On 19/1/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
>Well, if I get an e-mail wherein the subject line thanks me for buying them
>lunch, I ~know~ it's gotta be fake!!
So Frank is it true that you have the deepest pockets and the shortest
arms east of the Rockies? ;-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O)
On 19/1/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
>>Oh my GOD Robert, I just opened a PIF file - and guess what happened ?!?!?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Cheers,
>> Cotty
>
>
>
>I don't know :o)
>
>You won a million dollars?
I wish.
What happened?
Nothing.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Pla
on 20.01.04 0:08, Cotty at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Oh my GOD Robert, I just opened a PIF file - and guess what happened ?!?!?
Nothing? ;-)
Sometimes it is really good to be different :-)
--
Best Regards
Sylwek
Keith Whaley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Not being a PC person, I visited Google.
>They said, in defining a ".pif" file:
>
> Short for Program InFormation file, a type of file that
> holds information about how Windows should run a
> non-Windows application. For example, a PIF fi
Since this is a Windows "how to work" file, why is it necessarily
associated with virii?
I know I'm missing something here, but it has always seemed to me that a
.pif file, by itself, is not an indicator of the presence of a virus.
Are .pif files carriers of viruses? What?
keith
Not being a virolo
Not being a PC person, I visited Google.
They said, in defining a ".pif" file:
Short for Program InFormation file, a type of file that
holds information about how Windows should run a
non-Windows application. For example, a PIF file can
contain instructions for exec
Oh my GOD Robert, I just opened a PIF file - and guess what happened ?!?!?
Cheers,
Cotty
I don't know :o)
You won a million dollars?
I do not claim that you can avoid ALL viruses but often they follow a
pattern. PIFs are good give-away it might be a virus. Another one is a
general refer
ubject: Re: VIRUS: "Re: Pentax needs USM and IS"
> Patrick White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > FYI, this message had a virus attached (well, that's _my_ interpretation
of
> >having a file named "031013-2141.cl5.pif" attached means :-)
>
On 19/1/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
>At 02:08 PM 19/01/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>>Patrick White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > FYI, this message had a virus attached (well, that's _my_
>> interpretation of
>> >having a file named "031013-2141.cl5.pif" attached means :-)
>
>
>
>I
iesti-
Lähettäjä: mapson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Päivä: 19. tammikuuta 2004 22:45
Aihe: Re: VIRUS: "Re: Pentax needs USM and IS"
>At 02:08 PM 19/01/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>>Patrick White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
At 02:08 PM 19/01/2004 -0500, you wrote:
Patrick White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> FYI, this message had a virus attached (well, that's _my_
interpretation of
>having a file named "031013-2141.cl5.pif" attached means :-)
If anyone opens a PIF file they asked for it!
(*)o(*)
FYI, this message had a virus attached (well, that's _my_ interpretation of
having a file named "031013-2141.cl5.pif" attached means :-)
later,
patbob
On Monday 19 January 2004 09:21 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi
> Roland is right. I have just the same opinion. There is time when so
p; S)
Newbies are very fascinated with these new-fangled slr thingies, end result
a new photographer.
Feroze
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 5:44 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax needs USM and IS
> I hope you're
It took me 8 weeks to get one, and that was direct from the distributor.
Feroze
- Original Message -
From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 5:37 PM
Subject: RE: Good-bye Pentax (was: Pentax needs USM and IS)
D]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 7:20 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax needs USM and IS
I think the MZ-S is very inexpensive for its construction quality and
capabilities.
Lists of specifications are no way to choose a camera.
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com
"Paul Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I think one difference between the EOS-3 and MZ-S that should be considered
>is the external build quality. The MZ-S is quite solid as far as newer
>cameras go and the EOS-3 feels like plastic junk, I have shot both of these
>cameras and there is no compari
After which, they produced the rest of the MZ/ZX line looking like, not
quite Rebel clones but at least Rebel cousins.
The MZ-5 is significant not because its a flagship or it looked special, but
the fact that it put Pentax back into the game again after years of struggle
with the Z/PZ series (a
stated that this year would be different; so far, it has been - let's hope
that it continues and Pentax will prove me, and all the others out there
hoping for something special, wrong.
