Cotty wrote:
Cotty wrote:
Did I mention that we're off to see Alison Krauss in London in a couple
of weeks?
You lucky bad!
Paul
She's a dish. Oh yeah, and she sings real nice :-)
And somebody in her band handles a fine fiddle and I hear some
outstanding banjo playing.
Her web
>Cotty wrote:
>
>> Did I mention that we're off to see Alison Krauss in London in a couple
>> of weeks?
>
>You lucky bad!
>
>Paul
She's a dish. Oh yeah, and she sings real nice :-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
Cotty wrote:
Did I mention that we're off to see Alison Krauss in London in a couple
of weeks?
You lucky bad!
Paul
On Aug 20, 2005, at 11:17 PM, John Munro wrote:
WoW!!! That's really, really impressive, Godfrey!!! 250 lbs. of
anything, especially a pressed bench (whatever that is), is
something I'm sure I could never pull off, oops, I mean press on/
off (?). Whenever I'm in San Francisco and need to
On 21/8/05, Cameron Hood, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Your camera still sucks, though.
If you think that's bad, you should hear me playing my Weber Mando ;-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
Did I mention that we're off to see Alison Krauss in London in a couple
of weeks?
Cheers,
Cotty
That'll be a great show.
Since 'Brother, where art thou?', there certainly has been a resurgence
in bluegrass. And there are some amazing virtuoso musicians amongst
them, and Allison Krause and
ugust 2005 17:56
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: FA*24/2.0
On Aug 19, 2005, at 6:19 PM, keithw wrote:
> John Munro wrote:
>
>
>> Godfrey, that's interesting what you have to say about the FA24.
>> How did you tell it has "a lot of chromatic aberration&qu
LOL
On 8/21/05, John Munro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Godfrey wrote:
> "LOL ... I don't know, John. I'm just shy of 51 years old and bench
>
> press 250lbs easily. ;-)
>
> I hate carrying excessively large and heavy gear. Has nothing to do
> with strength or age.
>
> Godfrey"
>
> ==
Godfrey wrote:
"LOL ... I don't know, John. I'm just shy of 51 years old and bench
press 250lbs easily. ;-)
I hate carrying excessively large and heavy gear. Has nothing to do
with strength or age.
Godfrey"
WoW!!! That's really, really impressive, Godfrey!!! 250 lbs. of
a
Cameron,
I'm one of those guys who saw great results from the FA*24 on film.
I was worried about the lens until I saw Stan using it on his digital
body in one of the photos posted to the list. That's good enough for
me.
And I have yet to see bad digital results from it.
Perhaps I'll run some tests
On 20/8/05, Cameron Hood, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Seen this?
>
>http://www.guitarshredshow.com/
Did I mention that we're off to see Alison Krauss in London in a couple
of weeks?
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
___
On 20/8/05, Cameron Hood, discombobulated, unleashed:
>At least you've got some decent glass on your franken-thingy... too bad
>you're too old to hold it steady!
>
>Nyuk, nyuk.
LOL
You got me there pal :-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http:
On 20/8/05, Cameron Hood, discombobulated, unleashed:
> her Taj Mahal
>shots look like the building was designed by Picasso.
LOL
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
I think you need to be cautious about putting down others for their
findings. I do know how to use wide angles, as well as that lens,
having owned two of them. My film experience was very good. My
digital experience was not.
--
Best regards,
Bruce
Present company excepted, Bruce. I always l
Yo Cam!
Don't let the bastards grind you down
Actually you made 2 mistakes, cos as well as not getting a DSLR for 2
years while you were hiding under a barrel, you then went and got a
Pentax!
Having played with my mother-in-law's Rebel XT, with her $85.00 battery
packs (2 AA's stitched t
Atta boy, Cameron, give them naysayers Hell!!!
Viva FA*24!
===
Bruce Dayton wrote:
Hello Cameron,
I think you need to be cautious about putting down others for their
findings. I do know how to use wide angles, as well as that lens,
having owned two of them. My film experience was very good. My
digital experience was not.
