On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 1:25 PM, Matthew Hunt m...@pobox.com wrote:
And a microprism is the ultimate.
My old Praktica (long since stolen) had a lovely hybrid screen:
A split screen centre surrounded by a micro-prism ring.
The best of both worlds, in my book.
cheers,
frank
--
Sharpness is
William Robb wrote:
I don't know how the guys using the cheap Canons with their trash
viewfinders manage.
Superior autofocus? :-)
drop and cover!
--
Christian
http://404mohawknotfound.blogspot.com/
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:58 PM, William Robb war...@gmail.com wrote:
- Original Message - From: Graydon
Subject: Re: 21th may is the day for the new Pentax DSLR.
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:05:06PM -0400, Christian scripsit:
Graydon wrote:
proper split-prism viewfinder
For me
On Apr 22, 2009, at 12:29, frank theriault wrote:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 1:25 PM, Matthew Hunt m...@pobox.com wrote:
And a microprism is the ultimate.
My old Praktica (long since stolen) had a lovely hybrid screen:
A split screen centre surrounded by a micro-prism ring.
The best of both
Bruce Dayton wrote:
I have a friend who uses the lower end Canons. She has told me more
than once that she really has to rely on the AF - manual focus isn't
a real option - especially in dimmer light.
Part of the problem with AF these days and lower-end bodies is the
lower-end lenses used
Pentax DSLR.
- Original Message -
From: Graydon
Subject: Re: 21th may is the day for the new Pentax DSLR.
Look kids, a real pentaprism
And we kids may detect this how?
Trapezoidal silhouette? Front of the viewfinder housing slopes like a
1915 battleship turret? Base
Bruce Walker wrote:
One of the more important features in the K20D that pushed me to upgrade
from the K100Ds was being able to use the PUF as a flash controller. Up
until then I never used the PUF and was considering gluing or taping it
down so it wouldn't pop up when I occasionally hit the
Look kids, a real pentaprism
And we kids may detect this how?
Trapezoidal silhouette? Front of the viewfinder housing
slopes like a
1915 battleship turret? Base of the viewfinder housing
almost as wide as
the inner diameter of the lens mount? Protruding, rather
than
You, also, expressed my thought very well, Mark.
Jack
--- On Wed, 4/22/09, Mark Roberts msrobert...@ysu.edu wrote:
From: Mark Roberts msrobert...@ysu.edu
Subject: Re: 21th may is the day for the new Pentax DSLR.
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Date: Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Graydon wrote:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:05:06PM -0400, Christian scripsit:
Graydon wrote:
proper split-prism viewfinder
For me, the above phrase is an oxymoron. Give me a nice matte screen.
Mind if I ask why?
Never did like the splitters. Too fiddly and given to blacking out.
Give
- Original Message -
From: Christian
Subject: Re: 21th may is the day for the new Pentax DSLR.
William Robb wrote:
I don't know how the guys using the cheap Canons with their trash
viewfinders manage.
Superior autofocus? :-)
drop and cover!
Say that on forum-neurotica
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 01:29:18PM -0400, frank theriault scripsit:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 1:25 PM, Matthew Hunt m...@pobox.com wrote:
And a microprism is the ultimate.
My old Praktica (long since stolen) had a lovely hybrid screen:
A split screen centre surrounded by a micro-prism ring.
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Graydon o...@uniserve.com wrote:
Is that different from what the Katz-eye screens do? (From the
description it sounds like the same thing...)
I don't know. Never looked through one.
I was merely commenting on generic split screen versus micro-prism
versus
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 01:28:22PM -0400, Christian scripsit:
Graydon wrote:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:05:06PM -0400, Christian scripsit:
Graydon wrote:
proper split-prism viewfinder
For me, the above phrase is an oxymoron. Give me a nice matte
screen.
Mind if I ask why?
I could not
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 02:32:07PM -0400, frank theriault scripsit:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Graydon o...@uniserve.com wrote:
Is that different from what the Katz-eye screens do? (From the
description it sounds like the same thing...)
I don't know. Never looked through one.
Fair
Doug, using fast lenes the split is the better option, for me. I really
hate when I can't change it for the matte for the long and dark lenses.
