I'll bite.
Not I. Although I have an Optio a * ist D.
Kenneth Waller
-Original Message-
From: Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
At the risk of being bashed again me.
Christian
-Original Message-
From: graywolf [EMAIL
graywolf asked:
Here is a bit of a poll: How many of the folks on this list who have been
into
photography as a serious hobby for 5-10 or more years, and for whom it still
is
a serious hobby have 100% abandoned film?
My shooting is 100% film and will stay that way for some time. I only shoot
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
Bill, we understand your worry. Your job is on the line. I would
suggest your
local government agency that retrains folks for new jobs, except
that from my
experience they will only retrain you for another obsolete
Just about 5 years
Nope, I still like film better and the feel and performance of film
equipment better.
Here is a bit of a poll: How many of the folks on this list who
have been into
photography as a serious hobby for 5-10 or more years, and for
whom it still is
a serious hobby have 100%
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell
Subject: RE: Film is Dying? (was Pentax is Dying?)
READ! I said BW film. Black and White! Try shooting some Tech Pan
full frame with some really good lenses and find out what 35mm
film is capable of. The color films you just mentioned
- Original Message -
From: graywolf
Subject: Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
Bill, we understand your worry. Your job is on the line.
The last thing I am worried about is my job. It has become so bloody
frustrating that I could walk away from it tomorrow
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell
Subject: RE: Film is Dying? (was Pentax is Dying?)
Why start digital if you never used digital before? You have to
start everything at some point don't you?
Never shoot BW? Oh I see, but what if you wanted to try? By selling
ALL your film
- Original Message -
From: graywolf
Subject: Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
With all due respect, Bill, you are in the mass consumer film
market. I don't
believe anyone thinks that that is a viable business, long term.
I'm in the mass consumer market because the pro
Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Antonio Aparicio
Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is
Dying?
Whats to re-read. You say that film outnumbers digital in your part
of
the world, I say that film outnumbers digital in my part of the
world.
Not exactly rocket
I see, so that according to you new spin is meant to mean that as
things stand now more people are using film than digital, but that
more people are using digital than before and less are using film than
before - wow. I spent 4 years at a top English University and I would
never have guessed
Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:05:52 -0600
- Original Message -
From: graywolf
Subject: Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
Bill, we understand your worry. Your job is on the line.
The last thing I am worried about is my job. It has become so bloody
is Dying? (was Pentax is Dying?)
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell
Subject: RE: Film is Dying? (was Pentax is Dying?)
Why start digital if you never used digital before? You have to start
everything at some point don't you?
Never shoot BW? Oh I see, but what if you wanted to try
On 19/7/04, Christian, discombobulated, offered:
At the risk of being bashed again me.
Christian
Sorta like Chr*ist D ?
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
these days.)
- Original Message -
From: graywolf
Subject: Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
Bill, we understand your worry. Your job is on the line.
Something to think about though, there are still blacksmiths out
there, still
making a living.
Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
Bill, we understand your worry. Your job is on the line.
The last thing I am worried about is my job. It has become so bloody
frustrating that I could walk away from it tomorrow with no regrets.
Something to think about though, there are still blacksmiths out
On 19/7/04, David Miers, discombobulated, offered:
If Pentax goes under, most your major investment is in lenses anyways right?
Never fear, someone, somewhere will make you an adaptor to put it on a
different brand camera.
You rang?
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places,
What's a barista stand?
I guess if I knew what a barista was, I'd have it solved... g
keith whaley
Tom C wrote:
I'm considering opening my own barista stand on the state highway near
home. I suspect I would have little problem showing a before-tax profit
of 1000 USD/day Mon. - Fri.
Tom C.
the idiots in the world all to often... Thanks for reminding me.
-el gringo
-Original Message-
From: Gonz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 12:12 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax is Dying?
El Gringo wrote:
Maybe a thousand years from now,
science
Not an encouraging prospect for those who would like to continue working
with film. . .
