On Sunday, March 24, 2002, at 10:53 AM, frank theriault wrote:
If I had the money - well,
actually, if I had the money, I'd buy a 67,
...join the Brotherhood, Frank...
-Brother Aaron
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow
Pentax will never make a DSLR. They have concluded that digital cameras are a fad,
that will soon fade into oblivion. Instead, they will announce a new series of
professional APS cameras.
--
Daniel J. Matyola mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Stanley, Powers Matyola
I keep hearing this dis-embodied voice in my head...
It won't go away even when I line my bike helmet with aluminium foil...
Must resist. Must resist
It's futile.
Aaarrrggghhh!
-frank (not a Brother yet)
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
...join the Brotherhood, Frank...
-Brother Aaron
-
My comment was only a general one, because people very often fixate one one or
two items on a spec sheet. I had assumed that you hadn't done this.
--- Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not judging the camera by pixel count, I'm judging by the results I
saw, and I specifically did
Frank wrote:
I'm not sure what your point is.
Pentax' older gear satisfies my needs, at a fraction of the price of newer
equipment. As long as such high quality used gear is out there, I have no
intention of buying new. Is there something wrong with that? Or have I missed your
point?
Hi, Pal,
Thanks for clarifying. I'm not so self-absorbed to think that you were referring to
me in particular - or at all! vbg
And, to clarify my earlier post, I certainly am not one of those who thinks that
Pentax puts out junk, and that only their earlier stuff is somehow worthy. It's
23, 2002 9:32 AM
Subject: RE: Pentax digital SLR - Not now!
In fact, as films improve, our results get better and better.
Meanwhile, everyone I know whose digicam is more than two years old feels
like a chump.
JCO wrote:
Best thing about them oldies is they aren't obsolete (yet) even after
picture of
Norman Rockwell beating up a child. - S.W.
- Original Message -
From: Paul F. Stregevsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 8:32 AM
Subject: RE: Pentax digital SLR - Not now!
In fact, as films improve, our results get better and better
In a message dated 23-Mar-02 8:53:16 AM Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
half agree with this. Based on the number of pros who have switched over to
DSLRs, for things other than news, and their comments, the current DSLR's
image
quality is adequate for 99% of their work.
of Minolta SSM lenses. Minolta is
probably a more dangerous competitor for Pentax than Nikon and Canon.
Pål
- Original Message -
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 4:16 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax digital SLR - Not now!
- Original
Hi, Pal,
I'm not sure what your point is.
Pentax' older gear satisfies my needs, at a fraction of the price of newer equipment.
As long as such high quality used gear is out there, I have no
intention of buying new. Is there something wrong with that? Or have I missed your
point?
It
- Original Message -
From: frank theriault
Subject: Re: Pentax digital SLR - Not now!
Hi, Pal,
I'm not sure what your point is.
Pentax' older gear satisfies my needs, at a fraction of the
price of newer equipment. As long as such high quality used
gear is out there, I have
Isn't the Optios a 3+ megapixel camera? Looks pretty nice from what I've
seen.
Paul
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Bill, your comments ring ever so true.
I'm looking for a digital camera (!) with certain specs and features for
a specific long-term project. My first thought was to see what Pentax
Yes, the Optio 330 is a 3mp camera, but it doesn't offer the features
that I want. For example, one feature that's important is the ability
for the camera to take an accessory wide angle lens. The Optio doesn't
allow that, so I'm stuck with 37mm at the wide end. There's no TIFF
format, and
I gotta go along with your perspective here and I'm pleased to have it. . I
haven't paid much attention to the digital world. Although I scan most of m
color images and print them digitally. That's as far as I'm going for now.
Interestingly enough, many of the photographers who shoot cars for
My need is for some commercial and personal work, where quality is not
too critical, but some features are important. Frankly, I've not paid
much attention to it either, and am surprised at what I'm finding.
Even on supposedly higher-end cameras, image quality is pretty poor.
Chromatic
I assume that you've been looking at the $1000 digicams. The whole camera costs
about what just the sensor does in the SDLRs. You don't see that junk in the
DSLR files dpreview has on their site. Not all 3mp cameras are the same.
Judging a camera by just its pixel count is like judging a car
I'm not judging the camera by pixel count, I'm judging by the results I
saw, and I specifically did not mention 6mp DSLR cameras. They use
different lenses, to begin with - they use the same or similar lenses
that are used on 35mm SLR cameras.
Bruce Rubenstein wrote:
I assume that you've
I've been thinking about this lately and I'm in
no rush. Todays technology ( even with 6Mp ) isnt
as good as 35mm film capture. It's better to buy a
good 35mm film scanner if you want digital processing
as the resolution is way higher ( isnt 4000dpi roughly
equal to 24 Mp?). You can buy a great
JOC,Limited knowledge replie below.
Begin Original Message
Yes, I've heard the digitals are unable to
capture
extremely wide contrast scene. Also they have
an
exposure latitude more like slide film which is
not exactly a good thing.
Not having a lot of experience with slides,i
,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 10:05 PM
Subject: RE: Pentax digital SLR - Not now!
-Original
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of T Rittenhouse
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 11:26 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax digital SLR - Not now!
Hey, I am going to butt in and reply to this.
No, Dave's 8x10s ain't no where
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 12:04 AM
Subject: RE: Pentax digital SLR - Not now!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
23 matches
Mail list logo