Cheers,
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Keith Whaley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 20
Kenneth Waller wrote:
>
> Huh?
> Kenneth Waller
> - Original Message -
> From: "David Chang-Sang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 7:57 PM
> Subject: RE: Pentax needs USM and IS
>
> > Pe
Huh?
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: "David Chang-Sang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 7:57 PM
Subject: RE: Pentax needs USM and IS
> Pentax's current "flagship" - MZ-S - is, even by th
i wasn't kidding.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 15:34
Subject: Re: Pentax needs USM and IS
>
> - Original Message -----
> Subject: Re: Pentax need
--- Brendan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rob brings up a good point abou the frequency of USM
> lenses, now how are these suppposed to be good for
> wild life if your running around the forest with the
> equivalent of a dog whislte making a racket?
>
He just may have been talking about his own
Ro
EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Good-bye Pentax (was: Pentax needs USM and IS)
This point was discussed years ago by Canon nature and wildlife shooters
on photo.net and there was no problem with ultra sonic lens noise.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Rob brings up a good point abou the frequency of USM
This point was discussed years ago by Canon nature and wildlife shooters
on photo.net and there was no problem with ultra sonic lens noise.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rob brings up a good point abou the frequency of USM
lenses, now how are these suppposed to be good for
wild life if your runni
Hi!
Boz, I am sorry I am a little late with reply. It seems that there
were no virus on my computer after all, but hotpop is indeed behaving
strangely.
Anyway, I am sorry to see you go. With all honesty I realize that you
might as well disappear from PDML, since this is mainly technical
list. I h
Bruce when was the last time you saw a Sport Illustrated photographer using a
Pentax. Never will. That's my point. Pentax is not trying to compete in that
market. It's competing for amateurs and does a fine job with it If you
want to shoot with the big boys go and get a big boy camera. My ca
the fact that most members here know how to focus a camera without its help puts us
well above average.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 10:18
Subject: Re: Pentax needs USM and IS
> Herb: with
Bruce Rubenstein wrote:
The PUG? Try Sports Illustrated, not a gallery of hobbyists.
Whoahaaa. All the skill involved there can be resumed to keeping the
subject in the viewfinder and the shutter release button pressed down. A
movie camera would be much more appropriate.
Why don't we take some
Herb: with all due respect, and I know I'm going to get lambasted with this
comment. I have to disagree here. I would not say that PUG represents a group
significantly above average. We would all like to think we are, and if we
tell ourselves that enough we begin to believe it. But I don't buy i
I think it's important to remember that it is, IN MOST CASES, not different
NEEDS but different WANTS. There is a big difference
Vic
In a message dated 3/18/03 12:03:56 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>Bill,
>
>Some people are still doing it the same good old fashioned way. But some
>
>other
Hear! Hear!
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: "Greene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 11:21 AM
Subject: Re: Good-bye Pentax (was: Pentax needs USM and IS)
>
>
Can't say that I blame you, Boz.
Funny thing is most of us on this list are 'serious' photographers. Pentax
has pretty much abandoned that segment of the market. That may be a sound
marketing decision on their part, but it really means that the enthusiastic
Pentax user has been abandoned. Camera c
USM and IS are just icing. You seem to think that people sit down with a
few spec sheets, measure the length of the feature list and make their
decision. I don't think it works that way. After 4 years I still don't
have a lens with either (although a AF-S lens would be nice). Still the
best mo
The PUG? Try Sports Illustrated, not a gallery of hobbyists. Stop with
the self serving sample group. The shots you can't get with your
antiques, somebody else will. They get the shot and the job, you get
squat. If you want to be in "qualification limbo" (not bad for.., pretty
good considering.
On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:51:33 +0100, Boz wrote:
>
> Best wishes to all and thanks for all I've learned from you!
> To all KMP contributors most sincere thanks!
