Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-23 Thread Godfrey DiGiorgi
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 7:06 PM, CheekyGeek wrote: > Not on a Pentax, but no reason it couldn't be: > http://www.cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?p=133996 Love the look these old lenses offer. -- Godfrey   godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-23 Thread frank theriault
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 4:32 PM, steve harley wrote: > i just shoot through a translucent Pringles lid i found on the ground ... Okay, but you're not allowed to clean it first. ;-) cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail L

RE: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-23 Thread Bob W
> >Not on a Pentax, but no reason it couldn't be: > >http://www.cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?p=133996 > > Why am I thinking about an old codger with his todger hanging out when I > see that !?! > Mirror, mirror on the wall -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/ma

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-23 Thread Steven Desjardins
I've always suspected that. ;-p > > i just shoot through a translucent Pringles lid i found on the ground ... > > -- -- Steve Desjardins -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-23 Thread steve harley
On 2010-09-22 21:06 , frank theriault wrote: On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Larry Colen wrote: The field of photography has spent 150 years striving for the image quality that you can get on an entry level DSLR today, so what to people do? They go to extreme lengths to use lenses with an

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-23 Thread Miserere
On 23 September 2010 14:54, mike wilson wrote: > CheekyGeek wrote: >> >> Not on a Pentax, but no reason it couldn't be: >> http://www.cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?p=133996 > > What is a DP?  No need to let your imagination run riot if you do not > know. Director of Photography (if he works in t

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-23 Thread mike wilson
CheekyGeek wrote: Not on a Pentax, but no reason it couldn't be: http://www.cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?p=133996 What is a DP? No need to let your imagination run riot if you do not know. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNS

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-23 Thread Miserere
On 22 September 2010 23:24, Mark Roberts wrote: > CheekyGeek wrote: > >>Not on a Pentax, but no reason it couldn't be: >>http://www.cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?p=133996 > > Remember this? > http://www.jbuhler.com/HLimited/index.html That's hilarious! --M. --     \/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfM

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-23 Thread CheekyGeek
Correction... "author/Windsor Chair maker & instructor Michael Dunbar WILL HAVE a two-part article on the subject of genuine furniture wear and how to achieve it in upcoming issues of Popular Woodworking magazine." Source: http://thewindsorinstitute.com/blog/?m=201009 The subject of "defects" in

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-23 Thread CheekyGeek
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Matthew Hunt wrote: > I feel the same way whenever I see CGI shots with 18 elements' worth > of simulated lens flares.  Just simulate a perfect lens, OK?  Or at > least upgrade your simulated coatings. This is a thought provoking point. I remember watching the ext

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-23 Thread Matthew Hunt
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > The field of photography has spent 150 years striving for the image quality > that > you can get on an entry level DSLR today, so what to people do? They go to > extreme lengths to use lenses with an IQ that people would have screamed > abou

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-23 Thread Brian Walters
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 08:33 +0100, "Cotty" wrote: > On 22/9/10, CheekyGeek, discombobulated, unleashed: > > >Not on a Pentax, but no reason it couldn't be: > >http://www.cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?p=133996 > > Why am I thinking about an old codger with his todger hanging out when I > see that !?!

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-23 Thread Cotty
On 22/9/10, CheekyGeek, discombobulated, unleashed: >Not on a Pentax, but no reason it couldn't be: >http://www.cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?p=133996 Why am I thinking about an old codger with his todger hanging out when I see that !?! Wonderful images - love the vignetting. This lad is no strang

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-22 Thread frank theriault
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 11:24 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: > Remember this? > http://www.jbuhler.com/HLimited/index.html Buhler could take photos using a lens with elements made of tissue paper and the images would still blow mere mortals out of the water. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourge

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-22 Thread Ann Sanfedele
CheekyGeek wrote: Not on a Pentax, but no reason it couldn't be: http://www.cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?p=133996 Darren Addy Kearney, NE -- Nothing is sure, except Death and Pentaxes. cool! ann -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-22 Thread CheekyGeek
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 10:24 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: > Remember this? > http://www.jbuhler.com/HLimited/index.html Wow. I've never seen that before, but that is GREAT Lomo stuff. Darren Addy Kearney, NE -- Nothing is sure, except Death and Pentaxes. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdm

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-22 Thread Mark Roberts
CheekyGeek wrote: >Not on a Pentax, but no reason it couldn't be: >http://www.cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?p=133996 Remember this? http://www.jbuhler.com/HLimited/index.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-22 Thread CheekyGeek
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 9:57 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > > The field of photography has spent 150 years striving for the image quality > that you can get on an entry level DSLR today, so what to people do? They go > to extreme lengths to use lenses with an IQ that people would have screamed > abo

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-22 Thread frank theriault
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > The field of photography has spent 150 years striving for the image quality > that you can get on an entry level DSLR today, so what to people do? They go > to extreme lengths to use lenses with an IQ that people would have screamed > abou

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-22 Thread Larry Colen
On Sep 22, 2010, at 7:45 PM, drd1...@gmail.com wrote: > Very nice. You could probably convince the Canikon crowd that it's the new > Pentax kit lens. The field of photography has spent 150 years striving for the image quality that you can get on an entry level DSLR today, so what to people do

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-22 Thread drd1135
Very nice. You could probably convince the Canikon crowd that it's the new Pentax kit lens. --Original Message-- From: CheekyGeek Sender: pdml-boun...@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List ReplyTo: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR Sent: Sep 22, 2010 10:

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-22 Thread frank theriault
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 10:06 PM, CheekyGeek wrote: > Not on a Pentax, but no reason it couldn't be: > http://www.cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?p=133996 Where's Cotty? ;-) cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.ne

Re: 102-year-old lens on a modern DSLR

2010-09-22 Thread paul stenquist
Wow! Love that retro look from this lens. Fun stuff. Paul On Sep 22, 2010, at 10:06 PM, CheekyGeek wrote: > Not on a Pentax, but no reason it couldn't be: > http://www.cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?p=133996 > > Darren Addy > Kearney, NE > -- > Nothing is sure, except Death and Pentaxes. > > -- > P