iscuss Mail List
Subject: Re: What would you do (stay with Pentax, or...)
That is me.
But given the lack of quick focus shift, I think I'll be ok with the other
lenses around that focal length I already have: FA28/2.8, K30/2.8, FA35/2.
Heck, I even have the M28/3.5 and the M35/2.8.
Maybe I
On Wed, 01 Jan 2014 20:11:53 -0800 Larry Colen wrote:
>
>I have a 31, I'm not enamored with it, but it does yeoman work as a standard
>prime.
>I despise the sun shade but was dissuaded from taking a dremel and removing
>it.
>The shade is useless on aps. I made one like the da 40 with a couple
>> Juan,
>> What camera are you using your K and M lenses on?
>> Jonathan
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Juan Buhler
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 01, 2014 12:59 PM
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail L
om: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Juan Buhler
> Sent: Wednesday, January 01, 2014 12:59 PM
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re: What would you do (stay with Pentax, or...)
>
> That is me.
>
> But given the lack of quick focus shift, I think I'll b
The FA35/2 comes around often. It was available at B&H recently,
but I like the 31 Limited so much that I can never bring myself to buy it.
The one I'm proud of is the F28/2.8. Not many of those around and very small.
Regards, Bob S.
On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Bill wrote:
> On 01/01/2014
Paul via phone
> On Jan 1, 2014, at 7:36 PM, Bill wrote:
>
>> On 01/01/2014 5:44 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote:
>> And the M35/2 or A35/2. The K35/2 is a bit bulky and I don't have a FA35/2.
>
> I like the A35/2. It's beguilingly compact, and takes nice clear pictures.
> I've heard it is fairly rar
On 01/01/2014 5:44 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote:
And the M35/2 or A35/2. The K35/2 is a bit bulky and I don't have a FA35/2.
I like the A35/2. It's beguilingly compact, and takes nice clear
pictures. I've heard it is fairly rare as well. I can't believe you
don't have the FA35/2. It has nice glass
On 01/01/2014 3:24 PM, Juan Buhler wrote:
My apologies, sir. I think you might have *invented* the tradition of
enablement around these parts.
No apologies needed. I change screen names every now and again to
maintain fear and loathing in the hearts of the plebs.
I'm not sure if I invented
And the M35/2 or A35/2. The K35/2 is a bit bulky and I don't have a FA35/2.
On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 5:19 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
> And the 35/2.
>
> Paul via phone
>
>> On Jan 1, 2014, at 6:17 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote:
>>
>> Never met a Pentax lens that I didn't need.
>> Moved to a new house last
The sentiment has probably been expressed, but with the last upgrade to the
K3 I see no serious cause to switch.
With that I would ask how format could be any concern. 24Mp on APS-C
differs little from 24Mp in 135 form factor.
There may be technical reasons to change for some professionals, but fo
And the 35/2.
Paul via phone
> On Jan 1, 2014, at 6:17 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote:
>
> Never met a Pentax lens that I didn't need.
> Moved to a new house last month and the spare
> bedroom is full of Pentax lenses (and cameras).
> The 24, 30, and 28's are good substitutes for the 31mm.
> Regards,
Never met a Pentax lens that I didn't need.
Moved to a new house last month and the spare
bedroom is full of Pentax lenses (and cameras).
The 24, 30, and 28's are good substitutes for the 31mm.
Regards, Bob S.
On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Rick Womer wrote:
> Hmmm… It might be a horse race bet
Hmmm… It might be a horse race between Bill and Bob Sullivan…
Rick
On Jan 1, 2014, at 16:24 , Juan Buhler wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Bill wrote:
>>
>>
>> I have always been here.
>>
>>
>> Well, since 1998, anyway.
>
> Ahh! I went back to the emails saved by gmail and figured
On 1/1/14, Juan Buhler, discombobulated, unleashed:
>I went back to the emails saved by gmail and figured out which
>Bill you are.
This is not uncommon.
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__Broadcast, Corporate,
|| (O) |Web Video Production
--
_
--
On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Bill wrote:
>> We obviously never met in the old times of the PDML, but I see that
>> the old enablement tradition is alive and well :)
>>
>> j
>>
>
> I have always been here.
>
>
> Well, since 1998, anyway.
Ahh! I went back to the emails saved by gmail and fig
l.net] On Behalf Of Juan Buhler
> Sent: Wednesday, January 01, 2014 12:59 PM
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re: What would you do (stay with Pentax, or...)
>
> That is me.