Steve Desjardins wrote:
I really don't think film will die anytime soon. I pretty much agree
with Graywolf's predictions that the big players will leave and the
smaller ones will see their business go up.
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004, graywolf wrote:
Here is a bit of a poll: How many of the folks on this list who have
been into photography as a serious hobby for 5-10 or more years, and
for whom it still is a serious hobby have 100% abandoned film?
Not me. In fact in the last 12 months I shot more
You can choose to look at forced at home processing and optical printing as
a blessing or curse. The reality is you'll get better images. If you like
to machine gun through film using high speed film drives, well I doubt it's
for you. If you really think about each shot before squeezing it off,
Once again I must ask, Why. It makes more sense to put the FF sensor in
a 35mm size body, maybe with a dual
lens mount 645 and K mount but the 35mm lenses have a major advantage in
resolution.
DagT wrote:
På 16. jul. 2004 kl. 22.48 skrev Alan Chan:
there are probably other equally plausible
Here is a bit of a poll: How many of the folks on this list who have
been into photography as a serious hobby for 5-10 or more years, and
for whom it still is a serious hobby have 100% abandoned film?
Still using film. 100% film for weddings. Transparency films for stereo
slides and
On 18 Jul 2004 at 17:29, Amita Guha wrote:
Very true. It brought my husband back to SLR photography. He went
through 3 digital PSs before buying a ZX-50, because he missed having
that level of control. Problem is, he hated scanning the prints. Then
the 300D came out, months before the *istD.
digital camera.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Jerry Todd [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 1:25 AM
Subject: Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
From what I see, Mr. Robb, you live outside of the USA, and I'd suggest
that what you
On 19 Jul 2004 at 14:43, Tom Reese wrote:
You'll have to pry my MZ-S from my cold dead hands.
I sent mine to its new owner yesterday (with no remorse whatsoever), still got
2 LXen, maybe they'll be promoted to my display cabinet in short time.
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel
critical and allows for 85 deg f processing which is
very easy to achieve.
JCO
-Original Message-
From: Herb Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 7:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
i suggest you read some
pessimistic than Kodak and turned out to be more accurate.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Chris Stoddart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 7:09 AM
Subject: Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
So why can't there be fewer manufactuers still
: Pentax is Dying?
William and others on this list are a small part, almost a microcosm, of
the industry, and do not reflect, except by wishful thinking, the overall
market for film, paper, and the photographic process in general.
and temp critical and allows for 85 deg f processing
which is very easy to achieve. JCO
-Original Message-
From: Herb Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 7:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
i suggest you read some
Agfa has been trying to sell the film division for about 5 years. no-one is
remotely interested.
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
Ilford
years.
since Japanese manufacturers account for about 85% of all cameras made in
the world, that's what's going to happen.
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 12:05 PM
Subject: Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax
- Original Message -
From: Kenneth Waller
Subject: Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
Related to this thread, I read that most digitally captured images
are never
printed, just used for web posting and email,
The number I was told is something like 2% of digital images
I don't think film will completely die (I know it's another apples and
oranges comparison, but weren't printed books supposed to be going away
too?), but I'd have to agree that from the manufacturers' point of view
it's all about money--through planned obsolescence. It burns them up
that
On 17 Jul 2004 at 21:05, El Gringo wrote:
Sorry if this is old news but only came though a moment ago:
You're so negative Rob, why is that??
I guess I'm just older and wiser than yourself, give it time, you'll get there,
just don't be impatient :-)
It's scheduled for early 2005, not
No it doesn't in fact the cost/production curve on film is probably U
shaped. (For all you I/O economists out there,
and you can just try to prove me wrong). O:-)
Chris Stoddart wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004, Herb Chong wrote:
ink and paper won't because at least the same number of people using
Maybe, not even more expensive. Maybe less.
