On 4 Jan 2004 at 12:34, Steve Desjardins wrote:
> This explains a lot. I had no idea what you meant when I first read
> this because I have never had any problem pressing the A-lock button on
> the end. I also have no trouble removing my CF card, although I can
> easily see how someone might. M
"The funny thing is that I suspect the reasoning surrounding dropping
the
aperture ring control may have partly been a function of the move to
make this
body as small as possible. Anyone who actually owns a *ist will well
know that
you have to set the lens in the "A" position before it's mounted
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, John Francis wrote:
> > On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, John Francis wrote:
> >
> > > In any case, think of it as the final model in the "old" MZ/ZX range
> > > (which includes the ZX-5n and ZX-3); very capable cameras, but which
> > > all use the lens aperture ring, not body-mounted ape
On 31 Dec 2003 at 11:23, George Sinos wrote:
> My complaint? That 4-way button on the back needs to be bigger or have a
> more positive feel. The other controls on this camera work so well. This
> one just doesn't fit in with the feel of the others. It's annoying.
Got to agree with you on tha
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>In a message dated 12/30/2003 2:09:23 PM Pacific Standard Time,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>But Canon changed the mount for technical improvements, pentax hasnt changed
>the mount for technical improvements, they just abandoned a still very
>possible feature.
>JCO
>
>I
>
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, John Francis wrote:
>
> > In any case, think of it as the final model in the "old" MZ/ZX range
> > (which includes the ZX-5n and ZX-3); very capable cameras, but which
> > all use the lens aperture ring, not body-mounted aperture controls.
>
> Not all. The cripple mount
The comm port will be used for firmware upgrades, and I've heard that
computer control is coming via a firmware update.
Bill
> The argument about USB 1.1, 2.0 or Firewire doesn't interest me. If the
> only thing I can do with the comm port is download info from the card, you
> may as well leave
Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote that he didn't see the concern
about CF card slot or the AA batteries used in the istD.
Frankly, I think most of the negative comments that I've read are a
testament to the fact that there is not much to complain about on this camera.
The CF card tightness
On: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 23:48:20 -0500, Paul Stenquist
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: "In its present configuration its still a
snapshot camera.", referring to the istD.
Paul -
I use my istD for snapshots, but it's a heck of a lot more than a snapshot
camera. I'm not sure what you meant by the above
Kostas posted
> Not all. The cripple mount MZs do body-mounted aperture control. Not
> sure about the -6, the -7 or the -10.
The -10 can do both. Haven't tried the -6 and
-7.
-- -Original Message-
-- From: Mark Cassino [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 11:00 PM
--
-- At 11:35 AM 12/31/2003 +1000, you wrote:
--
-- >The stupid design of the memory card access port is
-- probably another
-- >compromise
-- >due to the design size constrai
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, John Francis wrote:
> In any case, think of it as the final model in the "old" MZ/ZX range
> (which includes the ZX-5n and ZX-3); very capable cameras, but which
> all use the lens aperture ring, not body-mounted aperture controls.
Not all. The cripple mount MZs do body-mount
"William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>My objection to the camera from the start was the loss of lens
>compatability.
>When I picked it up, I guess I decided that wasn't such an important issue
>after all.
In fact the only K/M lenses for which Pentax doesn't currently make an
equivalent focal
Bill said: "And this is in no way to imply that I find you or your internet
company tiresome. Quite the opposite, I find your posts delightful, and
enjoy poking around your website as well."
Must admit, I *was* starting to wonder if I should take the hint when you
said "Of course, I could also tel
Mark Cassino a écrit:
At 11:35 AM 12/31/2003 +1000, you wrote:
The stupid design of the memory card access port is probably another
compromise
due to the design size constraints. Unfortunately the *ist D review
on luminous-
landscape
(http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pentax-is
EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 12:49 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
- Original Message -
From: "J. C. O'Connell"
Subject: RE: Pentax's dSLR future?
> I dont understand William's comment, you were pissed AFT
- Original Message -
From: "Tanya Mayer Photography"
Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
In Australia, the term
> "pissed" is taken to mean "drunk" or "intoxicated",
Same here, but there are contextual vagaries.