>
> But given the lack of quick focus shift, I think I'll be ok with the other
> lenses around
On 01/01/2014 3:12 PM, Juan Buhler wrote:
On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Bill wrote:
The 20-40 has quick shift.
Maybe I have too many lenses as it is :)
You can never have too many lenses.
We obviously never met in the old times of the PDML, but I see that
the old enablement traditio
On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Bill wrote:
>
> The 20-40 has quick shift.
>
>>
>> Maybe I have too many lenses as it is :)
>
> You can never have too many lenses.
>
We obviously never met in the old times of the PDML, but I see that
the old enablement tradition is alive and well :)
j
--
Juan
Juan,
What camera are you using your K and M lenses on?
Jonathan
-Original Message-
From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Juan Buhler
Sent: Wednesday, January 01, 2014 12:59 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: What would you do (stay with Pentax, or...)
That
On 01/01/2014 2:58 PM, Juan Buhler wrote:
That is me.
But given the lack of quick focus shift, I think I'll be ok with the
other lenses around that focal length I already have: FA28/2.8,
K30/2.8, FA35/2. Heck, I even have the M28/3.5 and the M35/2.8.
The 20-40 has quick shift.
Maybe I have t
That is me.
But given the lack of quick focus shift, I think I'll be ok with the
other lenses around that focal length I already have: FA28/2.8,
K30/2.8, FA35/2. Heck, I even have the M28/3.5 and the M35/2.8.
Maybe I have too many lenses as it is :)
j
On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Bill wro
On 01/01/2014 2:09 PM, Juan Buhler wrote:
I think it will be the 20-40 for me then.
Is this you:
http://www.jbuhler.com/
??
If so, I think it will be a lens you will find happiness with.
bill
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to
On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote:
> No, the FA31 is an older screw drive AF lens and you don't have the
> modern convenience of touching-up the focus.
> I've pretty much lived on the AF results as is.
Oh.
This might actually be the dealbreaker for me, I think. I find that
I'm u
Yes.
Marnie aka Doe :-) Be nice to see you again.
In a message dated 12/28/2013 2:35:00 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
juanbuh...@gmail.com writes:
Definitely!
I went to several of the PDML meetups, up until 2007 or so. And I've
lived in the Bay Area for 18 years! We are going back after this
I had the 31 Limited for a while and wasn't very enamored of it. I didn't think
it worked so well for the size of the premium over the 35/2. And it is darn
bulky. And I hated the stupid fixed lens hood.
The 43/1.9 Limited was a different matter ... I almost kept a Pentax body just
so I could ke
The only thing I don't like about the 31mm is the fixed lens hood, (I've
only handled one once so maybe it's not a bit problem, but), it seems
that might be problematic when it's used on an APS-C sensor camera.
On 1/1/2014 12:32 PM, Juan Buhler wrote:
Thanks Bob... The idea of the 20-40 was re
No, the FA31 is an older screw drive AF lens and you don't have the
modern convenience of touching-up the focus.
I've pretty much lived on the AF results as is.
Regards, Bob S.
On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Juan Buhler wrote:
> Thanks Bob... The idea of the 20-40 was really nice, but the 31 s
Thanks Bob... The idea of the 20-40 was really nice, but the 31 seems
like it will be superb.
Does the focusing ring allow you to move it with the camera on AF?
j
On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 2:18 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote:
> Juan,
> I really like the 31.
> It's fast and kind of small and sharp.
> You'l
Juan,
I really like the 31.
It's fast and kind of small and sharp.
You'll not regret owning one.
Regards, Bob S.
On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Juan Buhler wrote:
> OK.
>
> So, after thinking a lot, and more importantly, after going out to
> shoot with the 6D and a nice Zeiss 35mm lens, I've d
OK.
So, after thinking a lot, and more importantly, after going out to
shoot with the 6D and a nice Zeiss 35mm lens, I've decided to stay
with Pentax.
I got some really nice frames from the 6D. The shallower depth of
field is really noticeable to me.
But the camera is bulky, heavy, and so are th
I was saving up for a full-frame Pentax. Doesn't look like that's in the
near future, but that's Ok, because some other things came up & wiped
out the money I was saving for that, setting me back to square one.
Maybe Pentax will have something to offer me by the time I've saved up
again.
On
Two things:
1 I hope you can contribute to the PDML Photo Annual this year
2 I think the K3 would work for you, but if you consider switching I
think the new Sony full-frame A7 and A7r cameras would be suitable for
street photography. Smaller than cameras with a reflex mirror and
quieter, too
We get together but very occasionally, usually when someone is visiting town.