Norm Baugher wrote:
News flash - even if the big boys stop making film, as long as there
is demand, someone will meet it. There will always (and are) companies
that specialize in twilight markets and no, the cost will not be 20x
more expensive,
Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I really don't think film will die anytime soon. I pretty much agree
with Graywolf's predictions that the big players will leave and the
smaller ones will see their business go up. All processing will become
in your basement or by mail. As a smaller and
What's a Cotty? Did he convert to Canonism?
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 17. juli 2004 09:34
Til: pentax list
Emne: Re: Pentax is Dying?
On 17/7/04, Rob Studdert, discombobulated
meddelelse-
Fra: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 17. juli 2004 09:51
Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Emne: Film is Dying? (was Pentax is Dying?)
On 17 Jul 2004 at 9:34, Jens Bladt wrote:
Pentax isn't Dying. Film is, increasingly slowly at some stage perhaps,
but it's
still going down
. There will always be a place for portable systems, but
for
those who want the UTMOST quality, MF is the promised land.
-el gringo
-Original Message-
From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 7:22 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Pentax is Dying?
On 17
On 17/7/04, Herb Chong, discombobulated, offered:
i'm giving them until October to promise a high end DSLR body and a couple
of lenses of FA* quality with DA features. if not then, i can't wait and
continue to lose photos that i haven't been able to get purely because of
hardware limitations.
PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 8:19 PM
Subject: RE: Replacement for the FA 50 and 100 Macros? (Re: Pentax is Dying)
I guess most DSLR buyers are looking for practical and affordable lenses,
instead of luxury lenses like the Limited which really aim for manual
focus
buyers.
On 18 Jul 2004 at 7:41, Herb Chong wrote:
the ones that are paying attention to their images will discover that the
practical and affordable lenses are not good enough for the *istD. the lens
quality matters even more with a DSLR than with a film camera.
What makes you say this Herb?
All my
well, let's just say that i'm not optomistic either.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 6:23 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax is Dying
Ain't gonna happen Herb. I reckon the best you can hope for is the *ist D
Alan Chan wrote:
Some news from Taiwan retailers (or just rumour) suggested some Pentax FA
lenses were not manufactured anymore (like FA100/2.8 FA50/2.8 etc)
because
they are expecting new lenses to replace them. But then again, nobody can
confirm.
Just wait a few weeks and you'll see...
On 18 Jul 2004 at 14:12, Dario Bonazza wrote:
Just wait a few weeks and you'll see...
I'll be more disappointed than ever if they start fixing areas of the lens line-
up where it 'aint broke before they fix where it is i.e. down the wide/fast
end.
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel
-
From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 7:51 AM
Subject: Re: Replacement for the FA 50 and 100 Macros? (Re: Pentax is Dying)
What makes you say this Herb?
All my primes but for the FA24/2 seem up to the task.
I sold ALL my film bodies (6 cameras: LX, 3x MX, P3 and SuperProgram) to buy
my *ist D. I knew I'd never use film again! ;-)
Christian Skofteland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
So who here has shed their excess film bodies in view of the
Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll be more disappointed than ever if they start fixing areas of the lens
line-up where it 'aint broke before they fix where it is i.e. down the wide/fast
end.
Frankly, I have no problem with Pentax's lens lineup at all. I suppose
I'd rather like a fast
is Dying? (was Pentax is Dying?)
I sold ALL my film bodies (6 cameras: LX, 3x MX, P3 and SuperProgram) to
buy my *ist D. I knew I'd never use film again! ;-)
Christian Skofteland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
So who here has shed
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To
Then how do you do hi-res BW ?
u I don't? Did I before digital? hm, nope! ;-)
rhetorical question no answer expected.
oops!
6MP DSLRs still cant match fine grain BW 35mm film (yet).
Well it sure
]
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 9:07 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Film is Dying? (was Pentax is Dying?)
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To
Then how do you do hi-res BW ?
u I don't? Did I before digital? hm, nope! ;-)
rhetorical question
My point JCO, is that I never shot Tech Pan before so why would I start now?
