David Mann mused:
>
> On Mar 8, 2005, at 5:48 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
>
> > So who else shoots successfully one handed? I certainly end up with
> > marginal
> > results at best when I do (which is only when there is no other
> > option).
>
> Only when there's no other option.
>
> About the on
David Oswald mused:
>
> I just noticed a 28mm Pentax shift lens on eBay. I've always wondered
> about this lens (but not enough to shell out the cash). It seems that
> nowadays, in the digital age, a shift lens *may* be one of those things
> that has become obsolete. Are they still getting u
Mark Roberts mused:
>
> "Bill Owens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >When you get the replacement (apprx $32.00 US), run, don't walk, to the
> >nearest pharmacy and find the small rubber bands in the hair care
> >department. They are even available in black and will hold the eyecup in
> >plac
The MZ-S retracts the lens to minimum zoom length, but doesn't re-focus.
John Whittingham mused:
>
> Hi Joe
>
> Had to check, my memory is not what it used to be. When powered off the 28-
> 105 zooms back to 55mm approx. and infinity on the focus. If the power zoom
> feature is not engaged, w
John Whittingham mused:
>
> > According to the FA manual, the power zoom lenses retract but do not
> > focus to infinity with the MZ-S.
>
> Strange on such a high spec body, Pentax eh :)
Not if you assume it's going to be used with IF lenses ...
With most of my lenses the change of length with
The 28-105 power zoom (the lens I mounted on my MZ-S to test)
changes length by perhaps 4mm over the whole focus range.
That's about 1/3 of the change in length due to the zoom.
So the MZ-S loses closer to a quarter than half the potential
benefit if it were to change the focus as well as the zoo
Carlos Royo mused:
>
> Joe Wilensky escribió:
> > But are any of them power zoom lenses? I think most of the IF lenses
> > replaced older power zoom designs.
>
> The FA* 80-200 2.8 is both power zoom and IF. And I think the awesome
> 250-600 mm. is also both.
That is correct (although neither
Bruce Dayton mused:
>
> I am a little slow at getting some shots together - I have been
> swamped since getting home.
>
> I had a wonderful time meeting new people and getting reacquainted
> with those I already knew. During that time, I did manage to get a
> few shots in along with trying out a
Godfrey DiGiorgi mused:
>
> On Mar 9, 2005, at 6:32 AM, Dave Kennedy wrote:
>
> > ...The perspective for the lenses are the same (as 35mm), but the
> > coverage is smaller. Hence if I want the effect and coverage of a 28mm
> > lens, I can't get it. ...
>
> That's incorrect. Perspective is a fun
Rick Womer mused:
>
> Another parent was shooting from his seat with a C D20.
> Geez, those things are big.
If you think the 20D is big, try a 10D. Then try a 1D.
The first thing I thought, when I eventually got to see a 20D,
was that Canon had actually got the camera down to a reasonabl
Shel Belinkoff mused:
>
> It seems that Pentax may soon be coming out with a replacement for the
> istD. How many istD owners would be interested in trading in the D for the
> newer camera, and what features or improvements would be needed in order to
> make that choice?
I have no interest in tr
Juan Buhler mused:
>
> Hello PDMLers,
>
> I have two of my photographs exhibited at the Stepping Stone gallery,
> in Huntington, NY. More, one of them was selected for the exhibition
> card:
>
> http://www.steppingstonegallery.com/new_exhibition.htm
Way to go, Juan!
Juan Buhler mused:
>
> On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 15:14:32 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Obviously a small (higher) f stop shows up fine detail that might get
> > blurred
> > with a shallower depth of field.
>
>
> This is precisely what is not obvious to me. If the dust is on
Rob Studdert mused:
>
> On 9 Mar 2005 at 17:01, Pål Jensen wrote:
>
> > Anyway,
> > according to Pentax they will market a MF based DSLR (almost certainly with
> > the
> > 645 mount) withing a year (regardless of demand it seems!). This will be
> > Pentax
> > pro offering. Below it will be a k-
I saw the family with the kids eating ice cream; they were
just outside the hotel in the history park. There was another
adult, and another child, as well; the other child had even
more ice cream all over his face. I thought about trying to
get a shot of him, but I'm not comfortable doing that.
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 01:45:31AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 3/9/2005 10:30:24 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/norcal/godfrey.html
>
> Maybe this one's a little better.
>
>
> Shel
> ==
> Huh? Why is the t
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mused:
>
> For setting white balance, you should use a pure white card,
> not a neutral gray card.
