Not long after I sent that, I remembered hearing how you were lacking
wall space.
Dave
On 2/14/06, Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> it is hanging on the wall - from a hook, though not in a
> frame...
>
> I wear it on rare special occsaions.
>
> and (ask frank if you don't believe me) th
Rob Studdert wrote:
>
> On 13 Feb 2006 at 19:53, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
>
> > and (ask frank if you don't believe me) there ain't no room
> > on the walls for anything else :)
>
> Of course I can vouch for you too, little paint is visible between the book-
> shelves and art-works :-)
>
> Cheers,
On 13 Feb 2006 at 19:53, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
> and (ask frank if you don't believe me) there ain't no room
> on the walls for anything else :)
Of course I can vouch for you too, little paint is visible between the book-
shelves and art-works :-)
Cheers,
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +
David Savage wrote:
>
> You should have it framed and hang it on the wall then.
>
> I'm serious :-)
>
> Dave
>
> On 2/13/06, Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have one
> > scarf I hardly ever
> > wear because I'm afraid I'll lose it and it was a present
> > from someone special.
>
You should have it framed and hang it on the wall then.
I'm serious :-)
Dave
On 2/13/06, Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have one
> scarf I hardly ever
> wear because I'm afraid I'll lose it and it was a present
> from someone special.
>
> ann
>
>
Mark Roberts wrote:
>
> Collin R Brendemuehl wrote:
>
> > 1. Which lens are you willing to get beat in a harsh environment
> > when you don't want to take the nice lenses out to play.
> >
> > 2. Which lens will you only bring out in the nicest conditions?
> > (and as a result this lens, though pe
Message -
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 6:07 AM
Subject: Re: The Sacrifices
- Original Message -
From: "Kenneth Waller"
Subject: Re: The Sacrifices
Kinda like the first dent/chip on a new car's finish. I
Rob Studdert wrote:
I fell off a slippery rock holding my LX with 31LTD fitted, I got dinged,
keeping the camera out of the water, the baseplate of the LX and the hood
and
aperture ring of the lens didn't come off too well either though the damage
stopped nothing functioning 100%.
Not the
On 12 Feb 2006 at 15:36, herb greenslade wrote:
> Last fall I tripped on a stair and fell heavily onto my *ist DS with my
> Pentax 100mm macro lens. Not a scratch!!
You or the camera and lens?
I fell off a slippery rock holding my LX with 31LTD fitted, I got dinged,
keeping the camera out of t
That's what comes of buying Japanese cars.
Same can be said of at least one US maker & one German maker, based on my
recent buying experiences.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Sacrifices
On
On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 19:52:38 -, Kenneth Waller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
The point in a products lifetime where it acquires its first
dings/scratches
etc always makes me feels annoyed with myself that I let it happen
(however
inevitable) but at the same time is fairly liberating.
Ki
Hi
I've probably and unknowingly been paraphrasing that for the last 40 years :-).
And I'm glad that it was one of my heroes that said it.
I have a couple of photos of musicians that are so tack sharp that it looks
like a studio - promo set up.
On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 19:36:18 -0500, frank theri
On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 02:52:38PM -0500, Kenneth Waller wrote:
>
> Kinda like the first dent/chip on a new car's finish. I've always felt the
> new vehicle should come with a chip/dent from the factory. Years ago that
> usually was the case, nowadays ,in my experience, it isn't.
Nowadays there
- Original Message -
From: "Kenneth Waller"
Subject: Re: The Sacrifices
Kinda like the first dent/chip on a new car's finish. I've always felt the
new vehicle should come with a chip/dent from the factory. Years ago that
usually was the case, nowadays ,in my
t the
new vehicle should come with a chip/dent from the factory. Years ago that
usually was the case, nowadays ,in my experience, it isn't.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2006 8:57 PM
Subje
Cotty wrote:
On 11/2/06, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed:
Please post a picture of the virgins.
Actually having a hard time finding any these days. No three wise men either.
Uhhh, does Alma know you're looking?
I know. Not if you're a wise man...
keith
Cheers,
Cotty
> From: Bob Shell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > That whole part of Kent is also something of a refuge for
> bizarre old
> > customs. The great English photographer Tony Ray-Jones
> squeezed a lot
> > of mileage out of it; he took some of his best photos in and around
> > Rochester.
>
>
>
On Feb 12, 2006, at 10:30 AM, Bob W wrote:
That whole part of Kent is also something of a refuge for bizarre old
customs. The great English photographer Tony Ray-Jones squeezed a
lot of
mileage out of it; he took some of his best photos in and around
Rochester.
