- Original Message -
From: "Collin Brendemuehl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 3:11 AM
Subject: Thankful for the west (was Re: Mz-S: Two Thumbs Up!)
>...
> Chivalry -- Considering the other person as more important
In a message dated 7/23/01 6:57:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<<
Anybody who thinks the 20th century was a century of
enlightenment and progress is going through life with blinders
on. There were more wars fought, more acts of genocide,
starvation, and exploitation
Yes, the electronic DOF preview would solve this
problem. Aside from an extra PF Function, though, you'd need some
sort of extra control to set the aperture on the body. It would be
nice but would somewhat undermine the simplicity of design Pentax appears
to have sought in the MZ-S.
By way of u
On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
[a bunch of stuff that made me feel really proud to be white, from a
christian family, to have studied physics, to be married to a lawyer,
and to belong to the "generation" that combined Greek teachings with
the New Testament to produce Darwin's theo
Folks, lots and lots of crappy stuff got built in the past. It _didn't
last_, which is why you don't see it littering the landscape today. The
stuff that did last was hideously expensive by modern standards. Owning a
crude spoon was once a status symbol for an awful lot of people.
Lets go back to
What has the West (generally "white male", "racist",
"exploiter", "Christian") given the world?
Hospitals -- Because life is sacred.
Higher Eduation -- Taking the Greek model and combining it with New Testament
methodologies, we've learned more about our world than any other
Agreed ... and the next time you take a bite of your favorite
chocolate remember that it was probably made from the beans
grown and picked on African plantations by bought or stolen
and enslaved children. In case you missed the news:
http://english.pravda.ru/economics/2001/04/17/3638.html
http:/
In a message dated 7/22/01 12:32:49 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>>You're looking at that with hindsight. It was built with the
techniques and technology of the time. I suspect the
designers and builders were not aware of the changes that
would take place. But yet, th
Well, aren't modern goods manufactured by enslaving or at least
worsening living conditions of huge amounts of people? Remember the
Odoni people or the seabirds when you drive your car... We are not much better than
those ancient societies. Everytime, OTHERS pay the real cost of our
goods (most f
Just few thoughts:
Well, yes. The cost of new FDD is 10$. But what about the
externalities of that cost? These aren't included, and would add many
times the cost of it. Cost of pollutiong the Earth by making it. Cost
of living of some poor kids who get exploited by the company making it
(or comp
Todd S. wrote:
> There is this:
>http://www.westegg.com/inflation/
>According to them, the Spotmatic with 50mm F1.4 would cost $1647.08 in 2000
>just from inflation - which makes the MZ-S a bargain. Likewise, the ZX-M,
>available without a lens for $159 today, would cost a little less than $30
>
At 03:38 PM 7/21/01 -0400, Mark Cassino wrote:
>...
>
>There are not many weak points, IMO. I'd list the following:
>
>- I miss the ability to set aperture via the body. If you use "A"
>lenses, turning the aperture ring means you lose the display of the
>aperture setting in the finder.
Message-
From: Michael Nosal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 23 July 2001 15:32
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Mz-S: Two Thumbs Up!
At 03:38 PM 7/21/01 -0400, Mark Cassino wrote:
>...
>
>There are not many weak points, IMO. I'd list the following:
>
>- I miss the abi
Todd wrote:
> There is this:
> http://www.westegg.com/inflation/
>
> According to them, the Spotmatic with 50mm F1.4 would cost $1647.08 in 2000
> just from inflation - which makes the MZ-S a bargain. Likewise, the ZX-M,
> available without a lens for $159 today, would cost a little less than $
On Sun, 22 Jul 2001, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> My 1964 Cadillac convertible and my 1972 Mercedes will get me
> across the country just as easily (and, arguably, more
> comfortably) as any new car.
> While the BMW has a better quality radio (that has to be
> .