And why would I compare it to the *ist D? Apples and Oranges. Even I can
see that. I implied that the D replaced film *for me* and the way *I* make
pictures. I make no assumptions for other people and their styles.
: Herb Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 7:19 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Replacement for the FA 50 and 100 Macros? (Re: Pentax is
Dying)
my observations while scanning a lot of slides, mostly Provia 100F.
acceptable lenses that seemed to deliver neglibly
? (was Pentax is Dying?)
I sold ALL my film bodies (6 cameras: LX, 3x MX, P3 and SuperProgram) to
buy
my *ist D. I knew I'd never use film again! ;-)
Christian Skofteland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
So who here has shed
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Film is Dying? (was Pentax is Dying?)
My point JCO, is that I never shot Tech Pan before so why would I start
now? And why would I compare it to the *ist D? Apples and Oranges.
Even I can see that. I implied that the D replaced film *for me* and
the way *I* make
: Pentax is
Dying)
Do you attribute this to rather unforgiving square pixels in digital as
versus the softer random edges in film grain? Most of my lenses are in
the adequate/good/very good category, I'd hate to think I'd get less
from them than I do now by going digital.
Don
-Original
? (Re: Pentax is Dying)
Do you attribute this to rather unforgiving square pixels in digital as
versus the softer random edges in film grain?
Most of my lenses are in the adequate/good/very good category, I'd hate to
think I'd get less from them than I do now by going digital.
, 2004 8:52 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Replacement for the FA 50 and 100 Macros? (Re: Pentax is
Dying)
that's one factor. the other is the automatic 1.5 magnification of the
center portion of the lens circle.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Don Sanderson [EMAIL
Ditto. I'm perfectly happy shooting BW, not worried what the digital
guys do I have a digital PS for snaps, but that's it for me.
Norm
Bill Owens wrote:
Hate to bring up the old film vs digital debate again, but...
There are those of here who are perfectly satisfied with digital, and others
-
From: Bill Owens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 1:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
Hate to bring up the old film vs digital debate again, but...
There are those of here who are perfectly satisfied with digital, and
others who
generators and anti-gravity generators, then maybe cameras
in the future will focus with perfectly formed gravity lenses...
-el gringo
-Original Message-
From: Antonio Aparicio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 11:11 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax is Dying
, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
Hate to bring up the old film vs digital debate again, but...
There are those of here who are perfectly satisfied with digital, and others
who are perfectly satisfied with film. It's doubtful that any of us will be
swayed from our current positions regardless
Bill wrote:Hate to bring up the old film vs digital debate again, but...
There are those of here who are perfectly satisfied with digital, and others
who are perfectly satisfied with film. It's doubtful that any of us will be
swayed from our current positions regardless of chemistry vs.
. Way, way, way, beyond and the istD
cant approch
what my $125 4x5 speed graphic can do with film, color or BW, NOW.
JCO
-Original Message-
From: El Gringo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 1:39 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Pentax is Dying?
Sorry, Thats
: Sunday, July 18, 2004 12:10 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax is Dying?
Gringo,
So film is limited by chemistry and digital sensors are limited by
physics. So what? At the end of the day they are just capture mediums,
and I have yet to see a digital sensor captures something that film
cannot. Plus
-Original Message-
From: Bill Owens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 12:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
Hate to bring up the old film vs digital debate again, but...
There are those of here who are perfectly satisfied with digital
Perhaps but I wasnt talking low end 35mm systems. I was talking 35mm
SLR vs digital APS SLR. Pentax *ist Film vs Pentax *istD, for arguments
sake each with the same glass.
A.
On 18 Jul 2004, at 19:39, El Gringo wrote:
Sorry, Thats bullshit. What you get from a digital PS camera easily
exceeds
cant approch
what my $125 4x5 speed graphic can do with film, color or BW, NOW.
JCO
-Original Message-
From: El Gringo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 1:39 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Pentax is Dying?
Sorry, Thats bullshit. What you get from a digital PS
that's one factor. the other is the automatic 1.5 magnification of the
center portion of the lens circle.