"Pissed"
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Cassino"
Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
> I really don't understand the hoo-ha about the CF card slot on the
> *ist-D. After pressing the eject button, my cards slide right out with a
> little assist from right thum
- Original Message -
From: "J. C. O'Connell"
Subject: RE: Pentax's dSLR future?
> I dont understand William's comment, you were pissed AFTER
> you picked it up or before?
Past tense. I was pissed (about the lens issue) until I picked the camera
- Original Message -
From: "Tanya Mayer Photography"
Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
>
", but to
> release a "flagship" model camera and then lenses that can't be used on it
> in that mode, that is just ridiculous (well, to me anyways
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Stenquist"
Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
> Will,
> When you picked up an ist D for the first time your angst diminished,
> and you were pissed. Prior to that you were outraged? Homicidal? I
> picked up an ist D for the
lol! I was talking to Rob about this comment today. In Australia, the term
"pissed" is taken to mean "drunk" or "intoxicated", so when I read it for
the first time, I was even more confused, thinking that he meant he was
drunk at the time and so wasn't as angry as he had anticipated! lol...
Bu
onnell.com
-Original Message-
From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 11:48 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
Will,
When you picked up an ist D for the first time your angst diminished,
and you were p
a snapshot camera.
On Dec 30, 2003, at 8:07 PM, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "graywolf"
Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
Now, Robb, and others, are pissed at Pentax because they do not get
full
compatability with lenses that Pentax has not sold for over 20
Ok, so after reading some of your responses and after chatting with Rob
Studdert today, I now "get" this. The one MAJOR point to me, is one that
Rob pointed out. The MZ-S doesn't have aperture priority from the body. I
had NO IDEA of this, and to me, this alone is a huge mistake that Pentax is
m
At 11:35 AM 12/31/2003 +1000, you wrote:
The stupid design of the memory card access port is probably another
compromise
due to the design size constraints. Unfortunately the *ist D review on
luminous-
landscape
(http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pentax-istd.shtml)
highlights th
- Original Message -
From: "graywolf"
Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
>
> Now, Robb, and others, are pissed at Pentax because they do not get full
> compatability with lenses that Pentax has not sold for over 20 years when
using
> them on the new cameras.
- Original Message -
From: "Tanya Mayer Photography"
Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
> I have to ask, maybe naively, BUT, what is the big deal about the aperture
> ring? Exactly what does it "add" to in regards to camera function, or
more
> to the
Tan,
Manual aperture setting on the lens is considered more accurate, there've
been reports that from-the-body aperture control can err by as much as 1/3
or 1/2 stop and is inconsistant in its degree and direction of error. In
addition, lenses from before the A-series can't support from-the body
a
- Original Message -
From: "Tanya Mayer Photography"
Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
> Rob (and others have mentioned it also) said "The transition to EOS mount
> was not executed in a clandestine
> manner."
>
> Just wondering what this means
- Original Message -
From: "Francis Alviar"
Subject: Pentax's dSLR future?
> I can't wait to get an *ist D. However I would like
> to ask everyone's opinion whether it's a good time to
> jump in now or wait for the next Pentax dSLR. Where
> do you see this going in the near future? W
CTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 7:37 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
> I have to ask, maybe naively, BUT, what is the big deal about the aperture
> ring? Exactly what does it "add" to in regards to camera function, or
more
>
al Message -
From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "pentax list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 7:40 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
> On 30/12/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
>
> >At least the Pentax K and M lenses are
ROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
> Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 16:43:09 -0500
>
> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Jim Apilado wrote:
>
>> I am one who eagerly wanted to get the *istD only to be disappointed that it
>> would not of
I have to ask, maybe naively, BUT, what is the big deal about the aperture
ring? Exactly what does it "add" to in regards to camera function, or more
to the point, what does it take away when it isn't availalble? Is it only
really a problem for those trying to use newer lenses with older bodies?
On 30 Dec 2003 at 19:33, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Now, I must ask, did Pentax ever SAY they were going to continue to do what
> they'd been doing? Did they ever say they'd keep the A rings or continue to
> fully support the K&M lenses? I know it seems like they had a good thing going
> with the
On 30/12/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
>At least the Pentax K and M lenses are usable, granted with restrictions, on
>the *ist D. This is more than can be said about 20-30 year old Canon lenses
>on their DSLR's
With the greatest of respect Uncle Bill, a while back when Canon dumped
on their o
On 30 Dec 2003 at 19:24, Bill Owens wrote:
> Yes.
LOL The *ist D is actually more compatible with old screw lenses than K and M
lenses.
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user s
On 30 Dec 2003 at 19:18, graywolf wrote:
> Now, Robb, and others, are pissed at Pentax because they do not get full
> compatability with lenses that Pentax has not sold for over 20 years when using
> them on the new cameras.
Make that 2 years.
The funny thing is that I suspect the reasoning sur
I hate to put my foot into this ring since I never had any of the old lenses
but...
Rob typed this: "Pentax have removed lens aperture rings, disabled
> aperture ring operation on bodies etc and this is just over a year after
the
> last limited lens hit the shelves and not so long after we were t
Yes.
- Original Message -
From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 7:09 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
> And didn't someone write that the Super Tak screw mount lenses were
entirely
&
On 30 Dec 2003 at 19:00, graywolf wrote:
> Ya, Rob. Pentax and Nikon have kicked their users in the shins. Canon on the
> other hand cut their users feet off. If you had had a bunch of FD lenses you
> would not have forgiven Canon yet.
At least they were up front, I could deal with that, same as
Well, Tanya, back when Canon went to autofocus, they intoduced a completely new
mount. The new lenses would not fit on the old cameras, and the old lenses would
not fit on the new cameras. Note that is NOT FIT, not NOT WORK IN ALL MODES. So
the Canon SLR, maybe an F1N you had bought the previos
And didn't someone write that the Super Tak screw mount lenses were entirely
workable when used stopped down to the working aperture?
Bill Owens wrote:
> At least the Pentax K and M lenses are usable, granted with restrictions, on
> the *ist D. This is more than can be said about 20-30 year old
Ya, Rob. Pentax and Nikon have kicked their users in the shins. Canon on the
other hand cut their users feet off. If you had had a bunch of FD lenses you
would not have forgiven Canon yet.
--
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 30 Dec 2003 at 15:38, Bill Owens wrote:
At least the Pentax K and M lenses are
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Jim Apilado wrote:
> I am one who eagerly wanted to get the *istD only to be disappointed that it
> would not offer full compatibility with older K and M lenses as my PZ1-p
> does. I no longer think of myself as owning any new Pentax equipment. As
> long as film is around,
On 30 Dec 2003 at 15:38, Bill Owens wrote:
> At least the Pentax K and M lenses are usable, granted with restrictions, on the
> *ist D. This is more than can be said about 20-30 year old Canon lenses on
> their DSLR's
I know we've been through it before but I find the lack of functionality using
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 3:32 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
> I am one who eagerly wanted to get the *istD only to be disappointed that
it
> would not offer full compatibility with older K and M lenses as my PZ1-p
> does. I no longer think of myself as owning any ne
I am one who eagerly wanted to get the *istD only to be disappointed that it
would not offer full compatibility with older K and M lenses as my PZ1-p
does. I no longer think of myself as owning any new Pentax equipment. As
long as film is around, I will continue to use my current film based
Pent
Francis Alviar wrote:
> I can't wait to get an *ist D. However I would like to ask
> everyone's opinion whether it's a good time to jump in now or
> wait for the next Pentax dSLR. Where do you see this going
> in the near future? Will Pentax release a higher resolution
> camera (8 or 9 MP)
I think Pop Photo just did a little piece on Pentax's upcoming
offerings...
> -Original Message-
> From: Francis Alviar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 12:35 PM
> To: Pentax Discuss List
> Subject: Pentax's dSLR future?
>
>
> I can't wait to get an *ist D.
Has there been an "official" announcement from Pentax stating that there
will be future DSLRs? Do you want a DSLR now or can you wait years? It
took 3 years I believe from the "announcement" of the MZ-D to the actual
shipping of the *ist-D (two very different cameras). I LIKE Pentax cameras
and
52 matches
Mail list logo