Interesting. I found the
round Rochester.
--
Cheers,
Bob
> -Original Message-
> From: John Forbes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 12 February 2006 15:08
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: The Sacrifices
>
> Whitstable's OK, too. The natives are tasty.
>
> John
>
>
On Feb 12, 2006, at 10:05 AM, Bob W wrote:
Rochester may be dreary, but you're on the way to the North Kent
Marshes,
which are a spectacular wetland/salt marsh habitat, and the setting
of the
opening scene of Great Expectations when Pip meets Magwitch in the
graveyard
at Cooling.
It's ve
-
From: Bob Shell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 12 February 2006 13:26
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: The Sacrifices
On Feb 12, 2006, at 5:01 AM, Cotty wrote:
> We won't be ready to receive guests until the summer. Summer in
> England is a magical time.
Agreed. I have actual
hostgate.co.uk/northkentmarshes/index.htm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/animals/features/298feature1.shtml
--
Cheers,
Bob
> -Original Message-
> From: Bob Shell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 12 February 2006 13:26
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: The Sacri
On Feb 12, 2006, at 5:01 AM, Cotty wrote:
We won't be ready to receive guests until the summer. Summer in
England
is a magical time.
Agreed. I have actually managed to be there in the summer a few
times when it wasn't raining.
I used to "commute" to England when I was publishing a maga
On 12/2/06, Juan Buhler, discombobulated, unleashed:
>It was thirteen virgins then.
Har! Actually, they're not virgins anymore ;-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
On 12/2/06, David Mann, discombobulated, unleashed:
>So what was the ceremony before you modified its mount? Must have
>been quite a spectacle.
Just a quick dusting down with the goose down thongs ;-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://ww
On 11/2/06, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Please post a picture of the virgins.
Actually having a hard time finding any these days. No three wise men either.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
__
On 11/2/06, Cesar, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Cotty,
Dude.
>
>Should I feel honored with the fact that you let me use the 85 while I
>was visiting?
The honour was all mine.
>:Hmmm, maybe it was because I used it on your camera... I
>never thought about trying it out on my cameras...
You
On 2/12/06, David Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 12, 2006, at 8:11 AM, Cotty wrote:
>
> > SMC A*85mm 1.4 gets treated with the respect it deserves. The
> > ceremony
> > that precedes even the opening of the case that holds it takes four
> > hours and a dozen virgins in goose-down thongs
David Mann wrote:
On Feb 12, 2006, at 7:28 AM, Kenneth Waller wrote:
I can also understand guys who wouldn't use their best in less than
ideal conditions but suppose you're out without your pristine lens &
the opportunity arises that requires its use. You just blew it.
I agree with this.
On Feb 12, 2006, at 8:11 AM, Cotty wrote:
SMC A*85mm 1.4 gets treated with the respect it deserves. The
ceremony
that precedes even the opening of the case that holds it takes four
hours and a dozen virgins in goose-down thongs.
So what was the ceremony before you modified its mount? Must
On Feb 12, 2006, at 7:28 AM, Kenneth Waller wrote:
I can also understand guys who wouldn't use their best in less than
ideal conditions but suppose you're out without your pristine lens
& the opportunity arises that requires its use. You just blew it.
I agree with this. The best conditions
Collin R Brendemuehl wrote:
1. Which lens are you willing to get beat in a harsh environment
when you don't want to take the nice lenses out to play.
Whichever lens is on the camera when I find myself immersed in the
adverse conditions. ...that is to say, I'm much more concerned about
the ou
Please post a picture of the virgins.
Cotty wrote:
SMC A*85mm 1.4 gets treated with the respect it deserves. The
ceremony
that precedes even the opening of the case that holds it takes four
hours and a dozen virgins in goose-down thongs.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People,
Cotty wrote:
On 11/2/06, Collin R Brendemuehl, discombobulated, unleashed:
1. Which lens are you willing to get beat in a harsh environment
when you don't want to take the nice lenses out to play.
EF 24-70 2.8 L because it has rubber seals including on the mount.
2. Which le
1. Since I consider my camera gear as tools and not jewels, I would not
hesitate to use any of my lenses in an environment I wish to introduce
my camera to.
2. Seeing at my response above, none of them. You can ask the people
who have seen my gear, the optics and operational aspects of them a
On 11 Feb 2006 at 15:04, Bob W wrote:
> I don't like new, pristine camera equipment. I can only feel comfortable
> with it when it's been through the wars a bit. When I got all my Contax gear
> new I felt very intimidated by it until it had been scuffed around on
> railway floors, dropped from ap
On 11 Feb 2006 at 9:52, Fred wrote:
> > What's the point of having good quality tools if they're not used?