>
> Bojidar Dimitrov
If I may add my small voice to the chorus,
thanks for something that's pulled back
many, many veils over the few sh
Hi
Roland is right. I have just the same opinion. There is time when someone suddenly
discover he is afford/needs to have sth better and also discovers that Pentax does not
have USM and IS and that the prices of glass is even higher than Nikon/Canon. So even
having MZS one decides to switch to
From: Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 13:46:39 +0100
The *ist D won't be cheap. It will probably cost slightly more than >the
Canon D10. A Pentax rep told me that the estimated price here in >Norway
was about 20.000Nkr (~£1700), about twice as much as it needed >to cost in
On March 18, 2003 02:58 am, Roland Mabo wrote:
> From: Nick Zentena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> >Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 17:12:55 -0500
> >
> > Great now define the market. Ask 100 people here and I bet >you'll get
> > 101 different answers. Maybe 201.
>
> Since many are choosing Canon or Nikon beca
Cameron wrote:
The MZ-S was beautiful, but flawed; the *ist D is way too late, and it better be cheap
because it's last years' technology, and the *ist has some nice features but is
extremely tacky looking.
REPLY:
Mostly right on. However, the MZ-S was basically the right camera but should ha
Dave wrote:
Pentax's current "flagship" - MZ-S - is, even by those on this list,
considered a failure.
Pentax's last decent model was the MZ-5n IMHO.
REPLY:
Huh? The MZ-S is described as more sucessful than anticipated in market. It sales
aren't huge but if you look at the price the reason why
I love it. You guys keep talking about how bad the MZ-S is.
When you get the price into the $350-400 range,
I'm gonna have a new flagship for the price of an LX. ;-)
Regards, Bob S.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >Pentax's current "flagship" - MZ-S - is, even by those on this list,
> >conside
<< Oh yes, I do own a Pentax that I think is beautiful but a bit tacky in
design. It's a transparent SF1 with a transparent zoom lens. Everything
works on it but I can't take pictures with film because the film would be
fogged. The camera and lens is on prominent display in my home. I get
Jim Apilado wrote:
>
> How many look at your cameras when you are out?
I've had more attention from my 6x7 in the last 4 months than I have had
from any other camera in 20 years. Almost invariably if I set up the beast
on the tripod some wag pops up with variations of 'Are you taking a
photograph
- Original Message -
From: "David Chang-Sang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 10:57 AM
Subject: RE: Pentax needs USM and IS
> Pal;
>
> Pentax's current "flagship" - MZ-S - is, even by those o
-- -Original Message-
-- From: Alan Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 12:06 AM
--
-- >Pentax's current "flagship" - MZ-S - is, even by those on this list,
-- >considered a failure.
--
-- I think the MZ-S has come a little too late, just like many
-- Pentax prod
- Original Message -
From: "Caveman"
Subject: What I lust for (was Re: Pentax needs USM and IS)
>
> I don't know what Pentax actually needs, and it's not my business to
> decide it anyway. But I definitely know that I'm eyeing a Bronica GS-1.
> I&#
Pentax's current "flagship" - MZ-S - is, even by those on this list,
considered a failure.
I think the MZ-S has come a little too late, just like many Pentax products
in the past. If it had been released 2 years earlier, it might receive a
much better welcome. Timing is critical, but Pentax don't
Reminds me of going into B&H the last few times I was in NYC and having
everyone wanting to try out the LX or two I was carrying ;-)
Cesar
Panama City, Florida
-- -Original Message-
-- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 5:33 PM
--
--
-- Jim Apil
the PUG isn't remotely close to being representative. it represents a level of
technical expertise significantly above average.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 23:45
Subject: Re: Pentax needs
In a message dated 3/17/03 1:18:33 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
All of this talk about how important USM, IS, FPS makes me wonder how in
the
hell did anybody ever take a decent photograph with a 620 folder, 35mm
rangefinder or even a Speed Graphic.
Bill,
Some people are still doing it the same g
Oh come on Bruce. That's way overboard. Sure there are pictures taken today
with modern autofocus lenses that could not be taken today, but i would guess
that 80 per cent of the pictures taken today are capable of being shot with
older equipment. The greatest development since then is the speed
on 3/17/03 6:57 PM, David Chang-Sang at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Pentax's current "flagship" - MZ-S - is, even by those on this list,
> considered a failure.