> Paul
In theory it should make no difference - your camera can't tell
the difference between a white card under dim lighting and a
grey card under bright lighting.
In practice th
Cotty mused:
>
> On 10/3/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed:
>
> >Makes me feel like saying, "Nyah, nyah, my Canon can beat up your Pentax."
>
> Yeah but Marn, ever hear of David and Goliath??
And whatever you do, don't try Cotty's simultaneous viewfinder
test with a dRebel.
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 04:21:53PM -0800, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> The skin's too red, the highlights are fried, the white shirt has a blue
> cast to it, the sky in the upper right is burnt out ... I'm sure a lot is
> in the miserable exposure I made, but I'd like to be able to get better
> results
Butch Black mused:
>
> Hi
>
> The thread about the MF based Pentax DSLR got me thinking, (always a
> dangerous proposition)
>
> First, the question. If building a body for use with Pentax MF lenses, would
> the flange to sensor distance be the same as the flange to film distance in
> the film
Marnie - could you please get some email software that knows
how to do quoting properly? (Or find the option in your
current software that adds a quote delineaition prefix)
It's really, *really* hard to follow what is happening in
your messages when there's no differentiation between the
lines y
Godfrey DiGiorgi mused:
>
> A point of curiousity...
>
> I've seen references to the 80-320 on DPReview and have seen some
> impressive pictures with it. How does it perform relative to the
> F100-300/4.5-5.6 that I've also seen? And compared to the A-70-210/4?
My opinions:
I bought the 100-
On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 09:13:22AM +, Cotty wrote:
>
> Forgive me for playing devil's advocate for a minute here Mike, but isn't
> the impression a photograph 'makes' in the eyes of the beholder? Surely a
> work is presented, and it is up to the viewer to determine what's going
> on in the pic
On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 10:03:56AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I would love to expound on this but I've already had a detailed, long
> critique of Marnie's stuff time out on me so I'm not going to risk it again.
> Suffice it to say that, while I'm using webmail, my comments and response
Mark Erickson mused:
>
> Still interested but $1500 too much? Make me an offer. I'll be happy to
> supply pictures of the lens on request.
That's a killer price. I paid $1700 for mine (including 1.4x TC), and
felt I got a really good deal. That was for a lens which K&H would
probably grade
Godfrey DiGiorgi mused:
>
> My primary use for a zoom in this range is for racing on the Isle of
> Man, where I found a 70-200 would have been just about perfect for the
> sight lines I normally work with.
Then what you need is the 80-200/2.8 :-)
> A couple of things have caused me to re-thin
Godfrey DiGiorgi mused:
>
>http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/11s.htm
>http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/11t.htm
>http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/11u.htm
>
> Your comments will be much appreciated.
Change your copyright date :-)
I like the first one
D. Glenn Arthur Jr. mused:
>
> Don Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "True wit is having a snappy come-back, and THEN
> > hitting 'em in the face with a pie."
>
> Only if there's an audience.
>
> Comic genius is knowing your audience well enough to understand
> whether it's funnier to thr
Rob Studdert mused:
>
> For those DSLR users with 35mm gear who thought before buying their DSLR that
> their 35mm film usage would:
>
> Remain the same?
> Be halved?
> Become occasional?
> Become specific (i.e. B&W only or high ISO or slide only)?
> Cease all toget
Shel Belinkoff mused:
>
> BTW, is there any other type of wool besides that from a lamb?
Well, apart from all the other species already mentioned,
most wool comes from adult animals (you must have seen
the obligatory sheep-shearing scene in just about any
film or TV show set in the Australian out
On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 06:07:41AM -0500, Paul Stenquist wrote:
> I was a little confused by John's assertion below. In the PSCS Raw
> Converter one need only go to "calibrate," and the red hue and
> saturation can be controlled independently of the other colors before
> conversion. I can't thin
Godfrey DiGiorgi mused:
>
> Yeah, who knows what Pentax does, but I'd say Pentax likely does very
> little given that they didn't even do bit stripping in the D and do in
> the DS...
No they don't. They do use some rudimentary compression, but they
are still using zero-padded sixteen-bit pixe
Mark Cassino mused:
>
> The only in camera setting that affects the RAW capture is the sensitivity
> (ISO) setting, which is an actual change in the voltage level of the sensor.
>
> - MCC
I believe that the latest Nikon models actually have per-channel
sensitivity, so white balance may also af
On Sat, Mar 12, 2005 at 09:33:25AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 3/11/2005 10:52:54 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I'm talking about the colour you get from a default conversion,
> before playing around with any levels, etc.
>
> Don't forget I don't
Godfrey DiGiorgi mused:
>
>
> On Mar 12, 2005, at 11:58 AM, John Francis wrote:
>
> >> Yeah, who knows what Pentax does, but I'd say Pentax likely does very
> >> little given that they didn't even do bit stripping in the D and do in
> >> t
provides for value storage, and TIFF is a byte-oriented format.
Graywolf mused:
>
> Could that be because they have plans for the future?
>
> graywolf
> http://www.graywolfphoto.com
> "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
> --------
No, Herb - we're talking about RAW file formats.
A PEF file is, basically, a monochrome TIFF (with 12-bit samples).
That means any library that can read and write TIFF files is a good
starting point for processing a PEF file.
Herb Chong mused:
>
> once you have converted to TIFF, you have comm
hould I care if TIFF values are used for storage?"
Nobody (exept you) is talking about converting to RGB TIFF.
Herb Chong mused:
>
> converting to RGB TIFF like Shel wants to do is committing to a conversion.
>
> Herb
> - Original Message -
> From: "John
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mused:
>
> In a message dated 3/12/2005 2:01:42 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Oh, good. I really didn't want to have more RAW stuff to think about. My
> head already hurts. Good thing Bayer makes aspirin as well as matrixes. I
> can cure my headache
Shel Belinkoff mused:
>
> And where does JPEG 2000 fit in. It's supposed to be lossless, but the few
> tries I've attempted at using it didn't seem to save much, if any, space.
>
> Shel
JPEG 2000 can be lossless (as could the earlier version of JPEG, in theory).
The big difference between the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mused:
>
> In a message dated 3/12/2005 10:50:23 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> That's a true lossless compression scheme. Now imagine that one of
> those 100 pixels is almost, but not quite, the same colour. That's
> going to need more space to descri
Shel Belinkoff mused:
>
> The latest camera to grace Casa Belinkoff is the Super program, given to me
> by John Francis at the NorCal meeting last week. Couldn't find a decent
> manual for it on line. Can anyone give me a brief rundown on how it works.
> Thanks!
>
&
It's more a matter of getting a larger register distance, so the
light doesn't strike the sensor at as much of an oblique angle.
(And, in particular, so that the angle doesn't vary as much from
lens to lens; that's one significant contributor to chromatic
aberration as you get away from the center
Marco Alpert mused:
>
> On Mar 12, 2005, at 11:44 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Five is very surreal, sort of like the idea of what a building
> > should be, rather than a real one -- like a child's drawing. Although
> > the dot
> > of reflection/light in the doorway bothers me a bit.
>
>
Scott Loveless mused:
>
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 23:06:42 -0500, frank theriault
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 23:03:48 -0500, Scott Loveless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > (As if ten percent of my posts are anywhere near on topic ).
> >
> > 10% on-topic posts? T
I think you might have missed something.
I've got one of the earlier model of these,
and it has a graduated release; the more
pressure you put on the squeeze grip, the
looser it becomes.
Perhaps the one you tried had the pressure
control (the little wheel at the top of the
grip) slacked off to th
Godfrey DiGiorgi mused:
>
> Personally, I find all these variations on the theme of Program mode
> too much to think about. I use Program mode with the EV compensation
> control for simplicity when I don't really have to watch the focus zone
> or shutter speed too closely, and switch to Av or T
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 02:23:25AM -0800, Keith Whaley wrote:
>
>
> frank theriault wrote:
> >On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 21:50:05 -0800, Marco Alpert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>A couple more from the NorCal outing:
> >>
> >>http://www.alpert.com/marco/pdml/norcal3.html
> >>http://www.alpert.com/m
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 09:52:51AM -0500, frank theriault wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 02:23:25 -0800, Keith Whaley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > That's what I see in it. Kind of sad, in a way. I see no smiles there...
> >
> Yeah, I think it's all that, Keith. As I read your post, I real
Rob Studdert mused:
>
> On 15 Mar 2005 at 11:17, Tom C wrote:
>
> > Clear answer... Thanks. I figured it must have to due with possible
> > vignetting, as many wide angle hoods are rectangular. I didn't put two and
> > two
> > together and realize that the petal shape was a deliberate compromi
Cotty mused:
>
> On 15/3/05, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
> >Why do you say that, Rob?
