I think you are a half century late there, Peter. Once again you are arguing
with someone who is basically agreeing with you. You seem to do that a lot
lately. 2:3 predates film by several decades.
P. J. Alling wrote:
> 120 Roll film was invented by Kodak in the late 1890's You should look
> a
From: "P. J. Alling"
> What is e-Bay if not the ultimate garage sale?
I think you left the letter "B" out of there somewhere ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYokLWfqbaU
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDM
2:3 = 6:9 which I believe makes my point.
graywolf wrote:
> 2-1/2 x 3-1/2 was a quarter 5x7 plate just as 3-1/4 x 4-1/4 was a quarter
> 6-1/2
> x 8-1/2 plate and 4x5 was a quarter 8x10 plate. Those were the 2:3, 3:4, and
> 4:5
> ratios that are still pretty much standard today and go back to
120 Roll film was invented by Kodak in the late 1890's You should look
at the formats most of those old folders which took 120 film..2 1/4 x 3
1/4 on 120 size was quite common. I can point to a few examples the
Kodak Autographic and early Folding Brownies between 1919-1929, the
actual image siz
You mean one of these?
http://www.graywolfphoto.com/digital/_images/TO-Y600.jpg
Sorry there are no transistors in there. However there are ten 9 volt
transistor
batteries in that one, plus 6 D cells. The clock radio is a fairly large one.
It
has no transistors either, just one IC.
P. J. Al
2-1/2 x 3-1/2 was a quarter 5x7 plate just as 3-1/4 x 4-1/4 was a quarter
6-1/2
x 8-1/2 plate and 4x5 was a quarter 8x10 plate. Those were the 2:3, 3:4, and
4:5
ratios that are still pretty much standard today and go back to the early days
of photography when those full plate sizes were the s
Bob,
You've gotta get off the crank! :-))
Paul
On Oct 22, 2007, at 4:36 PM, Bob Blakely wrote:
> If I can't capture a hockey game with players clothed in black and
> played by
> candle light, the glass is NOT fast enough and the ISO is NOT high
> enough!
>
> If I can't capture a timber wolf ra
If I can't capture a hockey game with players clothed in black and played by
candle light, the glass is NOT fast enough and the ISO is NOT high enough!
If I can't capture a timber wolf racing through a dense forest by starlight,
the glass is NOT fast enough and the ISO is NOT high enough!
If I
When I work with my Minox subminiature cameras, ISO 100 is high ISO...
I have the K10D set to Auto ISO with the range constrained to 100-400
most of the time. Differences in performance are near to invisible in
that range. I go to 800, and very rarely to 1600, when I need more
sensitivity. T
NEVER, perhaps uniquely with me. Didn't ever care for the 'stark,
gritty, under belly of life' genre.
S'pose that could make me less than complete. ;)
Jack
--- Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anyone who shoots indoor events, including weddings, can benefit from
>
> good high ISO per
I agree. For me frame rate is relatively unimportant compared to buffer
size and throughput.
Tom C.
>From: Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next ca
om: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
>Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:28:56 -0400
>
>Anyone who shoots indoor events, including weddings,
I think you're exactly right, Tom.
Sure there are a few who really need high ISO performance: sports pros
often shoot football games with a 600/4 and 2x teleconverter under
stadium lighting at night. Closed down 1 f-stop to recover some
sharpness, they're at f/11 and shooting fast action.
But
Bill Owens wrote:
> I think you're exactly right, Tom.
>
> Sure there are a few who really need high ISO performance: sports pros
> often shoot football games with a 600/4 and 2x teleconverter under
> stadium lighting at night. Closed down 1 f-stop to recover some
> sharpness, they're at f/11 a
: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
>Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 12:59:15 -0400 (EDT)
>
>Tom C wrote:
>
> >Most of you guys are missing my point, or maybe I'm not
> >acknowledging that I get yours.
> >
Anyone who shoots indoor events, including weddings, can benefit from
good high ISO performance. And even family pics and portraits are
much nicer in available light. I think high ISO performance is a good
plus for most photographers. That being said I'm far less offended by
noise and/or gr
Tom C wrote:
>Most of you guys are missing my point, or maybe I'm not
>acknowledging that I get yours.
>
>I'm just trying to say that high ISO quality seems to viewed as a
>holy grail in digital photography, and my perception, right, wrong,
I think you're exactly right, Tom.
