On May 1, 2010, at 10:02, Jeffery Smith wrote:
Does anyone know why the body only in black is more expensive than a colored
body with the zoom lens? I would prefer not to buy the kit lens as it is
really not a good substitute for either of the zooms I now own.
Get it with the kit and then
I used the kit lens on my K-x once, to see how it worked. Most of the
IMGP shots in this set were shot with it:
http://www.fluidr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157623732458488/
For a kit lens, it doesn't suck. Apart from my DA40 it might also be
my lightest lens. Which has some benefits.
On
Actually, it isn't bad. I didn't see anything that flew out at me as poor
optics. I'll give mine a whirl when it arrives.
Jeffery
On May 2, 2010, at 3:33 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
I used the kit lens on my K-x once, to see how it worked. Most of the IMGP
shots in this set were shot with it:
For some reason this flacker link is causing my system to reboot.
(Win2K SP4, Firefox 3.6.3), I tried it three times, three reboots. I'll
only hit myself on the head with a hammer so many times.
On 5/2/2010 4:33 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
I used the kit lens on my K-x once, to see how it worked.
Oh dear, my iMac is not having a problem with it.
Here we go again ;-)
Jeffery
On May 2, 2010, at 4:15 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
For some reason this flacker link is causing my system to reboot. (Win2K
SP4, Firefox 3.6.3), I tried it three times, three reboots. I'll only hit
No problems here...Win7/64 - Firefox 3.6.3
-p
On 5/2/2010 4:27 PM, Jeffery Smith wrote:
Oh dear, my iMac is not having a problem with it.
Here we go again ;-)
Jeffery
On May 2, 2010, at 4:15 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
For some reason this flacker link is causing my system to
On May 2, 2010, at 2:15 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
For some reason this flacker link is causing my system to reboot.
(Win2K SP4, Firefox 3.6.3), I tried it three times, three reboots.
I'll only hit myself on the head with a hammer so many times.
Weird. The reboot problem, not the fact
Jeffery Smith wrote:
While it is apparently marketed toward the average Joe/Jane who might want a
bit better digital camera, what is the verdict on the Pentax K-x? Does anyone
on the forum have and use one?
Yes. Buy it.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
2010/5/1 William Robb war...@gmail.com:
Pentax knocked one out of the hockey court with this one.
The what?
Stick with ballparks.
There's a par for every course, isn't there? :-)
I have only played with a K-x for a couple of hours, but it seems like
a very nice little camera. I got a
Does anyone know why the body only in black is more expensive than a colored
body with the zoom lens? I would prefer not to buy the kit lens as it is really
not a good substitute for either of the zooms I now own.
Jeffery
On May 1, 2010, at 3:56 AM, AlunFoto wrote:
2010/5/1 William Robb
Does anyone know why the body only in black is more expensive than a colored
body with the zoom lens?
Marketing.
On 5/1/2010 11:02 AM, Jeffery Smith wrote:
Does anyone know why the body only in black is more expensive than a colored
body with the zoom lens? I would prefer not to buy the
Figures.
On May 1, 2010, at 10:08 AM, P. J. Alling wrote:
Does anyone know why the body only in black is more expensive than a colored
body with the zoom lens?
Marketing.
On 5/1/2010 11:02 AM, Jeffery Smith wrote:
Does anyone know why the body only in black is more expensive than
Like P.J. says it's Marketing.
You've got to learn to think of it as a special deal only available on
the colored bodies.
I'd like a yellow one please.
Regards, Bob S.
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 10:08 AM, P. J. Alling
webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote:
Does anyone know why the body only in black is
Our major crack house, Henrys Cameras, has the body only about $20
less than with the kit lens.
Dave
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@gmail.com wrote:
Figures.
On May 1, 2010, at 10:08 AM, P. J. Alling wrote:
Does anyone know why the body only in black is more
It begins to sound like you should get the body with the kit lens, those
usually sell for about $100 on ebay. So you'll come out ahead.
On 5/1/2010 12:46 PM, David J Brooks wrote:
Our major crack house, Henrys Cameras, has the body only about $20
less than with the kit lens.
Dave
On Sat,
It's the new DA L kit lens, not the mechanically better DA or DA II
version which are the ones which go for $100. Plastic mount, no hood
and no QSF, same optics as the DA II and WR versions though.
-Adam
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 1:00 PM, P. J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote:
It begins to
The uninitiated will still pay $100.00.
On 5/1/2010 1:09 PM, Adam Maas wrote:
It's the new DA L kit lens, not the mechanically better DA or DA II
version which are the ones which go for $100. Plastic mount, no hood
and no QSF, same optics as the DA II and WR versions though.
-Adam
On Sat, May
But it would have to be delivered. Thats a no no here, if i want to
see my 58th BD.
dave
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 1:00 PM, P. J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote:
It begins to sound like you should get the body with the kit lens, those
usually sell for about $100 on ebay. So you'll come
On 4/30/2010 4:15 PM, Jeffery Smith wrote:
While it is apparently marketed toward the average Joe/Jane who might want a
bit better digital camera, what is the verdict on the Pentax K-x? Does anyone
on the forum have and use one?
there are probably half a dozen of us that bought one as a
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 7:15 PM, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@gmail.com wrote:
While it is apparently marketed toward the average Joe/Jane who might want a
bit better digital camera, what is the verdict on the Pentax K-x? Does
anyone on the forum have and use one?
Jeffery Smith
Several of us
- Original Message -
From: Larry Colen
Subject: Re: Pentax K-x - What say you?
Pentax knocked one out of the hockey court with this one.
The what?
Stick with ballparks.
William Robb
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo
On 01/05/2010, Jeffery Smith jsmith...@gmail.com wrote:
While it is apparently marketed toward the average Joe/Jane who might want a
bit better digital camera, what is the verdict on the Pentax K-x? Does
anyone on the forum have and use one?
Hi Jeffery,
Firstly welcome aboard, it's a great
Larry and Adam, thanks for the replies.
I'm very glad to hear about the low light capabilities. I have been using
rangefinders primarily for the past 10 years because lack of mirror flap and
fast lens availability made low light work possible (at least with film). I
have followed Fuji reviews
Well, you would have to determine what factors are most important to
you. As far as low light goes, it is the best Pentax body and
possibly the best APS-C body from any maker. As far as size and
ergonomics, it is great. Now, does it compare to the K20D or K7 when
it comes to things like robust
Did you shoot in RAW mode? That seems to make a world of difference noise-wise
in some cameras.
Jeffery
On Apr 30, 2010, at 6:59 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote:
Well, you would have to determine what factors are most important to
you. As far as low light goes, it is the best Pentax body and
That was a jpg straight out of the camera. Pentax has seemed to
really dialed in the noise issue in the jpg engine for the K-x.
--
Best regards,
Bruce
Friday, April 30, 2010, 5:01:51 PM, you wrote:
JS Did you shoot in RAW mode? That seems to make a world of
JS difference noise-wise in some
RAW is even better, especially when processed through CaptureOne 5.1.
-Adam
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 8:08 PM, Bruce Dayton bkday...@daytonphoto.com wrote:
That was a jpg straight out of the camera. Pentax has seemed to
really dialed in the noise issue in the jpg engine for the K-x.
--
Best
27 matches
Mail list logo
