On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 7:53 PM, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Cotty"
> Subject: Re: SDM technology & lenses
>
>
>> On 10/6/08, Adam Maas, discombobulated, unleashed:
>>
>>>If you think t
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 6:35 PM, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/6/08, gldnbearz, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>>Canon 1Dxxx? Nikon D3? That's rareified air, folks. I've seen pics
>>of Cotty & Dave B., so I expect size to not be an issue for them.
>
> We'll take that as a compliment.
W
Adam,
Thanks for your thoughts.
Pat
--
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 above and follow
the directions.
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 12:07 PM, gldnbearz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Adam,
>
> On 6/9/08, Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The Buffer is small enough that it can be a real issue even when not
>> shooting in continuous advance. I know I had issues with that with
>> both the K100D and t
Hi Adam,
On 6/9/08, Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Buffer is small enough that it can be a real issue even when not
> shooting in continuous advance. I know I had issues with that with
> both the K100D and the *istD.
Can you give some examples of situations when you ran into this? Mo
>
> From: "Bob W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2008/06/10 Tue PM 09:25:57 GMT
> To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'"
> Subject: RE: SDM technology & lenses
>
> Who'll be the first to review this one?
>
> http://www.amazon.co.
On 10/6/08, gldnbearz, discombobulated, unleashed:
>I spent a stint in high school where there was a "Video Club" complete
>with full size VHS camcorders (remember those?), spare batteries (3"
>x8" x1.5"), extension cables, mike pacs, etc where we did tapings of
>"newsworthy" events around campus.
On 10/6/08, Scott Loveless, discombobulated, unleashed:
>HOWEVER, the EOS-1d mII N with (non-IS) 70-200/2.8 weighs
>roughly 5.6lbs (2.54kg). Just to confirm Adam's statement, my P645 with
>A200/4 weighs 4lbs 11oz (2.12kg). So yeah, your camera is freaking heavy.
NO ITS NOT YOU FREAKASAURUS MY
- Original Message -
From: "Cotty"
Subject: Re: SDM technology & lenses
> On 10/6/08, Adam Maas, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>>If you think the D300's bad, try a D3 (or worse, a Canon 1DmIIN)
>
> Au contraire mon frere. The 1D series with a 70-
I spent a stint in high school where there was a "Video Club" complete
with full size VHS camcorders (remember those?), spare batteries (3"
x8" x1.5"), extension cables, mike pacs, etc where we did tapings of
"newsworthy" events around campus. I learned that I didn't have the
height & size necessa
Cotty wrote:
> On 10/6/08, Adam Maas, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>> Not heavy? It weighs more than my 645 Super with winder, AE prism and
>> a 150/3.5 on it. That's heavy. And note the 1DmIII is noticably
>> lighter (due to Canon finally using a modern LiIon battery)
>
> Size is everything. No
On 10/6/08, Adam Maas, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Not heavy? It weighs more than my 645 Super with winder, AE prism and
>a 150/3.5 on it. That's heavy. And note the 1DmIII is noticably
>lighter (due to Canon finally using a modern LiIon battery)
Size is everything. Not just cameras. If the shoe
On 10/6/08, gldnbearz, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Canon 1Dxxx? Nikon D3? That's rareified air, folks. I've seen pics
>of Cotty & Dave B., so I expect size to not be an issue for them.
We'll take that as a compliment.
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||
On 10/6/08, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Who'll be the first to review this one?
>
>http://www.amazon.co.uk/Draper-4-5kg-Single-Bick-Anvil/dp/B000MTNJIO/r
>ef=wl_itt_dp?ie=UTF8&coliid=I51ZQYZ28Z0E2&colid=WC7E8MODN8EJ
Non IS version, tut tut.
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) |
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:40 PM, gldnbearz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Canon 1Dxxx? Nikon D3? That's rareified air, folks. I've seen pics
> of Cotty & Dave B., so I expect size to not be an issue for them.
>
I'm somewhat larger than Dave, and while Cotty's got a couple inches
on me, I'm pretty
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 4:37 PM, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/6/08, Adam Maas, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>>If you think the D300's bad, try a D3 (or worse, a Canon 1DmIIN)
>
> Au contraire mon frere. The 1D series with a 70-200 2.8 balances
> beautifully and is not heavy at all.
>
>
Canon 1Dxxx? Nikon D3? That's rareified air, folks. I've seen pics
of Cotty & Dave B., so I expect size to not be an issue for them.
--
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 above a
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:25 PM, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Who'll be the first to review this one?
>
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/Draper-4-5kg-Single-Bick-Anvil/dp/B000MTNJIO/r
> ef=wl_itt_dp?ie=UTF8&coliid=I51ZQYZ28Z0E2&colid=WC7E8MODN8EJ
You don't want a Draper anvil.
Trust me.
cheers,
Who'll be the first to review this one?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Draper-4-5kg-Single-Bick-Anvil/dp/B000MTNJIO/r
ef=wl_itt_dp?ie=UTF8&coliid=I51ZQYZ28Z0E2&colid=WC7E8MODN8EJ
Bob
>
> Not compared to your anvil collection, anyway...