Sure there are a f
or my kind of photgraphy it doesn't work near as well as a lower ISO and a
>> tripod.
>>
>> Tom C.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail
tate the use of high ISO.
>
> Tom C.
>
>
>> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
>>
> dictate the use of high ISO.
>
> Tom C.
>
>
>> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next
>> camer
Heck, I've finally learned to compose for the 35mm frame, and unlike
some people I know the 6x9 format well predates the popularity of 35mm
double frame cameras.
John Sessoms wrote:
> From: Toralf Lund
>
>
>> graywolf wrote:
>>
>>> Or something like a 24x30 or 24x32 frame?
>>>
>>>
l List
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 11:12:35 -0400
Tri-X heads shooting available light were always looking for more speed.
It was the content that counted not so much the quality. I find that
both the
t; For my kind of photgraphy it doesn't work near as well as a lower ISO and a
> tripod.
>
> Tom C.
>
>
>
>
>> From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: R
Tom C wrote:
> Certainly... I understand. Given that you could achieve your desired
> results, would you opt for a lower or higher ISO? My guess is one usually
> opts for the lowest ISO possible.
>
> For me personally, if I could get a FF DLSR that was great at ISO 200 - 800,
> comparable to t
Adam Maas wrote:
> Tom C wrote:
>
>> With the caveat regarding who knows about Pentax?...
>>
>> I'd take a full frame sensor that did very well between 200 - 400 ISO any
>> day (ISO 800) w/b nice, over any sensor that had marginal high ISO [ ... ]
>>
>>
>
> I get results at ISO1600+ on fi
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C"
Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
> Certainly... I understand. Given that you could achieve your desired
> results, would you opt for a lower or higher ISO? My guess is one usually
> opts
John Francis wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 21, 2007 at 07:48:17PM -0600, Tom C wrote:
>> With the caveat regarding who knows about Pentax?...
>>
>> I'd take a full frame sensor that did very well between 200 - 400 ISO any
>> day (ISO 800) w/b nice, over any sensor that had marginal high ISO
>> performance
;
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
>Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 01:24:17 -0400
>
>On Sun, Oct 21, 2007 at 07:48:17PM -0600, Tom C wrote:
> > With the caveat regarding who kno
On Sun, Oct 21, 2007 at 07:48:17PM -0600, Tom C wrote:
> With the caveat regarding who knows about Pentax?...
>
> I'd take a full frame sensor that did very well between 200 - 400 ISO any
> day (ISO 800) w/b nice, over any sensor that had marginal high ISO
> performance at 1600 and above. I fin
ply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
>Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 22:13:28 -0400
>
>A shot that I consider one of the best of my career was at 3200. But
>I don't get all bent out of
John Sessoms wrote:
> From: Toralf Lund
>
>> graywolf wrote:
>>> Or something like a 24x30 or 24x32 frame?
>>>
>> Or 24x28, even?
>>
>> Yes, a change of aspect ratio would be interesting. I wonder what the
>> reaction would be...
>
> Stunned horror followed by extreme outrage.
>
I dunno, I
From: Toralf Lund
> graywolf wrote:
>> Or something like a 24x30 or 24x32 frame?
>>
> Or 24x28, even?
>
> Yes, a change of aspect ratio would be interesting. I wonder what the
> reaction would be...
Stunned horror followed by extreme outrage.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C"
Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
>
> Who *seriously* shoots at ISO1600+ and gets results they would rave about?
> For my kind of photgraphy it doesn't work near as well as a lower I
ce of high ISO films.
>>
>> Who *seriously* shoots at ISO1600+ and gets results they would rave
>> about?
>> For my kind of photgraphy it doesn't work near as well as a lower
>> ISO and a
>> tripod.
>>
>> Tom C.
>>
>>
>>
>
; Who *seriously* shoots at ISO1600+ and gets results they would rave
> about?
> For my kind of photgraphy it doesn't work near as well as a lower
> ISO and a
> tripod.
>
> Tom C.
>
>
>
>> From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To:
Tom C wrote:
> With the caveat regarding who knows about Pentax?...
>
> I'd take a full frame sensor that did very well between 200 - 400 ISO any
> day (ISO 800) w/b nice, over any sensor that had marginal high ISO
> performance at 1600 and above. I find any photo I take at 1600 or higher
> wi
l as a lower ISO and a
tripod.
Tom C.