But 90% of my pics are taken with lenses 5.6 or brighter.
LF
Doug Brewer escreveu:
Graydon wrote:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:05:06PM -0400,
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:31:01PM -0400, Adam Maas scripsit:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Graydon o...@uniserve.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:05:06PM -0400, Christian scripsit:
Graydon wrote:
proper split-prism viewfinder
For me, the above phrase is an oxymoron. Give me a
My big issue is that I don't want to have to focus first and then
compose. Having the focus aid stuck in the middle of the screen
requires me to have to point it at the subject (almost never dead
center), focus, now shift and compose. With a nice matte, all I have
to do is compose and focus at
Graydon wrote:
Which is certainly a good thing, but _how_? What about the matte screen
indicates that you're in focus, or the location of the plane of focus,
or similar?
Ummm, because the image in the viewfinder looks sharp? Your eye and
brain indicate that it's in focus sending a signal
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Graydon o...@uniserve.com wrote:
What about the matte screen
indicates that you're in focus, or the location of the plane of focus,
or similar?
On a good matte screen (among the screens I had for my LX was a
grid-enscribed matte screen) objects seem to snap
Luiz Felipe wrote:
Doug, using fast lenes the split is the better option, for me. I really
hate when I can't change it for the matte for the long and dark lenses.
But 90% of my pics are taken with lenses 5.6 or brighter.
LF
sure. Doesn't stop them from being fiddly.
I'm a
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 10:58:00AM -0600, William Robb scripsit:
I have a very good matte screen for my Nikon F2 that makes the screens
going into modern cameras look like a wet shower curtain. My major
problem with focusing now is that the viewfinders are so bloody small.
Dim as a burnt
...@alphoto.com wrote:
From: Doug Brewer d...@alphoto.com
Subject: Re: 21th may is the day for the new Pentax DSLR.
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Date: Wednesday, April 22, 2009, 12:21 PM
Luiz Felipe wrote:
Doug, using fast lenes the split is the better option,
for me. I really hate when
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 03:15:24PM -0400, Christian scripsit:
Graydon wrote:
Which is certainly a good thing, but _how_? What about the matte
screen indicates that you're in focus, or the location of the plane
of focus, or similar?
Ummm, because the image in the viewfinder looks sharp?
Graydon wrote:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 01:29:18PM -0400, frank theriault scripsit:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 1:25 PM, Matthew Hunt m...@pobox.com wrote:
And a microprism is the ultimate.
My old Praktica (long since stolen) had a lovely hybrid screen:
A split screen centre
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 03:16:38PM -0400, frank theriault scripsit:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Graydon o...@uniserve.com wrote:
What about the matte screen
indicates that you're in focus, or the location of the plane of focus,
or similar?
On a good matte screen (among the screens
Which is certainly a good thing, but _how_? What about the matte screen
indicates that you're in focus, or the location of the plane of focus,
or similar?
Ummm, because the image in the viewfinder looks sharp? Your eye and
brain indicate that it's in focus sending a signal to your right
Graydon wrote:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 03:15:24PM -0400, Christian scripsit:
Graydon wrote:
Which is certainly a good thing, but _how_? What about the matte
screen indicates that you're in focus, or the location of the plane
of focus, or similar?
Ummm, because the image in the viewfinder
On 22/4/09, Christian, discombobulated, unleashed:
Your eye and
brain indicate that it's in focus sending a signal to your right index
finger to trip the shutter.
Mark!
Nice T-shirt.
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
On 22/4/09, Doug Brewer, discombobulated, unleashed:
I'm a look-around-the-frame kinda guy
Mark.
Good pickings in this thread.
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Graydon o...@uniserve.com wrote:
What about the matte screen
indicates that you're in focus, or the location of the
plane of focus,
or similar?
On a good matte screen (among the screens I had for my LX was a
grid-enscribed matte screen) objects seem
Beattie Intenscreens are still around as http://www.display-optics.com/products_35mm-format_pentax.htm
but I think they only have old new stock on hand. LX and PZ-1.
If we all scream at them they may put out a model for the K10/20/xx
model cameras. Eh?
