date:20030608

On 9 Jun 2003 at 8:27, Dario Bonazza 2 wrote:

> That's exactly my opinion too.
> 
> > as well as a LX, a Z-1p and a Mz-s.
> > I will not buy anymore lenses, I will start to sell a part of my equipment to
> > have the money for buying a 10D and with 3 lenses. Now, I can understand Boz
> > (K-Mount page) very well, who changed to Canon.

OK the D *ist isn't in our hands so we can only speculate based on what's been 
reported. So given what is known who of those of us that envisage moving into 
digital are likely to purchase a D *ist and why? 

Who of us think it's time to move to the dark side and why?

Cheers,

Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998

Re: Bug Hints?

Uh, anybody got advice for slowing them down enough to shoot?
The one that starved to death curled up in a rather un-lifelike
posture.  Do I need to get ahold of some ether somehow, or are
there more accessible tricks?
How about some smoke or put them in refrigerator?

regards,
Alan Chan
_
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*   
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

Hallo Alexander

some replies to your reply
>
>> my problem is not the one K-lens I have. But I like to use the aperture
ring
>> like on the MZ-S, but that is not possible on the *ist, *istD and I fear
on
>> all coming *ists. I like to use power zoom on my FA* 2.8/80-200, not
possible
>> on the new *ists.
>
>I guess the power zoom has only few followers.


Yes, but three very expensive actuall lenses use it, so the *ist/*istD is
incompatible to
existing lenses.

>
>> I like to buy the new FAJ 18-35, but that will not work on
>> my LX at all and only reduced on my MZ-S. I also fear that the coming
>> lenses  in autum will be also only FAJ lenses, since lenses
>with aperture ring  will not make sense at all on the *ist/*istD.

>Look at the B&H web page. They already stock two of
>the FAJ lenses. They are really cheap. They are
>obviously targeted to the entry level market. They are
>about offering cheap camera kits.


You are right, for the 28-80 and 70-300, but the 18-35 is also attractive to
MZ-5n and MZ-S user, who will miss the ring. With the new Pentax attidute,
all new lenses in autum lack the aperture ring.

>
>
>> On the list was the argument, that the with the use
>of the aperture  ring only at the MZ-S, the aperture is more accurate. With
>> the thumb wheel  at the Z-1p, the aperture is not exact. Will the
aperture
>with the thumb wheel  of the *ist, *istD be correct?
>

>We will find it out. The *ists are a different camera
>generation compared to the PZ-1, so I would expect
>higher accuracy.
>


Why should it, the build quality is reported as bad.

>
>> Pentax is just sacrifing its best argument for buying Pentax without
>> any  technical advantage, the compabiltity.
>
>I think this is irrelevant for new users. They would
>have to pay for something they won't ever use. Still I
>think expensive stuff will support the aperture ring,
>similar as the expensive Nikon gear does.
>


Why then has the very expensive *istD got rid of?



Here the original message:

The new FAJ of objectives and the missing compatibility show new a thinking
direction of Pentax.

1. So far the design objective was to reach as much compatibility as
technically possible But now is the goal: as few compatibility as still
straight necessarily.

2. Change in the camera operation, so far operation by the aperture ring
(MZ-5n, Mz-s), or by aperture ring and thumb wheel (Z-1p), now only by the
thumb wheel, since then no aperture ring lenses is anymore necessary.

To 1:
>From *ist and *istD we see, that we have in the future no more compatibility
to older lenses, even if this is technically feasible, since it is not not
wished from Pentax. Only he current reduced compatibility to K and M
objectives is, in order to use also the F/FA soft lenses. The aperture
simulator is not a matter of price, a Mz-6 for 300 euro has it in.
Even an exposure measurement with work stop down aperture with * ist would
be technically without additional expenditure possible, is however missing.
Further example: With * ist/*istD power zoom shot is not any longer
supported, I cannot use my FA* 2.8/80-200 on *istD in a way I'm used to.
By the missing power zoom contacts it will not give USM or IS, because in
the patents these power zoom contacts are always needed.