>From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
>Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 11:47:22 -0400 (EDT)
>
&
Make that my existing 4x5 camera, the Graphic from 1952.
graywolf wrote:
> No thanks, I want to use it on my existing camera. However that is about the
> price I would want to pay for it.
>
> Your thing I could do manually with my existing digital at no cost, but since
> I
> am not into stilll
Quote:
>Hi Thibouille,
>
>
>I do not know how latest the sensor is, but the Chinese site is talking
>quite in detail about the spec and the expected price (So, I was told. I do
>not read Chinese :-).
>
>I noted it is 3fps which is on par with 5D which indicates it should not be
>an obsolete senso
No thanks, I want to use it on my existing camera. However that is about the
price I would want to pay for it.
Your thing I could do manually with my existing digital at no cost, but since I
am not into stilllifes much it would not help me a lot.
Sandy Harris wrote:
> On 10/21/07, graywolf <[
graywolf wrote:
> Or something like a 24x30 or 24x32 frame?
>
Or 24x28, even?
Yes, a change of aspect ratio would be interesting. I wonder what the
reaction would be...
> Toralf Lund wrote:
>
>
>> On the other hand, as perhaps someone mentioned earlier, there's a lot
>> between 1.5x and 1.
But that'll just add to the cost ot the camera.
:-)
Cheers,
Dave
On 10/21/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If they go full frame I want the aperture simulator back. :-P
>
> Mark Roberts wrote:
> > David Savage wrote:
> >
> >
> >> On 10/21/07, Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If they go full frame I want the aperture simulator back. :-P
Mark Roberts wrote:
> David Savage wrote:
>
>
>> On 10/21/07, Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> According to Ken Takeshita:
>>>
>>> Seems there's a strong rumour in Japan that Pentax would go
>>> with Cypress 14Mpix
Adam Maas wrote:
>Not only an old sensor, but one with extremely poor high ISO
performance
>(it's the Sensor Kodak used in the DCS14n, DCS/n and DCS/c).
Well they may have improved it since then: The data sheet shows it's
been revised, January 2007 -- they've nearly doubled the frame rate
fro
Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote:
> On 10/21/07, Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> According to Ken Takeshita:
>>
>> Seems there's a strong rumour in Japan that Pentax would go with
>> Cypress 14Mpix FF sensor.
>>
>> It seems someone is going to use that sensor and since Pentax is the
>> only
On 10/21/07, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> *Whatever* Pentax does will piss off a lot of people. Use the
> Cypress sensor. Not use the Cypress sensor. Go full-frame, not go
> full-frame. etc.
Mark!
So very true.
Cheers,
Dave
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pd
2007/10/21, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Dave: *Whatever* Pentax does will piss off a lot of people. Use the
> Cypress sensor. Not use the Cypress sensor. Go full-frame, not go
> full-frame. etc.
>
> ;-)
True ! :)
--
Thibault Massart aka Thibouille
--
K10D,Z1,SuperA
David Savage wrote:
>On 10/21/07, Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> According to Ken Takeshita:
>>
>> Seems there's a strong rumour in Japan that Pentax would go
>>with Cypress 14Mpix FF sensor.
>>
>> It seems someone is going to use that sensor and since Pentax
>> is the only brand not "
I'd like it. I'd be very happy with FF, but it doesn't seem logical.
However, I'm now going to hold off on buying any DA* lenses until I
know more. (Other than the 60-250, which is my most lusted after
anway -- if not my most needed.) But rumors of this sort are a sure
way to put the damper
Yes but maybe the equivallent with updated tech?
I can't read Japanese so really I can't say much and Babelfish is
absolutely of no help at all.
I know lenses are problem but I suppose a part of the fuel to this
rumour is indeed the recent delay introduced when DA*200/300 should
have been launched
On 10/21/07, Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> According to Ken Takeshita:
>
> Seems there's a strong rumour in Japan that Pentax would go with
> Cypress 14Mpix FF sensor.
>
> It seems someone is going to use that sensor and since Pentax is the
> only brand not "affiliated" with any sensor br
That thing would never land into a K20D IMO but an hypothetical
K5D/K1D, why not ;) ?
2007/10/21, David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 10/21/07, Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > According to Ken Takeshita:
> >
> > Seems there's a strong rumour in Japan that Pentax would go with
> > Cypr
On 10/21/07, Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> According to Ken Takeshita:
>
> Seems there's a strong rumour in Japan that Pentax would go with
> Cypress 14Mpix FF sensor.