On Apr 22, 2009, at 12:23 , Graydon
Christian wrote:
Graydon wrote:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 03:15:24PM -0400, Christian scripsit:
Graydon wrote:
Which is certainly a good thing, but _how_? What about the matte
screen indicates that you're in focus, or the location of the plane
of focus, or similar?
Ummm, because the image in
Thibouille wrote:
http://www.penta-club.ru/forum/uploads/post-1970-1240400101_thumb.jpg
Really doubt this is fake. This also confirms current rumours.
We all know the diameter of K-bayonet, so I decided to calculate the
body size. It's approximately 120-125mm wide - in other words it's the
I would shed no tears for the lack of a pop-up flash myself.
As someone who frequently uses the wireless function to fire two external
flashes using the pop-up flash, I would miss having the pop- up flash on
the camera.
Me too. I find it far too useful as a flash controller to buy a
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Peter Loveday pe...@loveday.org wrote:
I would shed no tears for the lack of a pop-up flash myself.
As someone who frequently uses the wireless function to fire two external
flashes using the pop-up flash, I would miss having the pop- up flash on the
And I agree with that first part. If the photo is some very close
portrait, the movement from placing the focus aid (or the AF target)
from the eye to elsewhere (assuming the eye as point of focus) when I
re-compose the shot may get me either focus trouble or a waste of time
and a perfect
On Apr 22, 2009, at 13:21 , Toralf Lund wrote:
Christian wrote:
Graydon wrote:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 03:15:24PM -0400, Christian scripsit:
Graydon wrote:
Which is certainly a good thing, but _how_? What about the matte
screen indicates that you're in focus, or the location of the
plane
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 03:33:04PM -0700, Joseph McAllister scripsit:
On Apr 22, 2009, at 13:21 , Toralf Lund wrote:
I'm also find it hard do choose the appropriate step on on the
viewfinder focus setting (on the one body I have where there is
actually such a setting.)
I think this is
Graydon wrote:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 03:33:04PM -0700, Joseph McAllister scripsit:
On Apr 22, 2009, at 13:21 , Toralf Lund wrote:
I'm also find it hard do choose the appropriate step on on the
viewfinder focus setting (on the one body I have where there is
actually such a setting.)
I
On 22/4/09, Christian, discombobulated, unleashed:
I have hyperopia, myopia and astigmatism
And all that time I thought you were just winking at me.
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
--
Cotty wrote:
On 22/4/09, Christian, discombobulated, unleashed:
I have hyperopia, myopia and astigmatism
And all that time I thought you were just winking at me.
Dude, I'm lucky to actually see you...
--
Christian
http://404mohawknotfound.blogspot.com/
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
FWIW, I am quite astigmatic - I wear corrective contacts and I have
no trouble at all focusing on stock *istD, K10D and K20D screens - do
it all the time. Maybe with glasses any movement of the lens pushing
against the finder could cause a problem?
--
Best regards,
Bruce
Wednesday, April 22,
Christian - remember, this is Cotty you are responding to. Do you
really mean to say I'm lucky to actually see you?
Being around Cotty made me appreciate the advantages of being able to
remove my (heavily corrected) contact lenses and going blind...
(astigmatism, presbyopia, and myopia).
Ok, good point. How about I'm lucky to be able to see anything... much
less you.
--
Christian
http://404mohawknotfound.blogspot.com/
Stan Halpin wrote:
Christian - remember, this is Cotty you are responding to. Do you really
mean to say I'm lucky to actually see you?
Being around Cotty made
I selected the start of this thread and I then did a sort by Subject.
Read the thread. The next message in my mail stash coincidentally was
from early December - Subash quoting a Pentax executive as follows:
Next year, we are planning to launch some three types, including
minor design
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 08:33:46PM -0500, Stan Halpin scripsit:
I selected the start of this thread and I then did a sort by Subject.
Read the thread. The next message in my mail stash coincidentally was
from early December - Subash quoting a Pentax executive as follows:
Next year, we are
- Original Message -
From: Graydon
Subject: Re: 21th may is the day for the new Pentax DSLR.
Which is why I, who think the K20D is a comfy compact size with splendid
ergonomics, am not wailing about the prospect of a significantly smaller
camera.