> Pentax's last decent model was the MZ-5n IMHO.
Failure? Huh? It is a very solid, easy to use, accurate metering, fast
focusing, etc e
Exactly my point Bill
Vic
In a message dated 3/17/03 1:18:33 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>All of this talk about how important USM, IS, FPS makes me wonder how in
>the
>
>hell did anybody ever take a decent photograph with a 620 folder, 35mm
>
>rangefinder or even a Speed Graphic. Bells and w
Jim Apilado wrote:
>
> How many look at your cameras when you are out?
I've had numerous inquiries regarding my 6x7. People are intrigued by
the fact that it looks like an SLR on steroids. But my recently acquired
Leica IIIf draws a crowd. I've only been using it for a week, but people
frequen
Fine whatever the reason. If you want high tech/high end you buy from
someone other than Pentax. Pentax spent a lot of years successfully
creating the perception among buyers that they aren't a first line SLR
maker. No matter what sort of hand waving, smoke and mirrors exercise
you want to go t
On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:51:33 +0100, you wrote:
>Best wishes to all and thanks for all I've learned from you!
>To all KMP contributors most sincere thanks!
>
>Bojidar Dimitrov
Many thanks for the KMP site, Boz. I've enjoyed it many times.
I bought a Nikon D100 DSLR, intending to hold onto my Pent
On 17 Mar 2003 at 20:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Thanks Fred: You are exactly right. I was not in any way suggesting Boj was lazy
> ... I was, in fact, trying to convince him not to leave Pentax for the bells and
> whistles that Canon and Nikon offer.
I doubt Boz's move is about "bells and whi
; Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 09:13:07 -0800
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Good-bye Pentax (was: Pentax needs USM and IS)
> Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Resent-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 12:13:17 -0500
>
> It is indeed a sad day for Pentax a
"David Chang-Sang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Pentax's current "flagship" - MZ-S - is, even by those on this list,
>considered a failure.
What???
Mark Roberts
MZ-S owner
Thanks Fred: You are exactly right. I was not in any way suggesting Boj was lazy ... I
was, in fact, trying to convince him not to leave Pentax for the bells and whistles
that Canon and Nikon offer. As photographers, collectors and gadget freaks (which most
of us are including myself) I think it
nt there will be a time, as I'm sure you're well
aware, when they'll be turned away by Pentax themselves because they no
longer "support" that equipment (i.e. LX for example) no matter how close to
"pro grade" it used to be.
Dave
-----Original Message-
From: P
Galen Rowell is unfortunately dead. He used the N80, and previously the N60, for their very light weight for rock/mountain climbing. It's a rather special use, and I wouldn't draw general conclusions from it.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sure this may be true generally. However Galen Rowell
aways
Bruce wrote:
I have no idea why people think that a company 1/10 the size of Canon would have the
same R&D budget as Canon.
REPLY:
Ideas are like beards. Men doesn't have them until they grow up.
Incidentally, didn't you say the same thing about a Pentax DSLR? That they would never
make one
They took different pictures. You couldn't create the images with the
old gear that you can with the new.
If you like the 1942 look, fine. Not everyone does.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All of this talk about how important USM, IS, FPS makes me wonder how in the
hell did anybody ever take a dec
For a lot of types of photography, it may not make you a better
photographer, but you will get better photographs.
Most of this misty-eyed, romantic, manual drivel comes from people with
little of no experience using current high-end equipment.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you want the lates
On March 17, 2003 01:46 pm, Roland Mabo wrote:
>
> Pentax must supply what the market demands.
Great now define the market. Ask 100 people here and I bet you'll get 101
different answers. Maybe 201.
Nick
On March 17, 2003 11:17 am, Caveman wrote:
> Nick Zentena wrote:
> > Pentax needs something like the Mamiya 645e. People are buying into the
> > 645e who would never have looked at Mamiya higher priced models.