>
> It seems someone is going to use that sensor and since Pentax is the
> only brand not "affiliated" with any sensor br
According to Ken Takeshita:
Seems there's a strong rumour in Japan that Pentax would go with
Cypress 14Mpix FF sensor.
It seems someone is going to use that sensor and since Pentax is the
only brand not "affiliated" with any sensor brand for now...
http://news.fengniao.com/69/691199.html
http://
It might be a reflection of things at home.
Is your granddaughter in that "No" stage Paul?
:-)
Cheers,
Dave
On 10/21/07, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> These one word answers aren't giving me much fuel for a rebuttal Paul. ;-)
>
> Tom C.
>
> >From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
>
> > provides an
> > upgrade path for APS-C body owners, while a 645 upgrade means
> > starting over.
> >
> > What will they actually do? The CEO hasn't told me. :-)
> >
> > Tom C.
> >
> >
> >> From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTE
st <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next
>> camera(s)
>> Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 08:06:27 -0400
>>
>> No.
>> On Oct 20, 2007
On 10/21/07, graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I want a full frame portable all in one back for my 4x5. It does not have to
> be
> high resolution, 4000x5000 will do fine for me.
>
> How's that for a dream?
Good one.
More realistic: how about a little robotic device that manages using
a dig
ing over.
What will they actually do? The CEO hasn't told me. :-)
Tom C.
>From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
>Date: Sat
Or something like a 24x30 or 24x32 frame?
Toralf Lund wrote:
>
> On the other hand, as perhaps someone mentioned earlier, there's a lot
> between 1.5x and 1.0x. It's been reported here that the DA lenses
> generally cover very nearly the image circle required by 35mm film, so
> perhaps they w
I want a full frame portable all in one back for my 4x5. It does not have to be
high resolution, 4000x5000 will do fine for me.
How's that for a dream?
Rebekah wrote:
> Hopefully a new camera will drive down the price of the K10 :)
>
>> But this 'I want FF' thing is really out of proportion IM
entax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next
>> camera(s)
>> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 23:49:10 +
>>
>> Tom,
>> You know Hoya management? Can you introduce them to the rest of us?
>> Paul
>> --
On 19/10/07, Tom C, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Is there any camera on the market that has a 1.2/1.3 crop at the moment? It
>does not make sense to me to shoot for somewhere between APS-C and FF. You
>wouldn't *need* new lenses of course...
As others have already posted,
The Leica M8:
No. But I read publicly available industry reports and news items and am
referring to what I read. Good enough?
Tom C.
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next cam
On 10/20/07, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just can't see Hoya management, more pragmatic than the former
> Pentax mgmt., going down a risky road with a 645D.
Given the recent news that the 645D project, while not scrapped, was
'no longer a priority for Pentax.' (Hiroshi Onoda, European gen
On 10/20/07, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >From: "David Savage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Also, why is everyone assuming that the 645D will be so much cheaper
> >than the current products on the market?
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
> >Dave
> >
>
> Have to say it:
>
> >Also, why is everyone assuming that t
So is the Cotty cam.
Sandy Harris wrote:
> On 10/20/07, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> Is there any camera on the market that has a 1.2/1.3 crop at the moment? It
>> does not make sense to me to shoot for somewhere between APS-C and FF. You
>> wouldn't *need* new lenses of course...
>
The same people who will spend twice list price for used equipment on
e-Bay that is still available new through B&H and Adorama. What is e-Bay
if not the ultimate garage sale?
Tom C wrote:
> And just who will buy it at $999 when it can be had for $599? I want
> to meet those people, because I h
On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 12:21:49PM -0600, Tom C wrote:
> I can't see non-645 owners jumping to a 645D in masses.
> The 645D would be a low volume seller compared to a 24 x 36 FF body. . .
That's a big assumption; I'm by no means convinced you are right.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml
he center of a lens has always been optimized for the center of the image
> circle it projects. :-)
>
> Tom C.
>
> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> >Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about
Canon 1D series, Leica M8.
One never "needs" new lenses. You only have to think creatively and
use the lenses you have. You might not be able to do *exactly* what
you used to do, but for many that's not really such a terrible thing
to deal with... ;-)
Photographers shouldn't be so equipment
The center of a lens has always been optimized for the center of the image
circle it projects. :-)
Tom C.
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
>Da
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The market changes fast. I think Pentax missed the mark with the 645D.
