumped to add another lens, but as I already have the 18-55mm WR& 55-300mm WR lenses, I am struggling to see what advantage I would

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Larry Colen wrote: > I'm quite interested in hearing about the relative merits and drawbacks > of all of the weather sealed lenses, as my 16-50 is my only lens in > that category. I don't generally worry too much about taking equipment out in poor conditions, WR or not, but on one occasion I got

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

P.J. Alling wrote: > From what I understand the 18-85 WR is a superior lens of it's type in > every way, except manual focusing, in that respect it takes after the > FA 17-70, which gives all the tactile feedback of a, I was going to say > dead fish, but that actually give tactile feedback, the

RE: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Darren Addy wrote: > I'm not sure where the "discount" is coming from, or how much of a > discount it is, but if it is sizeable enough that you could turn around > and sell the lens and make a profit - it would be worth doing just for > the "free money" aspect of it. In that case, I would look

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

I'm not sure where the "discount" is coming from, or how much of a discount it is, but if it is sizeable enough that you could turn around and sell the lens and make a profit - it would be worth doing just for the "free money" aspect of it. In that case, I would look at what NEW ones are selling

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

From what I understand the 18-85 WR is a superior lens of it's type in every way, except manual focusing, in that respect it takes after the FA 17-70, which gives all the tactile feedback of a, I was going to say dead fish, but that actually give tactile feedback, the 17-70 reportedly gives

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Malcolm Smith wrote: Larry Colen wrote: As my little part of the world is now getting regular rain again - and torrential it was this morning, with the end of my garden still flooded - a I envy you. We are now getting sporadic rain, which is a definite improvement, with a bit of

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015, at 08:29 AM, Malcolm Smith wrote: > I have the opportunity to add either an 18-135mm WR lens, or a 16-85mm WR > lens to my collection at a discount. > > In the past I would have jumped to add another lens, but as I already > have > the 18-55mm WR & 55-300mm WR lenses, I am

Re: Fighting enablement - lens choice question

Rereading your original post... I like to look at my lens line-up as a "team" that I am constantly working to upgrade, sometimes in incremental ways. What you are describing gives you the opportunity to upgrade yours: The 18-55mm you have is essentially just a kit lens with WR. The 16-85mm is a

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >