On Monday, October 20, 2003, at 06:17 PM, Kevin Waterson wrote:
My lighting was set up with two heads with 2 stops difference placed
like
subject
|__|
Light Light
At 02:06 PM 10/29/03, throwing caution to the wind, jtainter wrote:
Will Robb wrote:
'Plural of LX is LXs.
As in, "I have three LXs".'
So, Wheatfield, do you have:
A flock of LXs?
A herd of LXs?
A gaggle of LXs?
An exaltation of LXs?
Grammarians on the list, please help.
Joe
a coven
Reel him in, Jerome. He went for it.
At 09:57 AM 11/10/03, throwing caution to the wind, William Robb wrote:
Well, you just fucked yourself as far as I am concerned.
You are either trying to sell defective equipment, or you are too stupid to
live.
Either way, I wouldn't be buying equipment from y
On Monday, November 10, 2003, at 09:29 PM, Joseph Tainter wrote:
Yesterday I tried my Tokina AT-X AF 400 f5.6 on the *ist D. Well,
Pentax Photo Browser identifies the lens as "smc Pentax-F
35-70mmF3.5-4.5" and the focal length as 400 mm. Earth calling
Pentax
Joe
How is it a Pentax problem
we gonna pitch a bitch at 11:30
Doug "obscure references R us" Brewer
At 07:47 AM 11/14/03, throwing caution to the wind, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Yep, I'm in a mood to rant a little ... and it ain't even Sunday
Okay, everyone, listen up. Shel only wants us to talk about what Shel is
interested in. Before you send a post to the list, please send it to Shel
first an
At 11:06 AM 11/14/03, throwing caution to the wind, tom wrote:
The really imopressive catalog is the *lighting* book. Omigawd.
tv
Yeah, that's a fun book.
Doug "snoots..." Brewer
At 08:44 AM 11/18/03, throwing caution to the wind, Bill Owens wrote:
>
> We'll need some veils and a snake :-)
>
NO! That may cause tv and Jessica to Belly Dance.
Bill
I could handle Jessica belly dancing.
At 11:46 AM 11/20/03, throwing caution to the wind, Bill Owens wrote:
One of the members of our church asked for a copy of this. The first sale
of one of my images. Little Brown Church in the Vale:
http://groups.msn.com/BillOwensPhotos/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=47
Bill
woohoo. Now
boy, now =there= is a straight line...
Couple things:
I had the extreme good fortune to receive a visit from the currently
hobbled E Reed, late of the PDML, and her entourage, including spouse
and two exceptional offspring. It was truly an honor for me.
It is possibly true that young Mrs. Reed
On Tuesday, December 2, 2003, at 09:13 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm back.
As am I. Been back for a couple of days, but pretty busy.
I was glad to get to meet you and the family, Eleanor.
Doug
On Sunday, December 7, 2003, at 05:14 PM, Cotty wrote:
On 7/12/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
Their website is:
http://www.grandfather.com/events/nphoto.htm#register
AFAIK the only way to register is to send them a check or money
order. No
credit cards accepted anywhere on the mountain.
Tha
At 02:57 PM 12/8/03, throwing caution to the wind, Cotty wrote:
Okay, here's a poser for you *ist D users. What's the maddest lens you've
had on your Pentax DSLR?
Gotta be the A*135mm f/1.8 ? Anyone tried that?
Anyone using the brilliant A*85mm f/1.4?
Anyone tried the 600 f/4?
Anyone mad as a h
At 03:44 PM 12/8/03, throwing caution to the wind, Mark Roberts wrote:
>
>At GFM, we'll be running the istd on a Tak 1000/8...
It's a portrait lens for shy people.
Last time Bill Fortney was at GFM, I pitched a new book idea to him--
Portraits From 500 Feet-- but he didn't bite.
There's always J
At 11:56 AM 12/10/03, throwing caution to the wind, Peter Jordan wrote:
I live in a village in Scotland and my home address gives much amusement to
locals when people try to pronounce it.
I live in a place called "Haugh of Urr". Prize to any correct
pronunications.
um...hoover?
Culzean Castle (C
Begin forwarded message:
Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by
Ross Cidlowski ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) on Thursday, December 11, 2003
at 18:06:19
comments: hi im looking for famous photos or famous events taken with
a pentax camera for a research project. please help!
Picture this, Steve:
One tripod.
One asphalt path.
One $7500 Pentax SMCP-FA* 250-600mm f/5.6 ED IF.
Gravity.
Bottom line: it happens.
Doug
At 09:45 AM 1/22/03, you wrote:
Yes, I feel pretty crappy about the lens! I`m the one that broke
Frank`s lens. Now I`m probably out at least $100 to have
Do we =really= need to start up another guns/weapons/geopolitical
penis-measuring debate?
I would vote no.
At 01:05 PM 1/23/03, you wrote:
William Robb wrote:
> What is the time span needed for something to be called a weapon of mass
> destruction (if we are going to put the term into the la
Congratulations, Arnold. Now is when the fun begins.
At 01:38 PM 1/23/03, you wrote:
I woul happily like to share with the list the reason for which I could
not (as had been planned) join Boz on his successfull Pentax Day, which I
had arranged:
Even for a Pentax enthusiast sometimes there are
As of Oct 1, 2002, it's pronounced "Pentax."
At 11:29 AM 1/23/03, you wrote:
Is it AHH-sah-HEE or ahh-SAH-high or something else entirely?
Dan Scott
Though we've had our differences, which I truly regret, I hate to see you
go, as I hate to lose any of our members. Good luck in your endeavors and
remember that you are always welcome on the PDML.
Doug
former Dart Swinger owner
At 04:39 PM 1/31/03, you wrote:
After exactly three years on this
I'd like to thank you, Bill, for your reminder that all Americans are evil and deserve
all the tragedies that come our way. I'd especially like to thank you for reminding us
here on the Pentax list, where we are supposed to celebrate our commonality as people
and photographers no matter our nati
At 10:28 AM +01002/2/03, Arnold Stark wrote, or at least typed:
>Hello Doug,
>
>>I'm not inconsistent. My position has been and will continue to be that politics has
>no place here on the PDML.
>>
>Would you say the same if we had PDML members in Bagdad?
I do not keep up with where members li
They can't hold it without me.
Doug
at least, that's what I tell myself
At 03:22 PM 2/7/03, you wrote:
Who else is planning to make it?
ya know, if you want to talk about photography, you just have to introduce the
subject. seems simple enough, dunnit?
At 9:07 PM +2/9/03, Paul Stenquist wrote, or at least typed:
>I've been spending some time on usefilm. com. I was originally drawn
>there by the flower photo contest (sorry M
Does it? I'd sure like to see some examples you've done with Portra 800.
Doug
At 4:24 PM -08002/9/03, Matt Greene wrote, or at least typed:
>>
>
>I have no idea of what film sped you were using. But
>Iimprovesilm inproves your chances over any other
>speeds. Nearly any camera/flash combinat
Welcome back, Mafud.
At 9:14 PM -08002/10/03, Matt Greene wrote, or at least typed:
>>
>While it may be obvious that one 35mm print or another
>may be discernable from Medium Format, a properly
>exposed, properly focused 35mm negative, say Portra
>160, when properly printed, can easily rival
okay, just to get this clear. I don't have time to watch ebay every day, and generally
just glance at it every week or so, less often if I'm busy, so I have a question.
If I hop over to ebay and stumble across an incredible deal, say, a 67II system that
my next door neighbor is selling because h
my own personal opinion, Bruce (and it's just between the two of us), having shot a
few miles of MF and a few more miles of 35mm, is that a good photo will overcome its
format.
Doug
At 9:53 PM -08002/10/03, Bruce Dayton wrote, or at least typed:
>Doug,
>
>Yeah, I was trying to figure out exa
might as well trot these out again:
http://www.alphoto.com/floral1.jpg
http://www.alphoto.com/floral4.jpg
Doug
At 01:31 PM 2/11/03, Wendy wrote:
Here's mine
http://pug.komkon.org/02jul/tulip.html
---
natural light, yup.
thanks,
Doug
At 02:47 PM 2/11/03, you wrote:
Very nice, Doug(for colour)
Natural light i assume.
Dave
Mafud, I'd sure like to see some samples of those hot-selling flower photos. Can we
see some of them online? Or let us know your fair schedule so we can come out and see
them.
Doug
At 4:19 PM -08002/11/03, Mafud, wearing his Matt Greene "disguise," wrote, or at
least typed:
>>
--
Douglas
This just in from Chris Brogden:
A friend of mine is looking to buy or rent a Pentax stereo adapter, the kind
that fit onto the front of a lens to allow for stereo photography. He
doesn't need the stereo viewer, just the adapter that fits on the lens.
He's working within a pretty tight time
At 12:41 PM 2/12/03, Mafud wrote:
I used to be a photographer at dog shows. It took
about two shows for me to discover that most of the
male professional handlers and groomers, even a vet or
two, were homosexuals. A lot of "Hair Stylists",
barbers and "Cosmetologists" are Gay;
but you already knew
At 01:20 PM 2/12/03, Mark wrote:
Probably he's just in a bad mood because of being hit on by a gay
florist. And because Pentax is about to switch to a
totally-non-backwards-compatible lens mount and send special agents into
all our homes to confiscate all our old-style k-mount gear.
Tempers get
...anyone who has recently come into my crosshairs for off-topic behavior
is now free to take advantage of this one-time offer to take me to task for
my recent savaging of Mafudkirklandmatt, if you so desire.
order before midnight tomorrow.
operators are standing by
yr hmbl svt
Doug
At 12:01 PM 2/13/03, you wrote:
LowePro Mini Trekker.
Yep.
At 06:20 AM 2/14/03, Mike wrote:
Doug wrote:
> hmmm. Dan has apparently read and digested "Drawing on the Right Side
of the
> Brain."
...which would also be a nice book recommendation for Amita.
--Mike
Indeed. Searching through the vast emptiness of my brain, I've also
stumbled on "The Awake
Audrey 2
At 11:07 AM 2/14/03, you wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, Christian Skofteland wrote:
> What was the name of the plant in "Little Shop of Horrors"?
Audrey, after the protagonist's love interest.
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eight
mm.77
Homer
(doug)
At 01:55 PM 2/14/03, you wrote:
Bruce,
First I gotta get the 85 or 77. Then maybe the 43mm?
Michael
At 1:12 PM -05002/15/03, Otis C. Wright, Jr. wrote:
>Doug Brewer wrote:
>
>>Before jumping into the river of frustration that is adapting zone principles to
>35mm, you may wish to shoot a few hundred more rolls of film,
>>
> Interesting, but what does one
Aaron is the popsicle guy. Then there's Brendan, David and Frank.
At 02:14 PM 2/19/03, you wrote:
>http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1310244
The guy on the far left appears to be sucking on one of those humungous
popsicles.
Can we have a left-to-right ID please?
Thanx
Cotty
It's not just fps. It's also how fast the camera is ready for the next shot.
Doug
shoots pretty slowly anyway
At 03:49 PM 2/19/03, you wrote:
> IMO, fps is the most over rated feature of any camera. C'mon now, how many
> of us really use it? I'd wager that less than 1% of users seldom, if eve
Yup. Already waved a chicken at it. It's running again.
Doug
At 04:25 PM 2/21/03, you wrote:
Calling all Kentuckians, Digests have stopped again
--Mike, from the sound-proof booth
P.S. The next Sunday Morning Photographer is about Pentax again...oh
boy...oh no
Mike Johnston
_
Trade secret, Peter. You understand.
Doug
At 10:01 PM -05002/21/03, Peter Alling wrote, or at least typed:
>Was that an organically grown free range chicken or the regular supermarket variety,
>enquiring minds want to know.
>
>At 04:38 PM 2/21/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>>Yup. Already waved a chic
hmmm. Where =is= BR?
At 12:43 PM 2/26/03, you wrote:
Been saving this one in my "keepers" file for some time now:
> Thinking that Pentax will start selling an up to date DSLR, when
> they've sold nothing more than simple P&S digital cameras, is pure
> fantasy.
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writ
bitch
moan
bitch
moan
bitch
moan
bitch
moan
bitch
moan
bitch
moan
bitch
moan
bitch
moan
bitch
moan
Freud would have a field day with that one.
At 08:32 AM 2/28/03, you wrote:
Ken Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
"I think I just fell in lust again.for the tenth time today."
I responded:
"In the 1970s, lyricist/composer Stephen Schwartz (Pippin, Working,
Pocahontas, The Hunchback of Notre Da
At the risk of sounding reasonable, I think there are only a few questions
to ask when contemplating whether to purchase the new Pentax DSLR.
1.) Does it take pictures?
I'll assume it does.
2.) Does it get in the way of taking those pictures?
Can't be answered without actually holding it in th
If Victoria's Secret is any indication, thongs seem to have panned out
pretty well.
At 04:11 PM 2/28/03, Shaun wrote:
Let's wait and see how thongs pan outshall we?
Cheers
Shaun
At 1:43 PM -08002/28/03, Tom Davis wrote, or at least typed:
>
>The last thing Pentax-folk hold onto is nostalgia for the history of innovation that
>is beginning to get
>long in the tooth a while ago now, and that was analogue, not digital,
>innovation.
>
>Tom
I wonder why it seems required o
At 09:19 AM 3/5/03, you wrote:
This has got to be the funniest activity that occurs on this list -
people who'd have a tough time figuring out how much to charge for an
8x10 telling a multi-national corporation how much to charge for
something as complicated as a camera.
tv
But the pricing has to be innovative, original, =sexy= enough to set the
product apart from the competition, doesn't it?
At 09:41 AM 3/5/03, you wrote:
Tom wrote:
> This has got to be the funniest activity that occurs on this list -
> people who'd have a tough time figuring out how much to charg
Ah. Well, I saw the $1600 price here on the list as well, but I've heard
nothing about it elsewhere, so I don't know how solid that guess is. Since
the specs for the camera have not been finalized, I'd say it would be
difficult to predict what the price will be.
At 11:34 AM 3/7/03, you wrote:
D
Nevertheless, if a camera is expected to sell out without yet having a set
price, it's foolish to suggest the camera should be sold cheaper than it
could be.
At 11:38 AM 3/7/03, Pål wrote:
Not to be negative but hardly any digital camera is made for meeting
demand. Nothing scare the manufactur
Just show the good stuff, Dave. I think you have learned that.
At 6:46 PM -05003/7/03, David Chang-Sang wrote, or at least typed:
>
>My question to all of you:
>How do YOU handle your proofs when handing them back to clients? Do you
>sort and only hand the good ones back or do you give them the
Why on Earth would you hand hold 1000mm?
At 02:30 PM 3/10/03, you wrote:
I didn't appreciate before I'd tried it how much the image shakes when
you're holding 1000mm of telephoto by hand.
At 04:04 PM 3/10/03, you wrote:
Doug Brewer said:
> Why on Earth would you hand hold 1000mm?
>
All the usual reasons. Faster maneuvering, faster setup time when I go
from a shorter lens to 1000mm, one less thing to carry, especially when
I'm mainly going from point A to point B and bri
There are better places for your political opinions. Find them and have a
good time. Just leave the PDML out of it.
At 09:34 AM 3/18/03, Burt wrote:
more inflammatory rhetoric
Ulan Bator, of course
At 08:46 AM 3/20/03, throwing caution to the wind, mike wilson wrote:
Hi,
Runing about 24hours behind threads on the archive, so this may
already have been covered.
There is only one place a universal PDML meet could be. It's
the place where Pentax usually debuts its announ
Yep, I have one I got on ebay a few years ago. Don't remember what I paid
for it. It's a nice item, certainly something to show off.
Doug
At 12:05 PM 3/20/03, throwing caution to the wind, Joe Wilensky wrote:
I won this auction yesterday -- has anyone ever seen this particular
Pentax item?
<
The digest choked some time yesterday. I waved the chicken this morning and
it should be back up and running soon.
Doug
list witch doc
At 11:12 AM 4/4/03, throwing caution to the wind, Butch Black wrote:
Hi;
I haven't received a digest since 4/2. Is it down or is it me? (or is it
Memorex?)
A.) This isn't a newsgroup.
B.) We absolutely can ask that discussion be confined to the list's stated
topic. We don't go to the politics list and demand to be able to discuss
Pentax cameras.
At 04:42 PM 4/4/03, throwing caution to the wind, Cycad wrote:
Oh, come on. Something as big as a war
So you object to Bruce belittling the French, but you think it's okay for you to
belittle Americans. What an interesting double standard you have.
At 2:49 AM +02004/5/03, Lasse Karlsson wrote, or at least typed:
>- Original Message -
>From: "Daniel J. Matyola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <
Hope you get feeling better, Vic, and come back to see us.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Folks: I know you do not hear much from me lately but I've been a little
preocupied with some medical problems that I have been trying to deal with. I
think I'll be leaving the list soon to concentrate on getti
Tanya,
You know, I've stayed out of all of your threads, since I figured if you
didn't catch on to the idea of charging a proper amount for your work a
couple of years ago, you weren't going to catch on. But for some reason I
feel compelled to give you a little wake-up call.
Please understand
At 01:29 PM 1/6/04, throwing caution to the wind, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
maybe I just don't give much thought any
more to how a photograph was made, and spend more time considering the
results.
Hang on, I need to find my family and give them a kiss. I'm pretty sure the
end of the world is upo
On Tuesday, January 6, 2004, at 03:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree. I recall Doug Brewer recently telling Tanya that, although
she was
talented, many of her shots looked like recycled versions of other
people's
ideas. "Perhaps that is true", I said to myself, "but
Yeah, insulting everyone is always a good way to start off.
On Saturday, January 10, 2004, at 09:13 PM, Rebekah Gonzalez wrote:
Ok thanks Paul. Actually I just subscribed to the digest instead, and I
could share my overpowering opinion with anyone, so I was just trying
to get
into the discussio
At 02:29 AM 1/12/04, throwing caution to the wind, Cotty wrote:
Just a quick note that is probably already known about but I mention it
here because there's no way I can know if it's known about (a sort of
known unknown)
Haven't received any digests for at least 10 hours now, which is highly
u
At 01:58 PM 1/21/04, throwing caution to the wind, Bob W wrote:
Hi,
> It was commonly
> thought that most if them were placebos that were sent out now and again
> to patrol low-income housing and apartment areas in an effort to frighten
> offenders into nipping out to the Post Office and buying a
Just had this link sent to me. Some excellent stuff.
http://www.fifth-essence.com/archive/bestpix2003/index.htm
At 10:48 AM 1/28/04, throwing caution to the wind, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Mostly pap, cute animal pics, and flashy colors. A few
"nice" pics. Surprisingly lacking by comparison is
reportage or documentary work.
The mother and child escaping from the fighting in Macedonia and the
Palestinian yo
At 11:08 AM 1/28/04, throwing caution to the wind, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Why waste our time with such crap ...
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
>
> http://www.pbase.com/image/25524341
> Couldn't imagine better composition and level of details ;-
>
> --
> Best Regards
> Sylwek
Did we forget o
At 12:03 PM 2/12/04, throwing caution to the wind, graywolf wrote:
And, just what official authorized them to claim that?
Ad Agencies, a bunch of dumbies that think everyone is dumber than them.
Oh well...
The same official who authorized Nikon to claim to take the world's
greatest pictures.
I had a GT-6+ back in the day. Custom silver metal-flake paint job,
leather interior/wood dash. It was a great, if temperamental, car for a
little over a year until it became a victim of applied physics.
Loved how I could tip open the hood/bonnet, sit on the tire, and have
access to most of the
On Sunday, February 22, 2004, at 09:03 AM, William Robb wrote:
Real fun is going that fast on a souped up Kawasaki 900.
William Robb
Sure, but not nearly as much fun as trying to stop one at that speed.
On Sunday, February 22, 2004, at 06:03 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote:
Anyone know of a way to find out if I am registered or
not?
I've seen your name on the list, Bruce. I'll pass along your concern to
the PTB.
Doug
At 10:21 AM 2/24/04, throwing caution to the wind, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
And some of us have worked very hard to make the photographs
we present here. So, bitch all you want about OT stuff, but
lay of the PAW and the posting of photographs.
What the hell are you talking about? I haven't said a wo
Q: How many PDML subscribers does it take to change a light bulb?
A: 1,332:
1 to change the light bulb and to post to the list that the light bulb has
been changed
14 to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how the light
bulb could have been changed differently.
7 to caution
At 10:14 AM 4/12/04, throwing caution to the wind, William Robb wrote:
He's setting up a mailing list dedicated to cameras and photography,
and leaving you with the one about racing cars, beer, scotch whisky,
and politics.
William Robb
hmmm. Seems like I should get first choice of the two.
At 11:50 AM 4/13/04, throwing caution to the wind, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, if you shoot RAW then you HAVE to post process to turn it into JPEG. I
am still talking the honor system here. Allow only shooting in JPEG and allow
no post processing.
People will really cheat? I doubt it. I think i
At 02:38 PM 4/15/04, throwing caution to the wind, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I don't consider it a problem, just a "feature" of the PDML
It's the nature of email, not confined to the PDML. If a server is busy
somewhere in the pipe, then that may make email back up and go a different
route, which
I am the proud owner of an *istD. Just a few questions.
1.) Is digital photography better than film photography?
2.) So, how does this thing work?
3.) If I use this camera, will I go blind?