> If
> it was released 2 years ago it might have had a chance.
No chance at all. It would have been far too expensive. Only when the cost
is right will a 64
[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 2:23 PM
Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
> Mafud? (whoops)...
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Given the reports on Hoya's management priorities, I can't see them
> allowing
> Pentax to embark down a road on a niche-market, low-volume product.
According to Pentax and subsequently Hoya they want to be niche maker
concent
Mafud? (whoops)...
Tom C.
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
>Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:48:15 +
>
>colostomy bag?
> ---
May be, but relative comparisons like that don't necessarially fly with
those holding the purse strings.
Tom C.
>From: Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about s
Pentax basically ignored the 35mm market for several decades and did have a
respectable MF presence. Where has that gotten them to today?
Tom C.
>From: jtainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: "pdml@pdml.net"
>Subject: Re: Next m
And just who will buy it at $999 when it can be had for $599? I want to meet
those people, because I have some items in my garage I'd like to get rid of.
Tom C.
From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Not exactly free fall, you can find it for $599, (after rebate), but a
lot of places are
Tom C.
>From: Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
>Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:41:07 -0400
>
>Tom,
>
>One thing you are forgett
st"
Subject: RE: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 21:05:53 +0200
Tom Wrote:
Are you sure those lenses are in production? Designed maybe, but I would
think otherwise in the same status as the 645D. They're not making lenses
for
Mafud? (whoops)...
Tom C.
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
>Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:48:15 +
>
>colostomy bag?
> ---
t;To: "pdml@pdml.net"
>Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
>Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:58:38 -0600 (GMT-06:00)
>
>"It's been reported here that the DA lenses generally cover very nearly the
>image circle required by 35mm fil
wouldn't *need* new lenses of course...
>
>
> Tom C.
>
>> From: jtainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: "pdml@pdml.net"
>> Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
>
From: "David Savage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 03:32:52 +0800
On 10/20/07, Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&
From: "David Savage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 03:32:52 +0800
On 10/20/07, Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&
se I think.
Tom C.
From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:38:17 -0400
645 bodies and lenses are gone from the Pent
On 10/20/07, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there any camera on the market that has a 1.2/1.3 crop at the moment? It
> does not make sense to me to shoot for somewhere between APS-C and FF. You
> wouldn't *need* new lenses of course...
Leica M8 is 1.33 or so.
--
Sandy Harris,
Nanjing, C
Comments below:
Tom C.
From: Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Subject: RE: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 21:05:53 +0200
Tom Wrote:
Are you sure tho
Pentax basically ignored the 35mm market for several decades and did have a
respectable MF presence. Where has that gotten them to today?
Tom C.
>From: jtainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: "pdml@pdml.net"
>Subject: Re: Next m
t;To: "pdml@pdml.net"
>Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
>Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:58:38 -0600 (GMT-06:00)
>
>"It's been reported here that the DA lenses generally cover very nearly the
>image circle required by 35mm fil
From: jtainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> > >> To: "pdml@pdml.net"
> > >> Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
> > >> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:18:18 -0600 (
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Pentax basically ignored the 35mm market for several decades and did
> have a respectable MF presence. Where has that gotten them to today?
I think it is wrong to think medium format. Medium format used a certain
film type th
t; >> From: jtainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> >> To: "pdml@pdml.net"
> >> Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
> >> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:18:18 -0600 (GMT-06:00)
They're not really cameras anymore. They're optical computers. We think of
the LX as a camera circa 1980. We should think of the latest crop of digital
cameras as circa 10:30 AM.
Regards,
Bob...
"Art is not a reflection of reality. it is t
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Look at the K10D. :-) While I appreciate the low price, it's got to be
hard to make money on a body that depreciates by 50% in one year. It
makes me wonder if they are still in the production line. Some of the
stores selling at $99
t;> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: "pdml@pdml.net"
>> Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
>> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:18:18 -0600 (GMT-06:00)
>>
>> "645 bodies and lenses are gone from the Pentaxim
>From: "David Savage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
>Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
>Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 03:32:52 +0800
>
>On 10/20/07, Pål
Mafud? (whoops)...
Tom C.
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
>Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:48:15 +
>
>colostomy bag?
> ---
Pentax basically ignored the 35mm market for several decades and did
have a respectable MF presence. Where has that gotten them to today?
Tom C.
>From: jtainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: "pdml@pdml.net"
>Subject: Re: Next m
1 - 100 of 166 matches
Mail list logo