> Does anybody know if Pentax is working on any kind of IS or VR technology?
Yes they are working on it. They have patents on telephoto IS lenses, zoom IS lenses
(both used by Canon) and IS teleconverters. Not a word though, when or if they are
going to market it.
Pål
-
This message is fr
Hello
Cyril, you are also living in France ???
See you
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: "Cyril MARION" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: dimanche 4 mars 2001 22:45
Subject: RE: Pentax and Image Stabilization
> 5000F is not the ave
5000F is not the average income in France but the minimum monthly salary,
exaclty 5800F, for 35hrs/week (called SMIC). Average income in France is to
my knowledge located somewhere above 1F a month.
Cheers,
Cyril
> That means the average is 5000FF, or 762, that is roughly
> the same amount
>
its J. Wüthrich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: dimanche 4 mars 2001 12:30
Subject: RE: Pentax and Image Stabilization
> Good question, I didn't realise it could be explained two ways while I was
> writing it.
> 762 Euro (the Euro character got lost
Good question, I didn't realise it could be explained two ways while I was
writing it.
762 Euro (the Euro character got lost in e-space) is about 710 USD, and I
think that must be too low. Well first the question: is it net or gross. I
assumed gross.
Frits
> Frits J. Wüthrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Frits J. Wüthrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That means the average is 5000FF, or ?762, that is roughly the same amount
> in USD. I find it hard to believe that is the average monthly income in
> France. Are you sure?
Do you think it's too high or too low? :-)
Gianfranco
___
That means the average is 5000FF, or 762, that is roughly the same amount
in USD. I find it hard to believe that is the average monthly income in
France. Are you sure?
Frits
>
> Hello Everybody
> the 80-400 VR by Nikon is sold at 15000FF, equal to three times
> the average
> income a mounth in F
Hmm... That may not be so far fetched. As I noted in an old message the
lenses (31, 43, 77) are all 86 percent of more common focal lengths. If the
adapter had a magnification of 1.16x they would come out to 35, 50, and 90.
--Tom
- Original Message -
From: "Brian Walsh" <[EMAIL PROTEC
Alan Chan writes:
>From what I have been told, "quality products" was the idea of an american
> many many years ago. But it was the japanese who put this theory into
> practice. An now, you can see countless of japanese goods which are
> excellent in both quality and value. Not sure about the
Hello Everybody
the 80-400 VR by Nikon is sold at 15000FF, equal to three times the average
income a mounth in France
See you
Pentaxclover
_
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
-
This message is from t
[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
> We do know the few lenses NIKON has with "image stabilization"
> cost more than most people in France make in a year, which is why they can't
> even dream of owning an "IS" system.
>
Mafud:
I usually enjoy your messages, and find them useful and informative. But
In a message dated 3/2/2001 8:48:20 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< This means that even if a Canon IS lens is damned good, it would have been
even better without the IS. >>
Canon "L" lenses are damn good in their own right. Canon ultra "L" lenses,
(300mm and up) ~ALL~
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
H, has our friend Gregory moved to France?!8^D
-
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 .
Treena wrote:
> I admit I don't know much about image stabilization, but I seem to recall an
> article in Pop Photo that said the technology sacrifices a good bit of
> resolution to achieve its result. For any of you who have used IS lenses, is
> that true, and to what extent?
Yes. The movable
In a message dated 3/2/2001 2:57:42 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< Not sure about the american products.
Any comments?
regards,
Alan Chan
___ >>
Gee Alan: BUCK and CASE knives come quickly to mind. Give me a few minutes
and I'll drop a w
In a message dated 3/2/2001 2:00:56 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< I owned a 28-135mm IS before returning inPentax Family. And this is not a
top lens!>>
I'm beginning to suspect you write just to be able to say NIKON! every chance
you get.
<>
BS! Everyone who can ~af
Dave wrote:
> I now understand why someone said
> recently that Pentax gets a lot of respect from Leica users.
Uh, as one who used to defend Pentax on the Leica Users Group, don't put to
much store in this hypothesis. ;-/
--Mike
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubs
" Treena, with one known exception, (75-300 IS) all the other Canon IS (2nd,
3rd, 4th generation) lenses are top of the line "L" (pro) models, not just
jacked up consumer lenses."
I owned a 28-135mm IS before returning inPentax Family. And this is not a
top lens!
Lots of Pro in France, using Nikon
<< Treena Harp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I admit I don't know much about image stabilization, but I seem to recall
an
> article in Pop Photo that said the technology sacrifices a good bit of
> resolution to achieve its result. For any of you who have used IS lenses,
is
> that true, and to
Pål Jensen writes:
> Also, its clear that Pentax is exploiting customer wishes with the Limited
> lenses. Many claimed that they were fed up with plastic lenses.
There's a guy at work who can't quite understand why I'd spend twice the
money on a 43mm Limited instead of an FA50/1.7. I don't th
Might be -- but I believe it was in an article talking about how auto focus
causes loss in resolution as well.
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 7:17 PM
Subject: RE: Pentax a
Treena Harp wrote:
> I admit I don't know much about image stabilization, but I seem
> to recall an
> article in Pop Photo that said the technology sacrifices a good bit of
> resolution to achieve its result. For any of you who have used IS
> lenses, is
> that true, and to what extent?
I used a
Treena Harp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I admit I don't know much about image stabilization, but I seem to recall
an
> article in Pop Photo that said the technology sacrifices a good bit of
> resolution to achieve its result. For any of you who have used IS lenses,
is
> that true, and to what ext
I admit I don't know much about image stabilization, but I seem to recall an
article in Pop Photo that said the technology sacrifices a good bit of
resolution to achieve its result. For any of you who have used IS lenses, is
that true, and to what extent?
A scroll of mail from Pål Jensen <[EMAIL
Plausible and semi-confirmed. I've heard the MZ-1 Turbo is actually an LF
RF with IS, AF *and* peanut M&Ms, too.
Dan Scott (just how do these rumors get started?)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>For example, company gossip will say "the flagship will have IS, AF
>and OTF" when what's really happening is t
Ed wrote:
> Just for the record, I didn't make this up or even speculate it myself. It
> is exactly and precisely what I was told by my Pentax rep, and what many of
> them were collectively told.
Well if they were told that then its cover up to prevent further speculations.
>Also, I'm su
Ed wrote:
> Well, if it's a U.S. Rep you're talking to, chances are they won't know
> anything about future products or plans. They seem to be able to find out
> about what Pentax WAS doing, or almost doing, but they are incredibly
> uninformed about any plans Pentax may have for the future. I
27 matches
Mail list logo