>
> I see your point, Shel. However, certain tools might be most useful for
> certain tasks, so "sparing" them for those critical tasks using others
> instead may help ensure that they are
On 2/11/06, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just use the lens I think is best for the job regardless of the
> conditions. My second most expensive lens (80-200/2.8) is my most abused
> and beat up. If I ever found myself not using a lens because I was too
> worried about it getting har
On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 01:12:02PM -0500, Christian wrote:
> Collin R Brendemuehl wrote:
> >1. Which lens are you willing to get beat in a harsh environment
> >when you don't want to take the nice lenses out to play.
>
> All of them. They are just tools and are meant to be used. I abuse my
> ge
Collin R Brendemuehl wrote:
> 1. Which lens are you willing to get beat in a harsh environment
> when you don't want to take the nice lenses out to play.
>
> 2. Which lens will you only bring out in the nicest conditions?
> (and as a result this lens, though perhaps now having some age to it,
> st
Last weekend I was standing knee deep in sea water with waves coming in
around me and salt spray in the air while holding my *istD with DFA50
f2.8 macro attached (with modified AF360fgz flash). Normally I would
have had the FA100 f2.8 macro. I keep it all in an Ortleib waterproof
bag when I'm
1. Which lens are you willing to get beat in a harsh environment
when you don't want to take the nice lenses out to play.
...
2. Which lens will you only bring out in the nicest conditions?
(and as a result this lens, though perhaps now having some age to it,
still looks like new)
Others have
> 1. Which lens are you willing to get beat in a harsh environment
> when you don't want to take the nice lenses out to play.
FA43/1.9 black limited.
> 2. Which lens will you only bring out in the nicest conditions?
> (and as a result this lens, though perhaps now having some age to it,
> still
On 2/11/06, David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This question reminds me of my old man. He has at least 2 of every
> tool he owns. 1 or more of high quality & then the cheap one he
> actually uses. He pitches a fit when I go for the good stuff :-)
My mother has a dining room and two kitchen
On 11/2/06, Collin R Brendemuehl, discombobulated, unleashed:
>1. Which lens are you willing to get beat in a harsh environment
>when you don't want to take the nice lenses out to play.
EF 24-70 2.8 L because it has rubber seals including on the mount.
>2. Which lens will you only bring out i
Some people do ...
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > It's like owning a Ferrari and not driving it.
>
> But would you commute in and out of a city in a Ferrari ?
>
> Fred
Fred wrote:
It's like owning a Ferrari and not driving it.
But would you commute in and out of a city in a Ferrari ?
Fred
Yes. Everyday if I could. A friend owned a Testarossa which he drove
to work in the Washington DC area almost every day. The exception being
when it was in the shop
> It's like owning a Ferrari and not driving it.
But would you commute in and out of a city in a Ferrari ?
Fred
- Original Message -
From: "Bob Shell"
Subject: Re: The Sacrifices
Lenses and cameras are tools. Does a carpenter have special hammers
that he keeps at home on rainy days?
I have a compound mitre saw that I am extra fond of.
William Robb
ppose you're out without your pristine lens & the
opportunity arises that requires its use. You just blew it.
We're all in this for different reasons.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: "Collin R Brendemuehl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: The Sacrifi
Collin R Brendemuehl wrote:
1. Which lens are you willing to get beat in a harsh environment
when you don't want to take the nice lenses out to play.
All of them. They are just tools and are meant to be used. I abuse my
gear and expect it to hold up.
2. Which lens will you only bring out i
On Feb 11, 2006, at 12:34 PM, Jon Myers wrote:
1. Which lens are you willing to get beat in a harsh
environment
when you don't want to take the nice lenses out to
play.
Pretty much all of them - even my new M*300/4.
2. Which lens will you only bring out in the nicest
conditions?
(and as a
> 1. Which lens are you willing to get beat in a harsh
> environment
> when you don't want to take the nice lenses out to
> play.
Pretty much all of them - even my new M*300/4.
> 2. Which lens will you only bring out in the nicest
> conditions?
> (and as a result this lens, though perhaps now
>
- Original Message -
From: "Collin R Brendemuehl"
Subject: The Sacrifices
1. Which lens are you willing to get beat in a harsh environment
when you don't want to take the nice lenses out to play.
None. I'm made of sugar.