4.) What's the capital of South Dakota?
5.) Who was the guitar player on "Whiter Shade of Pale?"
6.) If
It can be disconcerting. I carry both a compass and a flashlight in my bag,
and have been known to stuff a Columbia jacket in there as well.
The most absolutely and irrevocably lost I have ever been, though, was in
Granada, Spain. You wouldn't think so, it being all urban and everything,
but oh
Hi Troops...
I appear to be back on the road to recovery from the sinus infection that
tried to kill my Grandfather Mountain trip, so I thought I'd drop in a few
thoughts. It's overwhelmingly positive, so those of you who only have time
for whining and bitching should move along to your next Ch
Not unfortunate at all. I'm comfortable and satisfied with my choice of
camera gear. Makes photography less stressful, being fine with the equipment.
At 04:43 PM 6/26/03, throwing caution to the wind, Lawrence Kwan wrote:
True; but unfortunately, I am the odd man out in this list - I actually
l
But what if you need to batch cut? I prefer this:
http://www.powertoolstore.com/Qstore/p000197.htm
At 10:14 AM 7/2/03, throwing caution to the wind, tom wrote:
Finally, someone who eschews the slipshod.
tv
> -Original Message-
> From: Simon King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >Bunch of
John Francis
At 01:24 PM 7/3/03, throwing caution to the wind, tom wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> This has started me wondering, do California PDMLers ever
> get together?
I know there was one back in 98 or 99...what was the guy's name
It's getting damned tiresome going through my email and getting the feeling
that since I, as an unapologetic fan of Pentax and Pentax gear, appear to
be unwelcome on the PDML. It is now, I notice, become fashionably
oh-so-clever to refer to Pentax fans as cheerleaders, in a pejorative
sense. Is
Get back to me when your reading comprehension skills improve.
At 10:12 AM 7/9/03, Caveman wrote:
Doug Brewer wrote:
No topic, no thread is safe because they have to jump in and "correct"
the poor ignorant misled Pentax users to the proper doctrine. It's as if
they are saying,
nt of the
cheerleaders is insult.
Doug Brewer wrote:
Get back to me when your reading comprehension skills improve.
out being shouted down and insulted.
Is that clear enough?
At 12:20 PM 7/9/03, throwing caution to the wind, Caveman wrote:
Doug Brewer wrote:
Okay, your reading comprehension skills are perfect. Tell me what part of
this thread I've written says this list should be a place of
unconditional
How odd. What lenses are you trying? Are they Pentax lenses?
At 02:09 AM 7/17/03, throwing caution to the wind, Robert Szasz wrote:
I have been utterly stumped by the folowing symptoms, if any of the three
lenses I have are fully snapped in then the camera has a good chance of
not latching onto t
Now here's a guy with priorities.
At 02:41 PM 7/21/03, throwing caution to the wind, =Lukasz_Kacperczyk= wrote:
Hi there,
I'm going to spend a week in Paris (it's my honeymoon - I got married
yesterday :-) Anyone knows any good used Pentax gear sources there?
TIA.
Regards,
£ukasz
I expect solid news to start circulating next week.
At 04:37 AM 7/29/03, throwing caution to the wind, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
Havent heard anything on this for a while.
whats the latest news on release?
JCO
I guess we'll find out next week.
At 10:28 AM 7/29/03, throwing caution to the wind, Rob Brigham wrote:
Inside info, or optimistic deduction?
> -Original Message-
> From: Doug Brewer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 29 July 2003 14:12
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subj
How much is a Canon 18-35 lens?
At 04:05 PM 7/29/03, throwing caution to the wind, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey Pat,
I think that the price is bang on - the prices of those other bodies (10D
and D100) are the same here in Toronto.
If the Pentax is coming in at $2899 CDN vs the Canon 10D at $2499
At 01:34 PM 8/19/03, throwing caution to the wind, tom wrote:
Again, it was another fine production, with a good showing of the
PDML. Doug, Bill, Steve, Mark, Graywolf and a few lurkers showed up to
hear some excellent presentations and drink a beer or 12.
Thanks to the folks who organize it every
At 01:53 PM 8/20/03, throwing caution to the wind, tom wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I just (minutes ago) made a 12 x 18 inch print from one of my *ist-D
> shots from last weekend:
> (http://www.robertstech.com/graphics/pages/IMGP0068.htm)
>
301 - 400 of 1689 matches
Mail list logo
