I don't have my MZ-S manual handy and can't remember exactly what is
cover by the data recording, but does the compensation data appear on
the negatives and does it record some decimal value or the nearest whole
fraction amount?
Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee Unive
Glen wrote:
> What are the six custom functions of the 645n that are not mentioned in the
> manual and how are they set and used. I just bought a 645n and would love to
> know.
I don't really remember if it were six or more. According to my hazy memory the custom
functions included how long th
Raimo wrote:
> That´s what I thought you mean. But it is impossible to ascertain if it really works
>- just because the smallest detectable >difference is 1/3 stop.
Thats the smallest detectable on film, not on the camera meter readout.
Pål
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail Lis
>> True. It is the cumulative effect of slightly lesser features that hampers
>> the MZ-S.
>> Suppose xx% of the "target audience" of this camera would not purchase a
>> camera with less than 4 fps. And yy% would not buy the camera unless it had
>> a sync speed of 1/250, and zz% would not buy if y
In a message dated 8/22/2002 1:58:34 AM Central Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > If Pentax has made the MZ-S as big and as heavy as F100, with all the
> > matching specs (higher shutter speed, fps) etc, why would anyone select
> > Pentax when it is just a F100 clone? Might as well
- Original Message -
From: Alan Chan
Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
>
> >I think we all agree one picture is worth a thousand
spec-sheets?
>
> Not according to most reviews.
Also not according to a lot of clients.
William Robb
-
This message is from the Pent
Yes but they are not "owned" by a larger automotive company. They are still
independent in some manor of speaking.
At 04:58 PM 8/22/2002 +1000, you wrote:
>On 21 Aug 2002 at 20:57, Galen S Swint wrote:
>
> > No, Porsche is public. I just saw an article in Forbes about it (it was
> > an old Forbe
Original Message-
> From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 22 August 2002 00:59
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
>
>
> On 21 Aug 2002 at 23:32, Rob Brigham wrote:
>
> > I think you would be hard pushed to find a s
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Chris Stoddart wrote:
> And of course with the prestige comes all the thousands of wannabes and
> the 'but it's a Canon, I must be a better/cooler photographer already'
> school of thought (see photo.net for examples, especially from the site
> owner). And those thousands of
> If Pentax has made the MZ-S as big and as heavy as F100, with all the
> matching specs (higher shutter speed, fps) etc, why would anyone select
> Pentax when it is just a F100 clone? Might as well get the real F100.
Umm, because you might want to use PENTAX lenses, Beavis
hehehaha
JCO
-
T
On 21 Aug 2002 at 20:57, Galen S Swint wrote:
> No, Porsche is public. I just saw an article in Forbes about it (it was
> an old Forbes).
Right you are:
"Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG went public in April 1984.
The share capital of Porsche AG (EUR 45.50 million) is currently
divided into 8,750
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, [iso-8859-1] Artur Ledóchowski wrote:
> It's amazing how easy some clearly visible differences are omitted or
> depreciated.
> F100 has less AF sensors, but 3 of them are cross type, spot metering covers
> 1% of the field, exposure compensation works with +/-5EV in 0,3 EV
> in
fford to scale up for mass production (of which perhaps TVR is the
>biggest).
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Pål Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: 21 August 2002 23:16
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
&
On 21 Aug 2002 at 23:32, Rob Brigham wrote:
> I think you would be hard pushed to find a sports car manufacturer which
> isnt owned by a mass market manufacturer (ferrari/fiat, Jaguar &
> Aston/Ford etc), except for the 'cottage industry' companies which could
> not afford to scale up for mass pr
is the
biggest).
> -Original Message-
> From: Pål Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 21 August 2002 23:16
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
>
>
> ??
> Less than 1% of all cars sold are sports car. Still, some
>
Michael wrote:
> True. It is the cumulative effect of slightly lesser features that hampers
> the MZ-S.