>
> --- Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > Au contrair
Not compared to your anvil collection, anyway...
--- Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Au contraire mon frere. The 1D series with a 70-200
> 2.8 balances
> beautifully and is not heavy at all.
>
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_
On 10/6/08, Scott Loveless, discombobulated, unleashed:
>My Crown Graphic wouldn't be heavy for Sasquatch, either.
I had to Google that.
!!!
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
--
PDML P
Cotty wrote:
> On 10/6/08, Adam Maas, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>> If you think the D300's bad, try a D3 (or worse, a Canon 1DmIIN)
>
> Au contraire mon frere. The 1D series with a 70-200 2.8 balances
> beautifully and is not heavy at all.
>
> My opinion, you understand.
>
My Crown Graphic
On 10/6/08, Adam Maas, discombobulated, unleashed:
>If you think the D300's bad, try a D3 (or worse, a Canon 1DmIIN)
Au contraire mon frere. The 1D series with a 70-200 2.8 balances
beautifully and is not heavy at all.
My opinion, you understand.
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) |
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 10:29 PM, gldnbearz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> SR requires a larger body unfortunately.
>
> Understood & I expected that to play a part in the increased size.
>
> I found the DS to have the
>> best ergo
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 10:29 PM, gldnbearz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> SR requires a larger body unfortunately.
>
> Understood & I expected that to play a part in the increased size.
>
> I found the DS to have the
>> best ergo
gldnbearz a écrit :
> Can someone educate me on the SDM enabled lenses? Am I correct in
> understanding that the AF is engaged only if you use the lens with an
> SDM enabled body? Otherwise the lens if MF only?
>
> SO is a bad influence/enabler... I'm being "encouraged" to upgrade
> from the istDS
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> SR requires a larger body unfortunately.
Understood & I expected that to play a part in the increased size.
I found the DS to have the
> best ergonomics overall (the grip on the D is too shallow, the K10D is
> about midway bet
Adam Maas wrote:
> Note that the battery life of a K10D or K20D is much longer than a P&S
> with a proprietary charger. 500+ shots in RAW is quite doable, and
> twice that with a grip.
No doubt. I can't speak for the K20D, but my K10D regularly goes to 900
or more shots per charge. I generally
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 5:37 PM, gldnbearz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Adam,
>
> The tempting features of the K200D are the shake reduction, weather
> sealing, and the fact that it takes AA batteries. I have an Optio
> with a proprietary charger. Can't say as I always know where the
> charger
Also the DS weighs 18oz (~540g) vs K10D (793g w/ batt) vs K200D
(24.3oz/730g w/ lithium AAs).
Higher MP is nice, but not essential as that invariably leads to
larger memory cards then larger hard drives.
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 3:06 PM, John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 09, 200
On Mon, Jun 09, 2008 at 02:37:31PM -0700, gldnbearz wrote:
> Hi Adam,
>
> The tempting features of the K200D are the shake reduction,
a used K10D will have that
> weather sealing,
and that
> and the fact that it takes AA batteries.
but not that.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.n
Hi Adam,
The tempting features of the K200D are the shake reduction, weather
sealing, and the fact that it takes AA batteries. I have an Optio
with a proprietary charger. Can't say as I always know where the
charger is when I need it.
I knew about the viewfinder issue with the K200D, didn't kno
The DA*'s offer both options (SDM and screwdriver), the sole DA SDM
lens (the 17-70) only does SDM.
I'd look very carefully at the K200D as an upgrade from the DS, it's a
downgrade in many ways (smaller buffer, worse viewfinder, only P-TTL
flash) but does give weather-sealing, a grip, more pixels
The DA* 16-50 and DA* 50-135 autofocus on both my K10D using SDM or
my *istD using the old screwdriver method.
--
Best regards,
Bruce
Monday, June 9, 2008, 12:37:24 PM, you wrote:
g> Can someone educate me on the SDM enabled lenses? Am I correct in
g> understanding that the AF is engaged only
Thanks for the responses. It seem like there is no reason there not
to "upgrade" - although I'm still looking for good excuses...
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 12:44 PM, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't own any SDM lenses however from what I know only one SDM lens
> needs an SDM enabled
I don't own any SDM lenses however from what I know only one SDM lens
needs an SDM enabled body to autofocus, the new 17-70mm f4.0. All other
SDM lenses, up till now, also support the screwdriver drive used on the
*ist-D[x] and K100 bodies.
gldnbearz wrote:
> Can someone educate me on the SDM
On Mon, Jun 09, 2008 at 12:37:24PM -0700, gldnbearz wrote:
> Can someone educate me on the SDM enabled lenses? Am I correct in
> understanding that the AF is engaged only if you use the lens with an
> SDM enabled body? Otherwise the lens if MF only?
No. Some of the SDM lenses (the DA* 16-50 and
37 matches
Mail list logo