>
> I would guess because with the advent of a 645D, it seems pretty unlikely
> we'll see a 24X36 full frame 35mm-style DSLR anytime if at all
Now, perhaps, you'll believe me ...
Pentax
Joseph Tainter mused:
>
> Picture here:
>
> http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/news/articles/story_2831.html
>
> ---
>
> This photo looks pretty fishy: no distance scale, no markings for focal
> length, no lens name. Maybe the actual thing is a ways off and this is
> just a mock-up in styrof
Fred Widall mused:
>
> The discussion regarding who would buy the new D645 made me wonder how
> much you folk spend on your career/hobby/addiction.
>
> I consider photography my main hobby, but being on the fugual side of
> miserly, I calculate that my total expenditure for equipment over the pas
Sorry if you don't like to see photographs without PDMLers, but I think
that one of the interesting things about PDML meets is to see what the
different people come up with when given the same opportunities.
So far we've seen some *very* different choices from the attendees at
the NorCal meet. I
Tom Lesser mused:
>
> Am I the only one who is bothered by these discrepencies? Is it
> really a problem? Is there a solution ?
>
> When I use the finder on my Mac (OS X) to open the DCIM > 100PENTX
> folder on a CF card shot in my *istD, and select a RAW file in list
> view,
Tom Lesser mused:
>
> When I use the finder on my Mac (OS X) to open the DCIM > 100PENTX
> folder on a CF card shot in my *istD, and select a RAW file in list
> view, the column headed "Date Modified" shows the actual date and time
> that the photo was shot; the column headed "Date Created" s
Oh, I still *want* the 16-45. But it's just not at #1 on the list
anymore (especially since I do have the Sigma 21-35, which got an
outing last night when we went to see the Black brothers; it did
quite well, although I'd have liked to have my choice of AF points).
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mused:
> I
William Robb mused:
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Cotty"
> Subject: Re: Pentax News
>
>
> > On 15/3/05, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed:
> >
> >>Why do you say that, Rob?
> >
> > I would guess because with the advent of a 645D, it seems pretty
> > unlikely
> > we'll s
> That is not the issue now. What do I see through the viewfinder? If I am
> using a 200m lens and the "crop" will make it look like 350mm -- am I seeing 200mm
> through the viewfinder or 350mm? And if I am seeing 200mm, then as someone
> mentioned previously, are there crop lines?
No. You'l
>
> I am interested on the effect of the 1.7 auto focus converter on an ist D.
>
> Thought of using it on my M lenses.
I don't think it will work. It won't add "A"-ness to a non-"A" lens.
My PZ-1p can tell the difference between "K"/"M" lenses and "A" lenses
even when they are mounted on the 1.
>
> Ektachomes and other E-6 process films should have come out great.
> Kodachrome and traditonal B&W films give trouble.
Especially if you leave the Digital Ice stuff turned on ...
> - Original Message -
> From: "Boris Liberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED
> >
> > Has anyone else had issues with adaptall lenses set on "A" working
> > accurately with program and shutter-priority modes on Pentax cameras?
>
> I just plain and simply have problems with Pentax cameras giving accurate
> exposures in automatic. I don't know why.
> Just lucky, I guess.
Giv
>
> 1. Is there a place on the net where I could actually see ME Super
> metering pattern?
Probably not. I thought it was in the camera manual, but it isn't.
The only reference work I have that shows metering patterns is
Carl Shipman's "How to select & use PENTAX SLR Cameras".
Unfortunately my
>
> I once heard that SR-71s actually leak gas on the tarmac before takeoff due
> to the seals being designed for flight temperature (over 550c degrees I
> think) and they had to develop new low flashpoint fuel for it.
>
> Anyone know if that's true or an urban legend?
(You mean "high flashpoin
>
> thanks Marnie !
> but I did feel a few not-very-positive thoughts about the photograph
> which I can now share.
> I felt the road was a bit too much and bright; and wondered how much
> I should be cropping off. Nice to hear that it gives relevance to where
> the person/rickshaw is stationed, a
>
> >(This information comes from a retired flight engineer who looked after the
> SR-71s that NASA used at Edwards AFB, California).
> Really? You?
Nope. Someone I know from another usenet newsgroup.
The closest I've been to a Blackbird is watching one fly overhead
as I was leaving San Diego t
> different fuel then any other military plane, I'm not sure if it was because
> of high flight temps or the ambient temps and lack of oxygen at their
> cruising altitude.
Well, it was lots of things. But a major one was to stop the fuel
boiling away at the operating temperatures; the fuel was al
>
> This will be my last post on this subject, but let me say
> I have really enjoyed it, as far as off-topic threads go.
To bring it back onto topic, somewhat:
A few years ago a SR-71 was supposed to be making a low, slow
pass over Moffett Field as part of their airshow. (It wasn't
exactly a s
> The ist D supports a 1 gb card, saying it will store 70 RAW files, 56 full
> resolution tiffs. It will do smaller than full resolution tiffs also, 87
> medium resolution (2400x1600) or 512 small (1536x1024).
Something seems wrong with those figures. Only 56 full-resolution (6MP) TIFFs,
and ye
>
> Am I remembering right that JPEG format files re-compress each time they are
> saved? In other words, saving the image on your CF card as a JPEG and then
> transferring to the PC would be two steps of loss?
No. Copying a JPEG file is just like copying any other file - lossless.
You could g
>
> Boris wrote:
>
> BL> This is most unusual. My ZX-L for instance, shows aperture value in
> BL> the viewfinder if a lens that has "A" position is set to some other
> BL> aperture. I thought that it came through electronics, this displayed
> BL> value. Why it is not supported in this case?
>
> I guess I've used the DOF preview button on my other two bodies more than I
> knew, miss it here. Camera could very well do this but I don't know how
> yet.
Isn't it the same as the MZ-S? Push the On-Off switch beyond the On position.
> I own over a dozen PENTAX K&M lenses, all superb.
> I own 1 (ONE) "A" type or later lens . . .
This represents maybe ONE new lens in the last twenty years?
Unless you've bought a whole lot of other stuff, I don't think
that's the sort of customer that keeps a company in business.
Not that I
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (graywolf) wrote:
>
> > You may need a powered hub. Often that is the case when there is more
> > than one USB device per controller.
>
> Thanks - that's just solved my problem with a Hama USB 2.0 Pocketdrive
> 6-in-1. I have Windows XP
>
> Hi,
>
> John F wrote:
>
> > I've spent far more than that, over the same period, in picking
> > up used equipment. Nice for me, but it doesn't support Pentax.
>
>
> I disagree. Although indirect, it does support Pentax. Buyers of new
> equipment would do so at a much(?) lower rate if th
>
> As I've said before, I think Pentax has plans for electrical contacts
> (for USM, electronic aperture control, etc.) in places where the
> "aperture simulator" is located on the original K mount . . .
I'd be very surprised if they used that part of the lens mount for new
purposes; it would pr
>
> Another of the things you have to realize here is that most of folks
> here on this list, or any other photo equipment list for that matter,
> are nitpickers. One honestly would be hard pressed to tell the quality
> difference in any non-defective Pentax lens or another in a good 8x10
> pr
>
> I got mine from KEH.
> CW
In fact they show three of them right now: 2 "A"s, one "F"
> >
> > This still comes down to demanding that everybody pay
> > the extra $10 or so, even if this is for functionality
> > they don't want and will never use.
>
> No offence, but everyone keeps pulling numbers out of thin air. Sometimes
> it's ten bucks, sometimes it's twenty, but no one with an
>
> Yeah, this is my problem. I bemoaned the lack of aperture control on the
> body with the MZ-S because I liked using the TV wheel on the PZ-1p to
> set the aperture. It's a real pain having to change the lens setting
> when switching a lens from a PZ-1p (or *ist/*ist-D) to an MZ-S or MX,
> for
>
> I never got the MZ-S, so I'm going from the PZ series to the *D, which
> should prove to be an easier transition than if I had. What was it
> about the MZ-S that made people move from the PZ-1*?
Far, *far* better autofocus
Extremely rigid metal chassis
Battery grip that took AAs (a
>
>
>
> Peter Alling wrote:
> > I have three things to say, if simpler is better 1.) Don't use
> > auto-focus don't use digital neither is simple. 2.) If you insist in
> > using a camera that sets exposures that are not guestimates then you
> > have one choice, the LX. Everything else is ju
>
> Caterham has improved them a bit. Many more engine options. De Dion rear
> suspension. Actual seats that slide forward and backward to adjust for
> different sized drivers.
>
> But, they're still pretty basic, elemental things, that go like stink.
