CityTV showed one of it's "Naked in the House" episodes this week. It's an
invitation only competition. The photographer gets 30 minutes with a naked
model and one roll of film. I've yet to see a Nikon or a Canon. I've seen
Pentax,Mamiya,Hasselblad, lots of Texas Leicas, something that
Those guys are the BIG boys from all over Canada and
the States, and Medium format only or larger, no dinky
35mm amateurs there.
--- Nick Zentena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> CityTV showed one of it's "Naked in the House"
> episodes this week. It's an
> invitation only competition. The
I watched about 10 minutes of that show (it was all I could watch without gagging).
I did notice that it was all being shot (what I watched of it) with Medium Format.
Didn't suprise me, given the nature of the shoot.
Didn't much like the concept of the show, though: too contrived. I ~did~ like
quality camera.
-Original Message-
From: Jon Glass [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 7:45 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pro cameras again.SHEESH. was: Re: New Guy
On Nov 21, 2004, at 3:39 PM, William Robb wrote:
> The nice thing about this subject
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: New Subject.. NOT
We've established many times, including quite recently, that we
cannot reach
a consensus on what makes a "pro" camera.
Thats cause the camera isn't all there is to whether it is pro or
not.
The company has to
Quoting Jens Bladt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hmmm... To some extend this is right for me too.
> But I guess I just got used to all the nice features - sofisticated Matrix
> metering (I rarely have to make corrections anymore with the MZ-S - *istD.
> I
> did with the PZ-1)
Is it just that people
Quoting William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
ernreed said:
> > We've established many times, including quite recently, that we
> > cannot reach
> > a consensus on what makes a "pro" camera.
>
> Thats cause the camera isn't all there is to whether it is pro or
> not.
> The company has to offer stel
November 21, 2004 9:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pro cameras again.SHEESH. was: Re: New Guy
Quoting William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
ernreed said:
> > We've established many times, including quite recently, that we
> > cannot reach
> > a consensus on
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pro cameras again.SHEESH. was: Re: New Guy
Meaning then that according to your standards, the LX isn't a "pro"
camera
either?
I mean, just to be clear, this got underway because of the claim
that the
15:25
Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Emne: RE: Pro cameras again.SHEESH. was: Re: New Guy
I used to care about camera features a lot...but not anymore...
As long as it allows me to take pictures, it's fine by me!
It matters to me the most is whether I take good pictures or even great
photos!
I t
- Original Message -
From: "Andy Chang"
Subject: RE: Pro cameras again.SHEESH. was: Re: New Guy
It's just a tool... what matters is your imagination...
I have owned a number of circular saws over the years.
My first one was a cheap orange Black and Decker. It wouldn&
he small-format
digital/35mm market? This is something I don't really have the answer
to. However, I can share my impressions:
1. quality differences. I think that it should be a given that a camera
that will be used full-time by a professional should be rugged enough
to handle th
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: "Andy Chang"
Subject: RE: Pro cameras again.SHEESH. was: Re: New Guy
It's just a tool... what matters is your imagination...
I have owned a number of circular saws over the years.
My first one was a cheap orange Bl
I've been sorely tempted to say, "Who cares!"
But since so many seem to, I've changed my question to, "For Pete's
sake, why does it matter?"
Might as well argue the mechanical differences between traditional flat
vs. round toothpicks.
keith whaley
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting William Robb <[
- Original Message -
From: "Keith Whaley"
Subject: Re: Pro cameras again.SHEESH. was: Re: New Guy
Might as well argue the mechanical differences between traditional
flat vs. round toothpicks.
Flat ones seem to work better around the incisors, but for molars,
nothing bea
It is interesting how a reputation can continue on long after it is no longer
deserved. Nikon (at least Nikon USA) "PRO" service is no longer much worth a
crap. At one time (back in the EPOC days) it was the best in the world. Now it
is pretty much a joke. (An insider joke I admit. The pros them
Hi,
Sunday, November 21, 2004, 4:56:21 PM, Keith wrote:
> I've been sorely tempted to say, "Who cares!"
> But since so many seem to, I've changed my question to, "For Pete's
> sake, why does it matter?"
> Might as well argue the mechanical differences between traditional flat
> vs. round toothpi
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: "Keith Whaley"
Subject: Re: Pro cameras again.SHEESH. was: Re: New Guy
Might as well argue the mechanical differences between traditional
flat vs. round toothpicks.
Flat ones seem to work better around the incisors, but
Good one, Bob! Indeed.