> sun roof, does it make the Mercede
Hear Hear Shel
At 08:47 PM 7/21/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>Mark said:
>
> > The rather quaint notion that you buy
> > something once and never buy a similar
> > device for the rest of you life arose
> > out of 19th century and prior technology
> > where things just plain didn't change fast
> > enou
There is this:
http://www.westegg.com/inflation/
According to them, the Spotmatic with 50mm F1.4 would cost $1647.08 in 2000
just from inflation - which makes the MZ-S a bargain. Likewise, the ZX-M,
available without a lens for $159 today, would cost a little less than $30
in 1965 dollars. Tha
Suggestion noted.
- Original Message -
From: "Bob Blakely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 5:56 PM
Subject: Re: Mz-S: Two Thumbs Up!
> I'm not the moderator, nor the censor of any list. I would, however,
suggest
>
I worked in a retail camera store in 1965 & the Pentax Spotmatic w/50/1.4 &
case sold for $307.00...what would that convert to in todays dollars? Must
be a web site with that type info somewhere.
jfd
At 08:13 PM 07/22/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 17:23:52 -0700, Bruce Dayton wro
If hardware is cheap, it's because it's being made in Thailand, like my Canon
printer, or China, like my Umax scanner, by workers making about $1 per day.
There is no such thing a cheap material, imho. Only cheap labour to extract,
process and manufacture it (and still allow the coporation to ma
On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 17:23:52 -0700, Bruce Dayton wrote:
>One thing to keep in mind here is back when things were made with such high
>quality, the cost of labor versus materials was different. Labor was quite
>cheap and materials were more expensive. The opposite is true now. I
>recall in the
I'm not the moderator, nor the censor of any list. I would, however, suggest
that you exercise restraint and keep your political opinions off the list.
After almost three years on this list I've learned to curb myself (at least
somewhat). I do this because at 54, I've decided to grow up.
If you w
o, CA
- Original Message -
From: "Gary L. Murphy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 9:56 AM
Subject: Re: Mz-S: Two Thumbs Up!
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 09:29:42 -0700, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
>
> >I believe that preservation of
- Original Message -
From: "Ernest Alejandria" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 4:28 PM
Subject: Re: Mz-S: Two Thumbs Up!
> All I know is that the tree-huggers are the most laughably obnoxious
people
> that ever walk
On July 22, 2001 Shel Belinkoff wrote:
>Supermarkets around
>here offer a choice of bags - paper or plastic. Both have
>their pros and cons. Do we lose a tree or contribute to
>chemical pollution.
I asked for both, usually. They secure the grocery better and provide a good
trash bag later.
Hi,
> Romans, Mayans, Incas, Egyptians, [...]. The economies of those societies were
> fueled by forceably stealing resources from neighboring peoples, enslaving
> them, and forcing the majority to attend to every whim of the
> minority.
Same thing applies here and now.
> They operated at a
At 09:29 AM 7/22/01 -0700, Shel wrote:
I was thinking about this statement while
taking a shower:
> 170 year old steam hoist encased in a poured
> concrete building with windows made of quartz, and realize it sat
> unattended for over a century and is still basically
functional. But it
> al
At 08:40 AM 7/22/01 -0700, Shel wrote:
I agree that some things (like the steam hoist
you mentioned)
become obsolete and outlive their usefulness. However, some
things don't become obsolete - they are just "improved
upon"
by new models with bells and whistles, but remain 100% capable
and functio
Mark C. wrote:
> Seagulls.
>
> :-)
Best Comeback of the Week Award, Mark. That's funny.
--Mike
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.o
On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 09:29:42 -0700, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
>I believe that preservation of the past, through buildings,
>and the objects we use on a daily basis, whether currently
>useful or obsolete, are an important part of our culture and
>heritage. By making everything disposable, and plannin
I was thinking about this statement while taking a shower:
> 170 year old steam hoist encased in a poured
> concrete building with windows made of quartz, and realize it sat
> unattended for over a century and is still basically functional. But it
> also was a big waste of effort and resour
Hi Mark,
No apology needed.