Well, I'm going to keep mine,
On Aug 20, 2005, at 11:05 AM, Cameron Hood wrote:
... Get a 24, and make up your own mind. ...
That's exactly what two friends of mine in the UK did. John (DS body)
bought one, used it for a month, and sold it: didn't like the CA, the
weight or the bulk. Richard (D body) bought one and f
On Aug 20, 2005, at 9:28 AM, John Munro wrote:
... The size and weight issue doesn't affect me as it does Godfrey
- I suspect I'm older (and maybe stronger) than Godfrey, for I come
from an era when it was sacreligious to use (or mention)
"miniature", "lightweight" 35mm cameras among profe
Hello Cameron,
I think you need to be cautious about putting down others for their
findings. I do know how to use wide angles, as well as that lens,
having owned two of them. My film experience was very good. My
digital experience was not.
--
Best regards,
Bruce
Saturday, August 20, 2005, 1
On 20/8/05, Cameron Hood, discombobulated, unleashed:
>I delayed getting a DSLR for almost 2 years because people on this list
>said that this lens was 'terrible on digital'; really really bad CA,
>oh, my god. I didn't want to lose the use of my favorite lens, the 24,
>so I didn't buy a digital
I find it hard to believe that people have such mixed feelings about
this lens - either there are some batch to batch discrepancies (highly
unlikely), or (more likely) some of the posters really don't know what
they are talking about, and just find they aren't getting the results
they are after
John Munro wrote:
Was/is yours an FA*24, or just an FA24?
Godfrey prefers an FA over an FA*, for some reason...
Do you?
keith whaley
===
The plate on the side of my lens states,
"SMC
PENTAX-FA*
1:2 24mm
-IF&AL-"
I've never heard of an FA24 versus an FA*24; so, I checked Dimitrov's
Was/is yours an FA*24, or just an FA24?
Godfrey prefers an FA over an FA*, for some reason...
Do you?
keith whaley
===
The plate on the side of my lens states,
"SMC
PENTAX-FA*
1:2 24mm
-IF&AL-"
I've never heard of an FA24 versus an FA*24; so, I checked Dimitrov's site and
couldn't
On Aug 19, 2005, at 6:19 PM, keithw wrote:
John Munro wrote:
Godfrey, that's interesting what you have to say about the FA24.
How did you tell it has "a lot of chromatic aberration"?
Three different people have sent me a bunch of RAW files from the FA
[The attachment star.gif has been
ness more than
anything else.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "John Munro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 8:55 PM
Subject: Re: FA*24/2.0
I'm not sure I'd recognize chromatic aberration, but one aspect of it I've
been told is
nt: Friday, August 19, 2005 1:00 PM
Subject: Re: FA*24/2.0
I dont have it but I have heard complaints that it has too much CA on the
digital. Supposedly fabulous on film.
John Munro wrote:
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
With regard to the D/DS bodies, there has been a lot of polarized
discussion of it. Some love it, others hate it. I've seen both good and
bad results from it.
It is large and heavy. I saw a lot of chromatic aberration in some
sample exposures I
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
With regard to the D/DS bodies, there has been a lot of polarized
discussion of it. Some love it, others hate it. I've seen both good
and bad results from it.
It is large and heavy. I saw a lot of chromatic aberration in some
sample exposures I was sent by my frien
On Aug 19, 2005, at 9:41 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Any comments on this lens?
With regard to the D/DS bodies, there has been a lot of polarized
discussion of it. Some love it, others hate it. I've seen both good
and bad results from it.
It is large and heavy. I saw a lot of chromatic abe
I dont have it but I have heard complaints that it has too much CA on
the digital. Supposedly fabulous on film.
rg
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Any comments on this lens?
Shel
Would like to add, especially in comparison to the K24/2.8
Shel
> Any comments on this lens?
32 matches
Mail list logo