> Suppose xx% of the "target audience" of this camera would not purchase a
> camera with less than 4 fps. And yy% would not buy the camera unless it had
> a sync speed of 1/250, and zz% wou
Artur wrote:
>exposure compensation works with +/-5EV in 0,3 EV
> increments,
Who the hell need 5 stop exposure compensation? Is Nikons matrix metering that much
off? BTW the MZ-S has stepless exposure compensation.
> For me it's enough
That'n fine. But we are not discussing what enough for
- Original Message -
From: "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
> But this is wrong. It's amazing how a slightly slower fps rate and max
shutter speed clouds the cameras appearance in some peoples eyes. The MZ-S
has more feat
CTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 2:14 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
In a message dated 8/21/2002 1:42:28 PM Central Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
>
> On Wed, 2002-08-21 at 03:52, Bru
Now features are a big deal. Toy batteries. Almost useless BIF. Low max Sync speed.
Another AF sensor, which is great because the AF sensor selector sucks. The F100 is a
performance body, not some cute, boutique toy.
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=E5l_Jensen?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
But this is wrong. It
In a message dated 8/21/2002 1:42:28 PM Central Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
>
> On Wed, 2002-08-21 at 03:52, Bruce Rubenstein wrote:
> >The term was pro. 99% of postcard pictures are shot by hobbiests.
>
> Ah, but
Maybe yes, maybe no. It doesn't matter. The operative term here was pro: one who earns
all or most of their income from photography.
From: Pieter Nagel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ah, but don't those hobbyists get paid for those postcards?
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsub
Pieter Nagel wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2002-08-21 at 02:24, Bruce Dayton wrote:
>
> > Ergonomically the MZ-S is much more comfortable to hold, especially
> > vertically with the BG-10.
>
> That feature I really love.
>
> My personal wish is for a camera that takes vertical pictures when it is
> right
Hell with two camera stores I frequent that carry Pentax, one that last
time I visited had pretty
much the full line of current products except the MZ-S in stock I still
haven't been able to see one.
Both places told me they have trouble getting orders filled. You can't
sell what you don't hav
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Pål Jensen wrote:
> If there were lot of profit in pro gear don't you think other
> manufacturers would have been more interested?
Pål
I would have assumed that the pro end of a manufacturers line would be
similar to the motorsport divisions of car companies - costs hell of
In a message dated 8/19/2002 8:08:04 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> All manufacturers makes special arrangements for pros. Pentax MF shooters
> get equally good service as Canon pro shooters.
>
This is probably true. However, I couldn't imagine Pentax creating an
equ
>I like quality and know it when I get it. Seems to me the PZ1p
>competes better than the MZ-S. Stronger AF motor for example.
There are differences between quantity and quality.
regards,
Alan Chan
_
Send and receive Hotmail on y
> I wonder what the term 'overpriced' means then if everything is worth
> exactly its selling price (assuming it sells)? Isn't it possible to take
> some sort of reasonable and dispassionate look at things and determine at
> least a reasonable range of relative value? If someone came out with a
The term was pro. 99% of postcard pictures are shot by hobbiests. "My
picture's on a POST CARD!, My picture's on a POST CARD! My mother's so proud
of me!"
and then Canon came out with the EOS system, and was willing to make a
major investment in time, money and effort to take a significant pa
>Well said Pal. Something is worth what people are prepared to pay for
>it. If enough people are prepared to pay the price for an MZ-S then it
>is not overpriced. Basic economics. [Rob]
I wonder what the term 'overpriced' means then if everything is worth
exactly its selling price (assuming
>Tell me then, how does Nikon manufacture and sell an F100 for around a
>grand? an N90s for $750(discontinued)...certainly cameras which are more
>bang for the buck compared to an MZ-S.
I can tell you that the F90X/F90s wasn't made as well as the MZ-S. It's more
like the built quality of the Z-
>After having used an MZ-S for over a year, I believe it is significantly
>*underpriced* for the construction quality and capabilities it offers.