2. Which lens will you only bri
I don´t make that kind of distinctions. When I use a lot of money on
equipment it is because I want to be able to use it under all
circumstances.
So, my A*85 has been through a lot, and it shows. It has even been
repaired once. In about 15 years the A*135 will probably look the
same, as
- Original Message -
From: "Fred" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For me, the harshest environment is whale watching.
I own one of these:
http://www.zodiacmarine.com/uk/bombard/familles/fiche.cfm?num_modele=29
I use my camera equipent all summer in this boat and keep it in an ordinary
camer
Bob W wrote:
When I got all my Contax gear
new I felt very intimidated by it until it had been scuffed around on
railway floors, dropped from apple trees, scraped in the bilges of fishing
boats, and generally lived a bit.
Mark!
Collin R Brendemuehl wrote:
1. Which lens are you willing to get beat in a harsh environment
when you don't want to take the nice lenses out to play.
The M lenses. I collected some of them for that exact reason. My
rationale being that they contain no electronics. They were also cheap.
2.
On 2/11/06, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I don't like new, pristine camera equipment. I can only feel comfortable
> with it when it's been through the wars a bit. When I got all my Contax gear
> new I felt very intimidated by it until it had been scuffed around on
> railway floors, dropped
> I'm not sure that I understand the thinking behind this question.
Well, Collin's two questions are likely to provoke all sorts of answers,
because we're all quite different in our relationships to our gear. I
can't really speak for Collin, of course, but he may have intended that
some of us wou
On 2/11/06, Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What's the point of having good quality tools if they're not used?
>
> I see your point, Shel. However, certain tools might be most useful for
> certain tasks, so "sparing" them for those critical tasks using others
> instead may help ensure that the
I ask him that question every time he reaches for the cheap stuff.
It's just one of his quirky charms I guess. :-)
Dave
On 2/11/06, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What's the point of having good quality tools if they're not used?
>
> Shel
>
>
>
> > [Original Message]
> > Wrom: OQKED
> Sent: 11 February 2006 14:37
> To: Collin R Brendemuehl
> Subject: Re: The Sacrifices
>
> > 1. Which lens are you willing to get beat in a harsh
> environment when
> > you don't want to take the nice lenses out to play.
>
> For me, the harshest environm
> What's the point of having good quality tools if they're not used?
I see your point, Shel. However, certain tools might be most useful for
certain tasks, so "sparing" them for those critical tasks using others
instead may help ensure that they are available when their use is most
needed.
And,
> 2. Which lens will you only bring out in the nicest conditions?
> (and as a result this lens, though perhaps now having some age to it,
> still looks like new)
Hmmm... Probably my worst example of a "sacred cow" lens is the A*
135/1.8. I tend to take this only when I know I am going to need th
> 1. Which lens are you willing to get beat in a harsh environment
> when you don't want to take the nice lenses out to play.
For me, the harshest environment is whale watching. For the last few
years, my solution to this has been a couple "user" copies of lenses that
are really good (which "spar
Collin R Brendemuehl wrote:
1. Which lens are you willing to get beat in a harsh environment
when you don't want to take the nice lenses out to play.
2. Which lens will you only bring out in the nicest conditions?
(and as a result this lens, though perhaps now having some age to it,
still look
What's the point of having good quality tools if they're not used?
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: David Savage
> This question reminds me of my old man. He has at least 2 of every
> tool he owns. 1 or more of high quality & then the cheap one he
> actually uses. He pitches a fit when I go
I treat all my lenses the same, although, for various reasons (usually
scarcity) I'd be more upset if something happened to some of them ... well,
thinking about it a bit more, most of the lenses I use are scarce to some
degree or another.
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Collin R Brendemuehl
1. K 50/1,4, K 35/3.5, K24/3.5 (all very good, but all rather
inexpensive and not essential to my kit)
2. K 85/1.8 (love it and tough to replace) and lately the DA 12-24/4
(expensive and much needed)
On Feb 11, 2006, at 8:58 AM, Collin R Brendemuehl wrote:
1. Which lens are you willing to ge
On 2/11/06, Collin R Brendemuehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. Which lens are you willing to get beat in a harsh environment
> when you don't want to take the nice lenses out to play.
All of them. Which isn't to say I don't look after them in adverse
conditions. They're tools & are meant to be u
1. Which lens are you willing to get beat in a harsh environment
when you don't want to take the nice lenses out to play.
2. Which lens will you only bring out in the nicest conditions?
(and as a result this lens, though perhaps now having some age to it,
still looks like new)
"He is no foo
72 matches
Mail list logo