I'm sure it's anathema to mention them
r little tweaks. I don't
even want to think about what sort of power you could end up with if
you really tried. Certainly well over 500HP.
> What are they REALLY called, then?
>
> keith
>
> John Francis wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Caterham has impr
I'm sure that the market for SLRs of any kind is pretty small,
and getting smaller every year.
The 35mm SLR was successful against the cameras of the day because
it was smaller, lighter, and cheaper. The picture quality wasn't
as good, but it was good enough. And the SLR design was ideal for
in
>
> I remember those days. Those big heavy ugly DSLRs which were not designed
> for the general public, but press photographers only. Even so, few were
> using them.
I guess it depends where you looked. In my experience as soon as the D1
came out you could hardly find an F5 in the media centre
>
> Perhaps I have a different way to approach the digital products. The 1st
> thing I check is the picture quality. If they aren't good, I don't care. Why
> bother to produce a 5MP model when the images are(sic) that good anyway?
Have you checked the Canon PowerShot G1/2/3/4/5? The Olympus 30
>
> I wonder how many users of digital equipment carry a white card to do white
> balancing? Just like how many digital slr users carry a light meter around
> with them all the time so they can get more accurate metering that their
> dslr doesn't seemingly give them. Lots of extra stuff to carry
>
> What I am worrying is that good quality processing might become harder and
> harder to find in the near future.
>
> Alan Chan
"Near Future" be blowed. In two years I've had to find a new place to get
my slides processed twice because the lab I was using closed down, and one
of the two labs
>
> What is the exposure accuracy requirement of a digital sensor as compared to
> film?
Well, just like slide film, you really don't want to overexpose; blow out the
highlights and there's nothing you can do about it. Underexposure introduces
noise (pretty much as can be seen by looking at sho
>
>
> Vic is right. IMO there can only be 2 possible reasons for buying a 300mm
> 2.8 lens:
>
> 1. You need the extra stop over a much cheaper f/4 lens, notably for
> sport or (say) rock concerts or whatever (where flash may not be
> appropriate)...
... or if you plan to use it with a TC occas
>
> I can't see spending $1500 for a six megapixel camera.
> In two or three years it will be a paperweight.
No. In two or three years it will still produce 6MP images.
That's more than enough for most purposes; it's a full-frame
8x10 print at 300ppi. Unless you're shooting on a tripod, at
opti
>
> Guarav asked
> >I am quite used to the split-image and matte (?) screen of the
> > ME-Super. Are there such screens for PZ-1?
>
> Beattie Intenscreen has made such a screen for the PZ-1. I think I bought mine
> from B&H.
Jost one word of caution; the Beattie screens can cause the in-camer
>
> Here's my little theory about WB - you don't need to worry about it.
> What have print labs been doing for years? Working with a media that
> is stuck on daylight balance but shot in a multitude of conditions. If
> you're making prints, find an expert printer and let him do his job.
Yep. I
you don't need to end up with too many
shots you would otherwise have passed by before you are convinced
that the outlay on the digital was worth it.
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: John Francis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: 13 October 2003 04:51
>
>
> > >
> > > Guarav asked
> > > >I am quite used to the split-image and matte (?) screen of the
> > > > ME-Super. Are there such screens for PZ-1?
> > >
> > > Beattie Intenscreen has made such a screen for the PZ-1. I think I bought
> mine
> > > from B&H.
> >
> > Jost one word of caution;
>
> A lot of people get excited about CF speed, but I really don't think
> it is too big of a deal unless you plan on shooting sports or other
> things were timing is critical. The buffer on the *ist D is pretty
> big and I've never filled it in normal shooting...only when I was
> holding the shu
>
> Next question, how much more accurately (if at all) is the diaphram
> controlled on an A lens rather than a K lens.
Simple question, tricky answer.
First of all: there's no requirement for the aperture response of any
K lens to be the same as a different lens; all that is required is that
t
>
> OK, now we're getting to the part where my analysis has to be spot on.
> Shooting motorsports, I'm not going to have time to review in camera.
Not something you want to do, in any case, with large heavy objects
whizzing by at 200mph. Not that I haven't seen people doing that;
sitting on th
>
> On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:57:50 +1000, Rob Studdert wrote:
>
> > Will this high speed shooting be out of doors? If so set the white
> > balance to a fixed value and get it right all the time instead.
>
> It will, and if a fixed value or the presets is close enough for this
> usage, that sounds
1201 - 1300 of 3031 matches
Mail list logo