>
> I don't know what Pentax actually needs, and it's not my business to
> decide it
Roland wrote:
I understand your decision - but I feel that Pentax are moving towards USM and IS. And
I believe that the *ist D has support for this technology.
But, the question is always - how long will it take?
New bodies and lenses with USM and IS. I believe that some might be released this
Dave wrote:
Pentax's target market in 35mm SLR has, I believe,
always been amateur or entry level.
REPLY:
Canon target market have also always been entry level. They have in fact dominated
this segment for 25 years. The wast majority of all Nikon and Canon gear sold is entry
level.
DAVE:
This
Boz,
I want to thank you for all of the effort that you put into the KMP.
It's a really great resource. I hope that, if you decide to stop
maintaining it, you'll consider finding another serious "Pentax head" to
take over the maintenance.
If you make the switch to Canon completely, perhaps you'l
Bruce wrote:
"If you spent a
> couple of months using a F100 and N80, you would
> know why N80's aren't
> used as backups to F100's. Backup bodies are:
> another F100, or the
> photographers old, N90, F3 or FM2n."
Sure this may be true generally. However Galen Rowell
aways like taking his N8
Bruce wrote:
" Buy the equipment/technology you need from whoever
> sells it. Companies
> do not look after you; you don't worry about
> companies. Vote with your
> dollars, it's the only thing companies understand."
Yup this is true. There have been many a Nikon users
who have switched or at t
I don't know what Pentax actually needs, and it's not my business to
decide it anyway. But I definitely know that I'm eyeing a Bronica GS-1.
I'm pretty much sure that the 6x7 format will let me get much better
enlargements than 35mm with USM, IS, VR, SW and whatnot. And lots of fun.
Just make sure
From: Cameron Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 09:13:07 -0800
the *ist D is way too late, and it better be cheap because it's last years'
technology
"last years' technology"? Why are you saying that?
What's "last year" in it? We haven't seen the complete specification yet,
but from
Hi Boz,
Any system is not the be all and end all, just like with many other things,
when you feel it doesn't perform then you are free to change. What is more
important is that you are still a photographer.
Many thanks for the KMP site, which has given me and many others an
invaluable source of
ctional
though it may be. Best wishes to him from a long time (since '96) PDML
member.
Cameron Hood
On Monday, March 17, 2003, at 06:30 AM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:51:33 +0100
From: Bojidar Dimitrov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Go
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you want the latest
and greatest USM, IS etc, go out and get it, but it really won't make you a
better photographer.
Boz clearly stated that he is "a technical head more than an artist",
and I can understand his reasoning. It's his money, and he's free to
spend it as
Ryan wrote:
So what? If you're not Canon, just give up? That doesn't sound like a better plan.
Reply:
So what what? I didn't suggest rolling over and play dead. I suggested that it was
going to be difficult and more than just the products are needed.
Pentax is suffering in the "image" departme
Paul wrote_
Do you know something about Pentax future that we don't?
Note: This is an honest question.
REPLY:
The honest answer is that I don't know what you know so I cannot answer the question
honestly. Anyway, I don't pretend to know anything about the future. However, it is
possible to ext
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Bojidar: Interesting approach and conclusion. I can
> see your reasons for
> leaving... But don't ever forget that it is the
> photographs that make the
> difference not the camera, not even really the
> lenses. If you want the latest
> and greatest USM, IS etc, g
Nick Zentena wrote:
Pentax needs something like the Mamiya 645e. People are buying into the 645e
who would never have looked at Mamiya higher priced models.
I don't know what Pentax actually needs, and it's not my business to
decide it anyway. But I definitely know that I'm eyeing a Bronica GS-
Bojidar: Interesting approach and conclusion. I can see your reasons for
leaving... But don't ever forget that it is the photographs that make the
difference not the camera, not even really the lenses. If you want the latest
and greatest USM, IS etc, go out and get it, but it really won't make y
On March 17, 2003 09:15 am, Roland Mabo wrote:
> "enthusiastic amateurs" as Pentax calls it.