I'm just morally certain they'll
I second that. I use the pop up flash in controller only mode for
off camera flash. I'd hate to have to buy a accessory to do the same
thing. gs
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Charles Robinson charl...@visi.com wrote:
On Apr 22, 2009, at 10:48, Graydon wrote:
I would shed no tears for the
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 10:15 PM, William Robb war...@gmail.com wrote:
- Original Message - From: Graydon Subject: Re: 21th may is the
day for the new Pentax DSLR.
Which is why I, who think the K20D is a comfy compact size with splendid
ergonomics, am not wailing about the prospect
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 08:15:47PM -0600, William Robb scripsit:
- Original Message - From: Graydon Subject: Re: 21th may is
the day for the new Pentax DSLR.
Which is why I, who think the K20D is a comfy compact size with
splendid ergonomics, am not wailing about the prospect
Does anyone have any good info about new Pentax bodies. I still have to replace
my istD and not sure to wait or buy a K10d or K20d...
Thanks Joe
http://photo.net/photos/pjjdxn
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE
show held every second year in Germany
in late September.
-Adam
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 1:15 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone have any good info about new Pentax bodies. I still have to
replace my istD and not sure to wait or buy a K10d or K20d...
Thanks Joe
http://photo.net/photos
Should have some info on such coming out of next month's Photokina.
Jack
--- On Tue, 8/19/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Any new info on new Pentax bodies
To: pdml@pdml.net
Date: Tuesday, August 19, 2008, 10:15 AM
Does
I noticed a serious price drop of the K20D in the last weeks. Can't wait :)
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 7:15 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone have any good info about new Pentax bodies. I still have to
replace my istD and not sure to wait or buy a K10d or K20d...
Thanks Joe
http
PROTECTED] wrote:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Any new info on new Pentax bodies
To: pdml@pdml.net
Date: Tuesday, August 19, 2008, 10:15 AM
Does anyone have any good info about new Pentax bodies. I
still have to replace my istD and not sure to wait or buy a
K10d
, 2008 at 7:15 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone have any good info about new Pentax bodies. I still have to
replace my istD and not sure to wait or buy a K10d or K20d...
Thanks Joe
http://photo.net/photos/pjjdxn
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman
I just received a Pentax T132 achromatic (two-element) close-up lens.
BH had a used one for $59.00 so I thought I'd go for it. It appears to
be in perfect condition. It's a +0.76 diopter lens, made for the 67
system but I'm hoping it works reasonably well on the FA-80-200/2.8 (I
know people
There are an infinite number countable infinities, of course 8)
On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 18:50:09 -0400, John Francis wrote
How many countable infinities are there?
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 05:28:24PM -0400, Steve Desjardins wrote:
I've always liked the countable infinities. The uncountable ones
is it possible for anything to be close to infinity? Any philosophers
out there?
Bob
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 03 April 2008 16:44
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: help needed for new
Yeah! Chuck Norris counted to infinity. Twice. :D
If you add the M42 lens then you should also add the Pentacon Six and
Pentax 67 and 645 lens too. There are adapters for 645 made by Pentax, and
Pentacon Six lenses are very common to be mounted on any 35mm cam.
.t
There are an infinite number
] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 03 April 2008 16:44
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: help needed for new pentax lens website
I would think it best to restrict something like this to
lenses that can be used without an adapter. It might
: help needed for new pentax lens website
42
John Francis wrote:
How many countable infinities are there?
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 05:28:24PM -0400, Steve Desjardins wrote:
I've always liked the countable infinities. The uncountable ones seem
so passe.
Doug Franklin
Hi everybody,
as mentioned in the subject, i need your help :-)
I'm in the process of building a website that will hold a database with
all lenses usable on Pentax bodies (with preference for the digital
ones). I know, there is Bojidar Dimitrov's excellent k-mount web page
(and some others),
Ok so the Leica S mount lenses could only be used a macro distances, but
the Canon f0.95 would let in a lot of light!