To show people the true quality of the MZ-S, Pentax should hammer their MZ-S
in their ads.
regards,
Alan Chan
_
>My problem with the MZ-S is that it is way overpriced. I think my magic
>number is $400-500 US, way below the retail at B&H of $799. If I were going
>to spend that much on a body I might have to go for an F100 and change
>systems(ouch). I am also worried about the "bugs" in the MZ-S(sounds lik
>I think the 'problem' here is that while the MZ-S is 'significantly'
>*underpriced*, the Z1P was MASSIVELY **underpriced** due to the fact
>Pentax had to drop the price in order to sell any Z1's. This arguably
>now makes the MZ-S 'seem' expensive in comparison. To my mind the
>people who see it
- Original Message -
From: Rubenstein, Bruce M (Bruce)
Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
> Pentax may have shown the first Japanese SLR, but Nikon was
selling them first.
> This is in the same general vein of, if you want patents,
prototypes and smoke go to Pentax, if yo
- Original Message -
From: Pål Jensen
Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
>
> 30 years ago all of them used Nikon and couldn't care less
about what Canon was doing next...
>
Perhaps. And in 30 years hence, they still won't care what
Pentax is doing.
William Rob
step backwards in so many ways.
Robert
- Original Message -
From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 12:00 PM
Subject: RE: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
> I think the 'problem' here is that while th
1:03
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
>
>
> Robert wrote:
>
> > My problem with the MZ-S is that it is way overpriced. I think my
> > magic
> > number is $400-500 US, way below the retail at B&H of $799.
>
> Well, just
In a message dated 8/20/2002 3:38:57 PM Central Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Subject: Vs: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
>
> F1 was a Canon, 3 versions of it.
>
OK, my mistake, it was the original Nikon F.
Jerry in Houston
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To
I am not convinced it is true for UK either.
> -Original Message-
> From: Lukasz Kacperczyk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 20 August 2002 19:23
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
>
>
> < equipment is actually LESS expensi
Robert wrote:
> My problem with the MZ-S is that it is way overpriced. I think my magic
> number is $400-500 US, way below the retail at B&H of $799.
Well, just because you're not willing to pay more than 500 for doesn't mean it's
overpriced. I don't want to spend the money for an Mercedes S-c
No, It's just mot Europe for Nikon.
At 08:23 PM 8/20/2002 +0200, you wrote:
>>
>
>Huh? Not in Poland (unless it's not Europe for you ;)
>
>Lukasz
>-
>This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
>go to http://www.pdml.net
There's about 17 pro landscape photographers in the world (and they make their money
selling books to hobiests on how to be pro landscape/nature photographers). So, to a
first order approximation there is no such thing.
You can go off on whatever semantic tangents you'd like to, but in the world
<>
Huh? Not in Poland (unless it's not Europe for you ;)
Lukasz
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Pentax may have shown the first Japanese SLR, but Nikon was selling them first.
This is in the same general vein of, if you want patents, prototypes and smoke go to
Pentax, if you want stuff you can buy, go somewhere else.
Just to avoid any confusion, Nikon had already established themselves wit
Chris Brogden wrote:
>
> On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, William Robb wrote:
>
> > > Hard to argue with this, except to point out the uselessness
> > > of "amateur" and "pro" as general terms.
> >
> > Actually, no. The terminology is very germaine to the
> > discussion. "Pro" means the type of equipment th
20, 2002 12:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
I have always been told that Nikon made its inroads in NA as THE pro brand
by
outfitting the entire photo staff at Life magazine with their F1 (I think).
They were the cream of the pro photo crop in the 50&#x
Nice logic but it doesn't mean they don't pay you a commission. It depends
on the way you look at product, is it sold to make money or as
advertising. (That's much to serious a response on my part, oh well).
At 09:14 AM 8/20/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>Now, now as we ALL know, because Pal told us
I have always been told that Nikon made its inroads in NA as THE pro brand by
outfitting the entire photo staff at Life magazine with their F1 (I think).
They were the cream of the pro photo crop in the 50's and 60's. When others
saw that they were using Nikon, most others fell in line.