> This is not a bad thing, but eventually - amateurs wants more than the el
> cheapo plastic le chique consumer zooms, they start to explore new areas of
> photography. They discover macrophotography and t
Hi Bojidar,
I understand your decision - but I feel that Pentax are moving towards USM
and IS. And I believe that the *ist D has support for this technology.
But, the question is always - how long will it take?
New bodies and lenses with USM and IS. I believe that some might be released
this fal
From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 08:49:34 -0500
I think Bruce has a point here (and no, it's not on his head)...
We have to remember, while we, loyal Pentax users, would love to see >the
brand grow and flourish, Pentax's target market in 35mm SLR has, I
>believ
as
> 2nd bodies. So, Pentax does not have to do a F5 or EOS 1.
>
> Best wishes,
> Roland
>
> >From: Bruce Rubenstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: Re: Pentax needs USM and IS
> >Date: Mon, 17 M
At 14:51 17.3.2003 +0100, Bojidar Dimitrov wrote:
>... I bought an EOS 30 (Elan 7e) and the top-rated lenses EF
>70-200/4 USM L and 28-105/3.5-4.5 USM. What can I say, I wasn't feeling
>sick anymore. USM may be seen just as a gimmick by some on this list,
>but USM lenses have full-time manual a
The only time pros "buy" these cameras is when their parts are used in
DSLRs. The #1 concern of muost pros is reliability, and no matter how
well mid range consumer cameras work they don't have a very solid feel,
and pros don't trust them. The EOS 3 and F100 are sold by their makers
as pro came
Hi Roland, hi all,
Roland Mabo wrote:
>
> Choosing SLR, is choosing a system. Those who wish to use the SLR
> primarly for p&s photography doesn't bother, but those who are
> serious about learning photography - who sees photography as an
> art, as a hobby or as an income - thinks about SLR as a
inal Message:
-
From: Roland Mabo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:20:02 +0100
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax needs USM and IS
USM and IS are not only for pro's. But speaking of pro's, I have seen many
pro's with EOS 3 and F100. They're
Buy the equipment/technology you need from whoever sells it. Companies
do not look after you; you don't worry about companies. Vote with your
dollars, it's the only thing companies understand.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
HI
So what dou you suggest?
Alek
EOS 1.
Best wishes,
Roland
From: Bruce Rubenstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax needs USM and IS
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 07:44:50 -0500
Pentax abandoned this segment so long ago that no one thinks of Pentax when
they look for high end/h
HI
So what dou you suggest?
Alek
Użytkownik Bruce Rubenstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał:
>Pentax abandoned this segment so long ago that no one thinks of Pentax
>when they look for high end/high tech cameras. It would take years of
>work (that Pentax was never willing to do) to change the per
Pentax abandoned this segment so long ago that no one thinks of Pentax
when they look for high end/high tech cameras. It would take years of
work (that Pentax was never willing to do) to change the perception of
the brand. Most people who are fans of taking pictures, rather than
camera brands,
Pal,
Do you know something about Pentax future that we don't?
Note: This is an honest question.
Actually, the Dynaxx 7 show how dangerous this market is. According to the
Wall Street Journal (or was it Finacial Times?), Minolta grossly
overestimated the sales of this camera. They anticipated a s
Pål Jensen wrote:
Actually, the Dynaxx 7 show how dangerous this market is. According to the Wall Street Journal (or was it Finacial Times?), Minolta grossly overestimated the sales of this camera. They anticipated a sale of 60.000 units a month (quite possible not far from the number achieved by
Actually, the Dynaxx 7 show how dangerous this market is. According to the Wall Street
Journal (or was it Finacial Times?), Minolta grossly overestimated the sales of this
camera. They anticipated a sale of 60.000 units a month (quite possible not far from
the number achieved by the Minolta 700
Pentax must release USM and IS technology, because...
Choosing SLR, is choosing a system. Those who wish to use the SLR primarly
for p&s photography doesn't bother, but those who are serious about learning
photography - who sees photography as an art, as a hobby or as an income -
thinks about S
98 matches
Mail list logo