I'm not aware of magnification. It is a crop of the central part of the
lens circle, giving a field of view that looks like a 1.5x magnification.
Even the photography magazines seem to have
And maybee pigs will fly.
A.
On 18 Jul 2004, at 19:39, El Gringo wrote:
Maybe a thousand years from now,
science will invent a gravity generator, then a portable gravity
generator,
then tiny gravity generators and anti-gravity generators, then maybe
cameras
in the future will focus with
Alan wrote:
I read the patent for the 118/2.4 too last year but it doesn't make sense for Pentax
ro release another expensive Limited lens consider the last one (FA31/1.8) hasn't sold
that well.
REPLY:
I've no idea whether there will be more Limited lenses. I've heard though, that the
El Gringo wrote:
The 645 digital on the other hand
has massive potential. It could be made smaller than it is, more in the
range of a large 35mm, it could burst faster than any film MF camera, and it
has a real viewfinder, unlike the Mamiya 7. Not to mention that it has a
nice range of high
Message -
From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pdml [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: Replacement for the FA 50 and 100 Macros? (Re: Pentax is Dying)
that's one factor. the other is the automatic 1.5 magnification of the
center portion of the lens circle
with it.
Whew! I think I understood what I just said!
Don
-Original Message-
From: Joseph Tainter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 1:05 PM
To: pdml
Subject: Re: Replacement for the FA 50 and 100 Macros? (Re: Pentax is
Dying)
that's one factor. the other is the automatic
: Replacement for the FA 50 and 100 Macros? (Re: Pentax is
Dying)
But it seems that if you take the same information from a SMALLER
section of
the image circle,
Then enlarge that to the same size you would have using the FULL FRAME the
image circle is capable of,
you have magnified
Have you seen the new (?) Mamiya 7 II? Popular Photography July 2004
adv., page 7.
I have not yet compared to the model 7 (basic) but it does seem
comparatively small for a 6x7 cm camera...
They must be very expensive, as I can't find a hint of a price on their
web site.
keith whaley
Pål
Earlier Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Antonio wrote:
Not to mention the poor quality of those digital prints.
Here I must disagree. A properly printed digital print is equal in quality
to an average film print, up to 8x10 at least. Above 8x10 and for severe
crops I'll agree with you. Our
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Why start digital if you never used digital before? You have to
start everything at some point don't you?
huh? sure, but I have no interest in fine grained BW (see below)
Never shoot BW?
No, I've shot countless rolls
Antonio wrote:
Not to mention the poor quality of those digital prints.
Here I must disagree. A properly printed digital print is equal in quality
to an average film print, up to 8x10 at least. Above 8x10 and for severe
crops I'll agree with you. Our Frontier 375 minilab does a
The Mamiya 7II is the current model, the 7 was replaced by it about 3-4 years
ago. A 6x7 range finder camera with fabulous (by all reports) lenses. Yes it is
expensive, ridiculously so in the US, but many people think the image quality is
worth the money. Some think of it as a decendant of the
-Original Message-
From: John Francis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 3:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax is Dying?
Antonio wrote:
Not to mention the poor quality of those digital prints.
Here I must disagree. A properly printed digital print is equal
I think the 7 is a follow on from the Mamiya 6 actually.
Antonio
On 18 Jul 2004, at 21:19, graywolf wrote:
Some think of it as a decendant of the Mamiya Press, but I would call
it more of a direct decendant of the Simon Omega Rapid, Koni-Omega,
Rapid Omega 100 (made by Mamiya) line of cameras.
Hi,
El Gringo wrote:
snicker
do that. Also, digital sensors are limited by physics, but there may be a
day when there is a sensor for every photon of light.
I'm not sure you are saying what you mean.
snak)
up significantly?? Decades ago?? What about digital?? A few months ago,
and not only
I stand corrected. Not having seen one of the prints you refer to i was
guided by poor quality stuff you get on the high-street. Obviously
there is more to it than that.