P. J. Alling wrote:
Well you've set yourself an enduring hobby. Any m42 lens and the
earlier m37 and c, (video, 8mm(?)), mount), Bessamatic or Kodak Retina
IIIS/Reflex
Well you've set yourself an enduring hobby. Any m42 lens and the
earlier m37 and c, (video, 8mm(?)), mount), Bessamatic or Kodak Retina
IIIS/Reflex with the proper adapter, I think there may even be a Leica
S (m39) mount to m42 adapter which opens all of the Leica, and copies
such as Canon,
I would think it best to restrict something like this to lenses that can be
used without an adapter. It might be worthwhile to include m42 Pentax lenses,
but I would draw the line there. BTW, although you can fit a Leica 39mm
screwmount lens to a Pentax with adapters, it won't focus anywhere
: help needed for new pentax lens website
I would think it best to restrict something like this to
lenses that can be used without an adapter. It might be
worthwhile to include m42 Pentax lenses, but I would draw the
line there. BTW, although you can fit a Leica 39mm screwmount
lens
Hi P.J.,
I didn't make myself clear enough it seems (sorry, english is not my
native tongue, but i'll try my best). The point is not to have a
*complete* list of lenses that in theory can be somehow attached to a
pentax body, who would want that anyway? maybe such a list would be
historical
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 03 April 2008 16:44
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: help needed for new pentax lens website
I would think it best to restrict something like this to
lenses that can be used
Steve Desjardins wrote:
Sure, according to the Mathematicians. And they're almost as unhelpful
as the philosophers.
I happen to like mathematicians quite a bit. They're much more useful
than philosophers. Granted, it helps than I'm married to one. Now if
only I could teach her to add 2+2
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 04:53:07PM +0100, Bob W wrote:
anywhere close to infinity
is it possible for anything to be close to infinity? Any philosophers
out there?
Bob
Well, by definition, if any of the philosophers are out there then it
must be possible for something to be close to
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 12:27:39PM -0400, Scott Loveless wrote:
Steve Desjardins wrote:
Sure, according to the Mathematicians. And they're almost as unhelpful
as the philosophers.
I happen to like mathematicians quite a bit. They're much more useful
than philosophers. Granted, it
John Francis wrote:
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 12:27:39PM -0400, Scott Loveless wrote:
Steve Desjardins wrote:
Sure, according to the Mathematicians. And they're almost as unhelpful
as the philosophers.
I happen to like mathematicians quite a bit. They're much more useful
than philosophers.
But the Zenit M39 lenses can be used (Leica thread with M42/K register)
-Adam
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 12:33 PM, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok so the Leica S mount lenses could only be used a macro distances, but
the Canon f0.95 would let in a lot of light!
P. J. Alling wrote:
Steve Desjardins wrote:
I happen to like mathematicians quite a bit. They're much more useful
than philosophers. Granted, it helps than I'm married to one. Now if
only I could teach her to add 2+2 in her head.
Mathematicians prove things. Addition is left as an exercise for the
Scott,
Sure.and the sine of the square root of 1 comes right up any time
you ask. Huh?
John Graves
WA1JG
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Scott Loveless wrote:
Steve Desjardins wrote:
Sure, according to the Mathematicians. And they're almost as unhelpful
as the philosophers.
I happen
John Graves wrote:
Scott,
Sure.and the sine of the square root of 1 comes right up any time
you ask. Huh?
Hold on a sec. I'll ask.
--
Scott Loveless
http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
Ah, but those are Zenit lenses another kettle of fish altogether.
Adam Maas wrote:
But the Zenit M39 lenses can be used (Leica thread with M42/K register)
-Adam
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 12:33 PM, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok so the Leica S mount lenses could only be used a
Scott Loveless wrote:
John Francis wrote:
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 12:27:39PM -0400, Scott Loveless wrote:
A mathematician doesn't care what the value of 2+2 is; Relating this
to things that happen in the real world is a physics problem.
Christie says I like him. She doesn't think very much
I've always liked the countable infinities. The uncountable ones seem
so passe.
Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] 04/03/08 5:11 PM
Steve Desjardins wrote:
Sure, according to the Mathematicians. And they're almost as
unhelpful
as the philosophers.
Steve the philosophy major
Bob W [EMAIL
Steve Desjardins wrote:
Sure, according to the Mathematicians. And they're almost as unhelpful
as the philosophers.