Jer
Russian manufacturer KMZ has begun SLR (with a pentaprism!)
manufacturing at 1953 -
http://members.tripod.com/rick_oleson/index-9.html
Best regards,
Arthur D. Grokhovski
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTEC
Ah Bruce,
Much as I would love to let this little political attack go unanswered,
I feel compelled to point out that in the UK and most of Europe, Nikon
equipment is actually LESS expensive than Pentax.
Besides, any consultant worth his yacht would be buying Leica ;-)
--
Kristian
> The real
To my mind the
people who see it as expensive overlook the fact that build quality
costs and tend to be 'features people'.
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 20 August 2002 16:46
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: N
"Robert Woerner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>My problem with the MZ-S is that it is way overpriced.
After having used an MZ-S for over a year, I believe it is significantly
*underpriced* for the construction quality and capabilities it offers.
--
Mark Roberts
www.robertstech.com
-
This messag
In a message dated 8/20/2002 9:56:23 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >By the time the Pentax put its first SLR on sale, Nikon (which had already
> been selling SLRs) was already established as a >"pro" brand.
>
>
> If this correct most history book must be rewritten. As
Me, too. I've been away for a week in England, and I come back to find
this hotbed of controversy.
Just to mention, I finally got to shoot extensively (about 30 rolls)
with the MZ-S. The camera worked perfectly, and I thoroughly enjoyed
using it. About five rolls have stuff we needed for m
Chris wrote:
> Exactly. But which pro? The type of equipment desirable to wedding
> photographers is usually very different from what pro landscape
> photographers use, and what studio photographers use, etc. etc. You can
> talk about "pro" equipment as it relates to these fields individually
Bruce wrote:
> Now, now as we ALL know, because Pal told us so, Nikon and Canon lose money on every
>high end camera they sell. By >pushing these other brands of high end cameras I'm
>helping them lose money faster, so they will go out of business leaving >Pentax a
>wide open for film cameras
Bruce wrote:
>By the time the Pentax put its first SLR on sale, Nikon (which had already been
>selling SLRs) was already established as a >"pro" brand.
If this correct most history book must be rewritten. As far as I know, Pentax (Asahi)
made the first japanese slr.
Pål
-
This message is fr
My problem with the MZ-S is that it is way overpriced. I think my magic
number is $400-500 US, way below the retail at B&H of $799. If I were going
to spend that much on a body I might have to go for an F100 and change
systems(ouch). I am also worried about the "bugs" in the MZ-S(sounds like
s
2002 15:11
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
>
>
> Good point, but there's more to it than that. A lot of
> people got very
> excited about Sigma's DSLR, partly because of the Foveon
> technology, and
> partly because of the mar
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, William Robb wrote:
> > Hard to argue with this, except to point out the uselessness
> of "amateur"
> > and "pro" as general terms.
>
> Actually, no. The terminology is very germaine to the
> discussion. "Pro" means the type of equipment that is desirable
> to a working pro.
Artur wrote:
> What is contradictory about MZ-S is that the camera, that is claimed to be a
>successor of Z-1p on the flagship position, is >both more and less advanced than
>Z-1p.
This is not contradiction it's a mistaken assumption. The MZ-S is not a replacement
for the Z-1p (in fact, Pen
Artur wrote:
> I wonder if I'm really the only one PDML'er who thinks that Z-1p is user friendly
>and easy to master, the only one who >feels that MZ-S is not as good as it could and
>should have been.
This is really not the discussion. I have no problems with the fact that some find the
Z-1
Bruce is just a spy for Nikon or is it Canon. He gets a commission every
time someone
on this list buys his brand.
At 11:18 PM 8/19/2002 +1000, Rob wrote:
>On 19 Aug 2002 at 8:58, Rubenstein, Bruce M (Bruce) wrote:
>
> > I have no idea why anyone who shots 35mm for money, and shoots typical
>
The full frame Contax by all accounts is a technical nightmare.
At 11:35 PM 8/18/2002 +0100, you wrote:
> > Talking to other photographers is somewhat
> > embarrassing because they can't believe I haven't gone digital yet. Almost
> > no one is using film anymore; have you seen a max rez shot fr
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, William Robb wrote:
> Pentax as a brand has always been an enthusiast/ hobbiest brand,
> at least here in North America, since the Korean War.