I'd almost forgotten!
keith
Bob W wrote:
Hi,
Sunday, November 21, 2004, 4:56:21 PM, Keith wrote:
I've been sorely tempted to say, "Who cares!"
But since so many seem to, I've changed my question to, "For Pete's
sake, why does it matter?"
Might as well argue the mechanical
William Robb mused:
>
> Subject: Re: Pro cameras again.SHEESH. was: Re: New Guy
>
> Of course the company has to stand behind the product.
While not suggesting that Pentax support comes anywhere near
that of Canon (who have dedicated repair staff on-site at most
major events, t
rindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Keith Whaley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 21. november 2004 17:56
Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Emne: Re: Pro cameras again.SHEESH. was: Re: New Guy
I've been sorely tempted to say, "Who cares!"
But since so many seem to, I've changed my quest
- Original Message -
From: "Keith Whaley"
Subject: Re: Pro cameras again.SHEESH. was: Re: New Guy
And floss is the Photoshop of tooth care...
If you have to fix it in Photoshop...
WW
- Original Message -
From: "John Francis"
Subject: Re: Pro cameras again.SHEESH. was: Re: New Guy
While not suggesting that Pentax support comes anywhere near
that of Canon (who have dedicated repair staff on-site at most
major events, together with masses of free loaner
On 21/11/04, Jon Glass, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Pro equipment used
>to be mostly devoid of automatic controls. Everything was set up
>manually. In fact, as part of that, far more parameters were adjustable
>and adjustable in more ways in pro equipment. As well, connections were
>also comp
ERN,
I'm a happy pentax user, but... My record with NEW Pentax cameras is not great.
My original ME failed after 3-4 years of use and I paid to repair it
when the standoff spring on the wind lever broke and put a metal piece
into the plastic film advance gears.
My Super Program died in the firs
In Krakow, this is one of the most common cars used by taxi drivers.
:-) (one of the other is the _much_ cheaper Polonez)
On Nov 21, 2004, at 7:34 PM, Jens Bladt wrote:
I guess my point is: You don't need the best or most expensive or
sofisticated car in the world to be a TAXI driver. A Mercedes
On 21 Nov 2004 at 9:44, William Robb wrote:
> It's not just your imagination, it's also what the tool is capable of
> doing.
> If all you imagine is junior grade work, a junior grade tool is often
> fine.
I tend to agree with your logic. I've stood in torrential downpours to make
photos with m
Round toothpicks are for professionals only.
Flat toothpicks are definitely amateurish.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: "Keith Whaley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 11:56 AM
Subject: Re: Pro cameras again...
William Robb mused:
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "John Francis"
> Subject: Re: Pro cameras again.SHEESH. was: Re: New Guy
>
>
>
> > While not suggesting that Pentax support comes anywhere near
> > that of Canon (who have de
BW> Daniel Defoe "Gulliver's Travels"
Oh, so that's where the Big-Endian vs Little-Endian bit (in computers)
war comes from :)
Good light!
fra
Frantisek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>BW> Daniel Defoe "Gulliver's Travels"
>
>Oh, so that's where the Big-Endian vs Little-Endian bit (in computers)
>war comes from :)
Um, yes, but it's by Jonathan Swift, not Daniel Defoe.
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com
Hi,
>>BW> Daniel Defoe "Gulliver's Travels"
>>
>>Oh, so that's where the Big-Endian vs Little-Endian bit (in computers)
>>war comes from :)
> Um, yes, but it's by Jonathan Swift, not Daniel Defoe.
oops - yes.
--
Cheers,
Bob
I do occasional "foul weather" photography with, usually, K-series
bodies. I put them under a bit of chamois. Not the Photo Chamois,
just an old, well washed, CAR chamois. Better, AFAIK, than a towel
or two. Ain't had a problem yet, but I'm not a Pro.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote, in part:
And then
Bob Sullivan mused:
>
> My PZ-1 went crazy in the drizzle at a Pig Roast (autofocus was
> hunting). It was 6 months new and went back to Pentax under the
> original warranty. I had to send the new camera plus the 28-80 lens.
> It took a dissatisfying 2+ months to get it back from Colorado.
Tha
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting Jens Bladt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hmmm... To some extend this is right for me too.
But I guess I just got used to all the nice features - sofisticated Matrix
metering (I rarely have to make corrections anymore with the MZ-S - *istD.
I
did with the PZ-1)
I
35 matches
Mail list logo