A.
On 18 Jul 2004, at 20:08, Bill Owens wrote:
Antonio wrote:
Not to mention the poor quality of those digital prints.
Here I
LOL!
mike wilson wrote:
So, if I don't _need_ one, why should I buy one now if a better one will
come along next month? That would be a remarkably stupid action by your
predictions. Except, if I and many others don't, what you prophesy will
not come to pass. I managed to destroy APS and disc
Hi,
Sunday, July 18, 2004, 9:33:52 PM, Antonio wrote:
I stand corrected. Not having seen one of the prints you refer to i was
guided by poor quality stuff you get on the high-street. Obviously
there is more to it than that.
You should pay attention at exhibitions. There are some
From: Antonio Aparicio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Also, an angle not mentioned is the renewed interest folks are having
in photography generally as a result of digital- perhaps it
will be the
saviour of film and not the other way around...
Very true. It brought my husband back to SLR
PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 1:04 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax is Dying?
And maybee pigs will fly.
A.
On 18 Jul 2004, at 19:39, El Gringo wrote:
Maybe a thousand years from now,
science will invent a gravity generator, then a portable gravity
generator,
then tiny gravity
Hi,
Digital could be doomed..
Absolutely! I mean, the best they've been able to come up with so far
is the one on Hubble, and that can't resolve anything smaller than a
galaxy. Crap!
--
Cheers,
Bob
PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax is Dying?
Hi,
El Gringo wrote:
snicker
do that. Also, digital sensors are limited by physics, but there may be a
day when there is a sensor for every photon of light.
I'm not sure you are saying what you mean.
snak)
up significantly?? Decades ago?? What about
to do
TTL view finding with digital quite obviously... Thats my point really, I
would love to see a Mamiya 7 III with a 14+ MP sensor.
-el gringo
-Original Message-
From: graywolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 2:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax
Will do, living in small village surrounded by the sea on one side and
by desert on the other on the south-eastern spanish coast its not that
easy to do - but will watch out for the prints next time I am at one in
London.
A.
On 18 Jul 2004, at 23:29, Bob W wrote:
Hi,
Sunday, July 18, 2004,
Ah, but isn't the Galaxy doomed?
A.
On 18 Jul 2004, at 23:53, Bob W wrote:
Hi,
Digital could be doomed..
Absolutely! I mean, the best they've been able to come up with so far
is the one on Hubble, and that can't resolve anything smaller than a
galaxy. Crap!
--
Cheers,
Bob
backwards fools, the rest of us are
moving
forward.*
-el gringo
-Original Message-
From: Antonio Aparicio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 1:04 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax is Dying?
And maybee pigs will fly.
A.
On 18 Jul 2004, at 19:39, El Gringo wrote:
Maybe
Lets not forget that the Pentax 645 system IS portable. In fact it weights
no more than comparable Nikon/Canon high-end slr systems. The 645 is down
right small compared to EOS-1Ds or similar! I'm sure Pentax will make a 645
DSLR even smaller.
Without the film transport mechanisms, it is quite
By then time viewers will have been invented so there won't be a need for photographs
as you can just set your picture frame to show any scene from any viewpoint at any
time.
Nick
-Original Message-
On 18 Jul 2004, at 19:39, El Gringo wrote:
Maybe a thousand years from
Hah! The same way they dealt with power supply issues with the *ist
Dlet the owners worry about it! Many other DSLR's come with
rechargeable batteries (or they are at least available for them), but
not the *ist D. This is a major let down IMHO. The ability to use of
AA's is great, but not
On 18 Jul 2004 at 21:40, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
Makes no sense, for same AOV you are using shorter lenses and
have a smaller reproduction ratio with APS size formatvs FF 35mm. DOF
should not be same as 35mm full frame format. It should be more DOF
than 35mm.
It might be a greater DOF in
201 - 300 of 387 matches
Mail list logo