This is certainly not true for the UK at least. For example, recently UK
tv showed a documentary titled 'The Real Blow Up' (did anyo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] napisał:
>Your knowledge is wothy of respect, but don't assume that
>every one of your judgements constitutes a fact.
This is exactly, what I tried to express.
Thanx
Artur
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follo
- Original Message -
From: Chris Brogden
Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
> Hard to argue with this, except to point out the uselessness
of "amateur"
> and "pro" as general terms.
Actually, no. The terminology is very germaine to the
discussio
On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, Keith Whaley wrote:
> Bruce, an honest question, in light of the attitude of disdain
> displayed in your message...
> Why are you even a posting member of this list, if you think so little
> of Pentax?
As much as I disagree with what Bruce says sometimes, I find it hard to
a
In a message dated 8/19/2002 5:01:26 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> You need one touch of your
> > finger to switch between HyP, Av and Tv in Z-1p. You can set the flash
> > compensation w/o taking your eye away from the viewfinder in Z-1p.
> > You tell me it isn't use
I was talking about the previous posting, this link is correctly balanced.
- Original Message -
From: "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 19, 2002 8:19 AM
Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
> The D60 is an amazi
: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 19 August 2002 16:36
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
>
>
> Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> The battle in the MF market is of course important, but
> unless Pent
Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The battle in the MF market is of course important, but unless Pentax
>> introduces interchangeable backs for the 645 and 67, it will not be able to
>> win the battle with Contax and Mamiya. This is of course but a personal
>> point of view:)
>
>But Pentax
Bruce, an honest question, in light of the attitude of disdain
displayed in your message...
Why are you even a posting member of this list, if you think so little
of Pentax?
Whaley, Keith
"Rubenstein, Bruce M (Bruce)" wrote:
>
> I have no idea why anyone who shots 35mm for money, and shoots typ
Bruce wrote:
>The support/marketing for the pro
> world also has to be in place.
I believe this argument is mostly a red herring. Unless you're shooting at the
Olympics special pro service hardly exist. All manufacturers makes special
arrangements for pros. Pentax MF shooters get equally goo
- Original Message -
From: Tim S Kemp
Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
> > I note that you no longer have patience to get your
processing done like
> most
> > on this list (I assume). Last I heard patience is a virtue.
You lost it
> > somewhere.
>
&
Artur wrote:
> Besides, you're wrong about that Pentax supremacy in the MF
> segment. The reason is simple - bodies lack interchangeable backs. This is
> more important and decisive thing than one would suspect.
Not for Pentax who actually specialices in the non-interchangeable back market. The
Tim wrote:
> So true. Has anyone seen shots from the full frame Contax?
It's a disaster. Customers are demanding their money back.
Pål
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Use
Alan wrote:
> In terms of technology, Canon was ahead of Nikon since they introduced the
> EOS system, and it was back to 1988?
They have "always" been ahead of Nikon in the feature race.
Pål
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and f
Artur wrote:
> Indeed. But I think that the majority of the MF cameras are being used in
> studios. IMHO this is where Pentax strategy is quite inconsistent.
No, there's nothing incosistent in making cameras indended for outside studio use.
Pentax have been very consistent in this.
> Yes,
Jim wrote:
> I repeat all those who are going digital should form their own list. When I
> joined the list digital wasn't even a topic.
This is a Pentax discussion forum. Here we discuss Pentax equipment. If Pentax makes
digital products then it's a topic. Lets not go back to the weird times
Alexander wrote:
> Just a thought. With talk about a new Pentax digital SLR system, what is the
> possibility that the new Pentax 35mm flagship camera is a film/digital
> system?
I think the possibilities are very slim. With the short lifespan of digital products
and the added complexity,
Artur wrote:
> No, the main role for the MF is studio/fashion/commercials/nude (:))
Medium format is the most popular format for landscape photography on a global basis.
This is the market Pentax is catering for. The studio market is crowded and Pentax
have never shown much interest in it.