Steve the philosophy major
Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] 4/3/2008 11:53 AM
anywhere close to infinity
is it possible for anything to be close to infinity? Any philosophers
Steve Desjardins wrote:
I've always liked the countable infinities. The uncountable ones seem
so passe.
Well, then, that lets the infinity of human stupidity right out.
--
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
How many countable infinities are there?
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 05:28:24PM -0400, Steve Desjardins wrote:
I've always liked the countable infinities. The uncountable ones seem
so passe.
Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] 04/03/08 5:11 PM
Steve Desjardins wrote:
Sure, according to the
42
John Francis wrote:
How many countable infinities are there?
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 05:28:24PM -0400, Steve Desjardins wrote:
I've always liked the countable infinities. The uncountable ones seem
so passe.
Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] 04/03/08 5:11 PM
Steve Desjardins wrote:
John Francis wrote:
How many countable infinities are there?
I don't know, but I'd guess there's an uncountably infinite number of them.
--
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML,
An infinite number, you can count them all you want...
John Francis wrote:
How many countable infinities are there?
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 05:28:24PM -0400, Steve Desjardins wrote:
I've always liked the countable infinities. The uncountable ones seem
so passe.
Doug Franklin
42
Are you suggesting coconuts migrate?
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: help needed for new pentax lens website
42
John Francis wrote:
How many countable infinities are there?
On Thu, Apr 03
hi yall,
I have been very interested for a long time but not finding any NEW price
information
on all NEW Pentax lenses made since the spotmatic (1964) era. I have
found a few NEW list prices for a few years here and there but no
NEW street prices for the older lenses. I would be very interested
. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hi yall,
I have been very interested for a long time but not
finding any NEW price
information
on all NEW Pentax lenses made since the spotmatic
(1964) era. I have
found a few NEW list prices for a few years here and
there but no
NEW street prices
Joseph Tainter wrote:
Over at Ned Bunnell's web site:
http://nedbunnell.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-k-ad.html
That's my kind of add... I prefer a twist of lemon to the olive
though... :-)
--
Christian
http://photography.skofteland.net
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well done. The contrast draws the eyes to the cameras, but the spilling
Yeah, but did they *have* to talk about megapixels? Sigh... -T
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
Tim Bray wrote:
On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well done. The contrast draws the eyes to the cameras, but the spilling
Yeah, but did they *have* to talk about megapixels?
Of course. It's the law. ;-)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Yeah, but did they *have* to talk about megapixels?
Yes!!!
It's the high megapixel count that makes the K20D a possible success
story. I wouldn't even mention the weather sealing. Definitely no
reference required to the quality of the pictures!!
I worked out that a full frame
On Mar 1, 2008, at 2:58 PM, Tim Bray wrote:
On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Joseph Tainter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well done. The contrast draws the eyes to the cameras, but the
spilling
Yeah, but did they *have* to talk about megapixels? Sigh... -T
Yes. While megapixel count
- Original Message -
From: Mark Roberts
Subject: Re: New Pentax Ad
Well done. The contrast draws the eyes to the cameras, but the spilling
Yeah, but did they *have* to talk about megapixels?
Of course. It's the law. ;-)
It's also what consumers have been programmed to key
http://1001noisycameras.blogspot.com/2007/08/lessons-in-supply-and-demand-new-pentax.html
snip
The initial production output for these lenses was at 1000 per month
each
http://1001noisycameras.blogspot.com/2007/07/two-pentax-da-lens-go-on-sale-in-japan.html.
/snip
It seems I'll get mine in
Roman,
I don't know if we live in different Estonias, but AFAIK our Pentax
dealer is going to get initially AT LEAST 50 of both DA* lenses (100 in
total). Those should arrive around August 15. This year.
BR, Margus
Roman wrote:
Remote Assistant user manual, converted from .chm, to .doc:
http://perso.orange.fr/krg/temp/PPRmanual.doc
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Michel Carrère-Gée a écrit :
Remote Assistant user manual, converted from .chm, to .doc:
http://perso.orange.fr/krg/temp/PPRmanual.doc
And now converted to PDF:
http://perso.orange.fr/krg/temp/pprmanual.pdf
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
601 - 700 of 1827 matches
Mail list logo