Last time was when Jostein was here. It would be great to see you again, do
tell when you'll be in town.
I have thoughts on the Great Camera Hunt ... But that'll be another post. :-)
Godfrey
--
Godfrey DiGiorgi - go
Definitely!
I went to several of the PDML meetups, up until 2007 or so. And I've
lived in the Bay Area for 18 years! We are going back after this trip,
San Francisco is home after all.
Are you guys still meeting from time to time?
j
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 7:09 PM, John Francis wrote:
> On Sat
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 01:54:20PM -0800, Larry Colen wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 06:37:21PM -0200, Juan Buhler wrote:
> >
> > BTW, one more thing: I might be getting an M9 to replace the M8. Not
> > buying it--it's a long story, but basically I'll have an M9 to use and
> > keep as long as I
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 06:37:21PM -0200, Juan Buhler wrote:
>
> BTW, one more thing: I might be getting an M9 to replace the M8. Not
> buying it--it's a long story, but basically I'll have an M9 to use and
> keep as long as I want. So maybe that will take care of the full frame
> urges. I'm flyin
I've heard that the Sony shutters are loud too. But then again, I'm
still shooting a K20D and there's talk about how loud that shutter is,
until I talk too some of my friends who are shooting mid range Canon and
Nikon bodies, and then they tell me how quiet my camera is, (I guess
they don't li
Funny, I was writing when your email arrived. The Sony a7r I discard,
after hearing the shutter and seeing its frame to frame VF blackout. I
hear the cheaper a7 might be better in those regards, and seriously,
it is tempting. Wouldn't it be great to have one of those with an SMC
M 50/1.4 on it? It
Thanks all for the thoughtful replies.
Sorry--I was thinking 6D and looking at the 6D reviews, but somehow
wrote 60D. Maybe it was some kind of Freudian thing that means that I
want to stay with a smaller-than-35mm format. Or it might mean the
opposite, the only sure thing is that it was Freudian
Well, based on everything I've read lately, if you're not sticking with
Pentax the better choice as far as imaging would be Nikon. I haven't
compared Nikon and Canon directly for autofocus speed but others have
said that Nikon is as good as Canon at for that at least at the upper
end of their
On 28/12/13, Juan Buhler, discombobulated, unleashed:
> or get a 60D ($1300
Do you mean a 6D (36X24 sensor) or a 60D (APS-C sensor) ??
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__Broadcast, Corporate,
|| (O) |Web Video Production
--
_
--
PDML Pentax-Discu
On 28/12/13, Juan Buhler, discombobulated, unleashed:
>What says the PDML? It seems like the only good thing about Pentax not
>releasing a FF camera is that Cotty's hat is still intact, no?
I suspect it will stay intact for a while longer mate ;-)
Amazing to hear from you! What the hell are Pixa
Few random idea, Juan, if I may.
1. Canon 60D is not a full frame camera. The Canon 6D however is.
2. You can buy a bundle of 6D plus 24-105/4L relatively cheap. Further
it stands to reason that currently there're further discounts.
3. I would suggest you double check whether you could adapt
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 02:48:00PM -0200, Juan Buhler wrote:
>
> Now the time has came to renew my DSLR. Obviously, an option that is
> up there is a K3. It seems like a camera I'd love, and given that it's
> a Pentax, I can just use it without waiting for my fingers to learn
> where the controls
The Canon 24/105 is a great lens.
Just saying... Marnie aka Doe :-) Actually so is the 17-40, I believe.
In a message dated 12/28/2013 8:48:46 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
juanbuh...@gmail.com writes:
Hello all,
I don't post here much anymore, but I decided to ask this because I
see a lo
Juan - just buy the K-3 - clearly your pro-con list is leaning that way
:-)
gotta keep having your photos in the PDML Annual..
ann - (who diverted to the dark-side briefly and came back to the fold.)
On 12/28/2013 11:48, Juan Buhler wrote:
Hello all,
I don't post here much anymore, but I de
Juan - I have been enjoying the adventures of Milo and envy you your trip.
With each photo you posted I played a bit of a guessing game: "Did he shoot
this one with Leica or Pentax?" I never found any defining characteristic in
the subjects or in the rendering which gave a clue as to which one yo
All I can say is that the K-3 image quality is terrific. I suspect it would
equal the 60D, although the sensor wouldn't be as large. (Both cameras shoot a
full frame:-). The autofocus of the K-3 is much improved over the K-5, but I
don't know that it's the equal of Canon.
Paul
On Dec 28, 2013,
48 matches
Mail list logo