>
Artur wrote:
> MZ-S is full of contradictions.
There's no contradictions with the MZ-S.
>Moreover, lack of promotion and information,
> together with a bit too high price (when compared with Dynaxx 7 for example)
> and those contradictions don't make its future bright IMHO.
Well, it can't be
Cameron wrote:
> My guess for the next Limited; a very disappointing 50mm f=1.2 based on
> the one from the LX 2000.
You guess is wrong.
>
> Either Pentax will have a whole lot of treats for us at Photokina next
> month, or there are going to be a whole lot of disappointed Pentax
Conrad wrote:
> I think Pentax decided somewhere to specialise in medium format gear. I still
>remember when they brought out their first MF SLR in the early 70's although the name
>escapes me now. In all fairness, they have never looked back. Others have come and
>gone some more than othe
Artur wrote:
> I don't agree with the point of view stated above (and it has been already
> disscussed several times), because the photographic market is not a constant
> thing. Conditions change. Yes, Pentax lost the battle, but why do you think
> they also lost the whole war? They can and IMHO
- Original Message -
From: Jim Apilado
Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
Jim, you might want to check out this link:
http://65.107.211.206/victorian/darwin/darwin1.html
Good metaphorical information there about your concern.
William Robb
> I repeat all those who are go
> I note that you no longer have patience to get your processing done like
most
> on this list (I assume). Last I heard patience is a virtue. You lost it
> somewhere.
It's not patience, it's invonvenience. If photography is your business then
time is money, if it's not then then time processing
Your right about that.
Jim A.
> From: Kevin Waterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Organization: Oceania
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 10:21:10 +1000
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
>
Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 14:50:03 -0700
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
>
> Jim A. wrote:
>>
>> I would like those who are salivating for a Pentax dslr to form their own
&
On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Artur Led=F3chowski?= wrote:
> BTW, a new version of NPH 400 is going to appear soon...
It's out already... we've even received some in Winnipeg. :)
chris
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and fol
Użytkownik Paul Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał:
>If thats the new way the bring back the old way!
Ditto!:) Give ma a piece of the NPH 400 and I'll make much better shots with my Z-1p
and AF500FTZ...
BTW, a new version of NPH 400 is going to appear soon...
Greetz
Artur:)
-
This message is fr
> The new way of doing wedding photography:
> http://trevorowen.com/paton/
> Shot on a Canon D60
If thats the new way the bring back the old way! The look soft and arn't
particulaly good shots. The rest of that guys stuff look much better. The
D60 is a very impressive camera, but this definately
d.
Wow.
R
- Original Message -
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 10:39 PM
Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
> - Original Message -----
> From: Tim S Kemp
> Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Came
- Original Message -
From: Tim S Kemp
Subject: Re: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
> I would suggest though that wedding and portrait guys are not
yet dumping
> film. Not the ones I've seen anyway. I think 35mm is going
away in favour of
> digital though and all that hold
>Almost
no one is using film anymore; have you seen a max rez shot from a new high
end Canon or Nikon digital?<
the main difference i see between my Provia 100F originals after scanning
and my Nikon digital originals? there isn't any film grain in the digital
original. large prints made from the
> Writes Jim, digitally.
>
>Jim, get a grip. Form your own list of film only shooters. While
> you're at it, why don't you use snail mail instead of email. You
> could have a nice tight group of Pentax film-only penpals, and you
> could start a stamp collection to boot.
man, are you f
On Sun, 18 Aug 2002 14:50:03 -0700
Cameron Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jim A. wrote:
> >
> > I would like those who are salivating for a Pentax dslr to form their own
> > list so that those of us who are contented film users can live in peace
> > without all the digital stuff intruding.
I
> Cameron Hood wrote with intelligence and decisiveness:
>
> I reiterate, their new camera better be bloody good, or there will be a
> LOT of nice FA* lenses on the market. And they had better introduce a decent
> flash or two to match, because a guide number of 30 (barely) just doesn't
> cut it
1 - 100 of 117 matches
Mail list logo