I agree that some things (like the steam hoist you mentioned)
become obsolete and outlive their usefulness. However, some
things don't become obsolete - they are just "improved upon"
by new models with bells and whistles, but remain 100% capable
and functional. Came
Mike Johnston wrote:
> Back on topic, cameras are fun to collect simply because older ones were
> made so nicely. Many of them are beautiful and can still be used today.
Agree. I have a Rollei TLR my father passed on to me back in about 1955,
after he had used it for many years. Of no interest
At 06:18 PM 7/22/01 +1200, David Mann wrote:
> > I have yet to see if the switches are subject to being knocked out of
> place.
>
> My first reaction to those little switches was "how long until they
> break off?". I
>also wonder how awkward this body would be to use with gloves on. The Z-1
I apologize for coming on so strong at that point - somewhere I slipped
past ranting into raving... But the point remains that technology moves
on, so why invest the energy and resources to build something to last 50
years, when it will be obsolete in 10?
A few weeks ago I spent some time amo
Seagulls.
:-)
- MCC
At 09:18 AM 7/22/01 +0100, you wrote:
bit surprised to read this coming from someone
so into nature
photograpy. What will you do when there's no more nature, only
landfill?
- - - - - - - - - -
Mark Cassino
Kalamazoo, MI
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- - - - - - - - - -
Photos:
http:/
Mike Johnston wrote:
> I agree. I'm drinking coffee right now out
> of a mug that I bought at a Shaker Village
> in Kentucky when I was 9. I tend to get
> attached to things.
I have to laugh - I've got a mug that's about 20 years old
which I dearly love. It was hand made, and part of a match
In eons past, ancient forests fell and were gathered together and covered by
waters and with silt by the waters. As the ages passed, the silt became
stone, the waters abated, and new vegetation covered a new land. Finally, in
this new age, we've drilled down into those ancient forests and now pump
Shel B. wrote:
> I don't subscribe to that logic. I like things that last, and
> that I can use and take pleasure in for the rest of my life.
> It's comfortable, it's convenient, it saves money, it saves
> time. I like things of substance, and that have a timeless
> quality about them. That's n
On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 18:18:42 +1200, David A. Mann wrote:
>
> I've yet to see what the imprinting actually looks like. Is anyone with an MZ-S
>able to scan the sprocket area?
I put up a scan of it that I found somewere:
http://www.fsys.demon.nl/gallery/mz-s-data-imprint.htm
It is abou
Pĺl Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał / wrote:
> Shel wrote:
>
> > Early Pentax had shutters that were good for about 50,000
> > cycles, later models, like the Spotmatic, bumped that up to
> > about 100,000 cycles. "Pro" cameras seem to be in the 150,000
> > cycle range. Where does the MZ-S
Hi,
> The rather quaint notion that you buy something once and never buy a
> similar device for the rest of you life arose out of 19th century and
> prior technology where things just plain didn't change fast enough to
> warrant being replaced in one lifetime. That logic was obsolete in the
At 03:38 PM 7/21/01 -0400, you wrote:
>Last Saturday I gave Ken Waller's MZ-S a brief test drive. My initial
>reaction was intrigue: it was much smaller than I had imagined, looked
>great, and felt incredibly natural in the hand.
Just as an update:
I don't have many AF lenses and shot my fi
>Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 22:29:36 -0400
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: Mark Cassino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Mz-S: Two Thumbs Up!
>
>At 03:00 PM 7/21/01 -0700, you wrote:
>>Lots of people are quite excited about the new MZ-S, extolling
>>its virt
At 03:00 PM 7/21/01 -0700, you wrote:
Lots of people are quite excited about the new
MZ-S, extolling
its virtues of size, handling, features, and apparent build
quality. Recently I've read a few articles about camera
durability. It seems that the number of cycles the shutter is
designed for is a
45 matches
Mail list logo