To 2.
Since the operation was changed over, *ist and *istD by thumb wheel to be
only adjusted. The aperture can not be adjusted by the aperture ring. During
a parallel operation of my MZ-S and *istD I have always to change the way of
operation reorientation. Originally I did want to buy a *ist as a back-up
for the MZ-S, but now not anymore.
Also all *ists (* istM for 600 euro, * istS for 900 euro) future cameras
will only have the thumb wheel operation, as a *istD for 1600 Euro also only
have the thumb wheel.
Therefore also all new lenses will be only FAJ lenses (see already 18-35),
because an aperture ring disturbs only the *ist cameras operation.
It is intended, that these lenses should no longer work to the MX, LX or
Mz-s (see 1), because it is supposed that new cameras should to be bought.

Pentax loses thereby the only selling arguement in relation to the
competition, the k-mount compatibility. Why should I buy a *istD with the
pertinent lenses, if I can not use these lenses with my LX and MZ-S?

Re: FA-J lenses (WAS: Re: *ist)

2003-06-08 Thread Dario Bonazza 2

I won't believe that for one second. When you (Pentax) remove diaphragm
simulator from top end models (like the *ist D undoubtably currently is),
removing aperture ring from your (Pentax) lens line is just a matter of
time.

Dario Bonazza
www.aohc.it

> REPLY:
> I've been told that the FA-J lenses are strictly entry level and that
there will be no higher end FA-J lenses.
>
> Pål
>

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

>Alexander wrote:
>
>>Still I
>> think expensive stuff will support the aperture ring,
>> similar as the expensive Nikon gear does.
>
>I've been told that Pentax have no plans of removing the aperture ring from
the more expensive lenses. As usual, I might have been told bullshit...
>
>

Why should the keep the aperture ring, now on three last cameras (MZ.-60,
*ist, *istD) this ring will case problems and is of no help.

See the original message:

The new FAJ of objectives and the missing compatibility show new a thinking
direction of Pentax.

1. So far the design objective was to reach as much compatibility as
technically possible But now is the goal: as few compatibility as still
straight necessarily.

2. Change in the camera operation, so far operation by the aperture ring
(MZ-5n, Mz-s), or by aperture ring and thumb wheel (Z-1p), now only by the
thumb wheel, since then no aperture ring lenses is anymore necessary.

To 1:
>From *ist and *istD we see, that we have in the future no more compatibility
to older lenses, even if this is technically feasible, since it is not not
wished from Pentax. Only he current reduced compatibility to K and M
objectives is, in order to use also the F/FA soft lenses. The aperture
simulator is not a matter of price, a Mz-6 for 300 euro has it in.
Even an exposure measurement with work stop down aperture with * ist would
be technically without additional expenditure possible, is however missing.
Further example: With * ist/*istD power zoom shot is not any longer
supported, I cannot use my FA* 2.8/80-200 on *istD in a way I'm used to.
By the missing power zoom contacts it will not give USM or IS, because in
the patents these power zoom contacts are always needed.

To 2.
Since the operation was changed over, *ist and *istD by thumb wheel to be
only adjusted. The aperture can not be adjusted by the aperture ring. During
a parallel operation of my MZ-S and *istD I have always to change the way of
operation reorientation. Originally I did want to buy a *ist as a back-up
for the MZ-S, but now not anymore.
Also all *ists (* istM for 600 euro, * istS for 900 euro) future cameras
will only have the thumb wheel operation, as a *istD for 1600 Euro also only
have the thumb wheel.
Therefore also all new lenses will be only FAJ lenses (see already 18-35),
because an aperture ring disturbs only the *ist cameras operation.
It is intended, that these lenses should no longer work to the MX, LX or
Mz-s (see 1), because it is supposed that new cameras should to be bought.

Pentax loses thereby the only selling arguement in relation to the
competition, the k-mount compatibility. Why should I buy a *istD with the
pertinent lenses, if I can not use these lenses with my LX and MZ-S?

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

2003-06-08 Thread Dario Bonazza 2

Alexander wrote:
> Still I
> think expensive stuff will support the aperture ring,
> similar as the expensive Nikon gear does.

*ist D is expensive stuff, and it does not support aperture ring. I see no
turning point here.

Dario Bonazza
www.aohc.it

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

Pal wroten

>> On the list was the argument, that the with the use of the aperture ring
>> only at the MZ-S, the aperture is more accurate. With the thumb wheel at
the
>> Z-1p, the aperture is not exact. Will the aperture with the thumb wheel
of
>> the *ist, *istD be correct?
>
>I've heard they have changed the protocol...
>


If the have change the protocol, that will work with new FAJ lenses, but not
with the existing FA lenses.



Here the original message:

The new FAJ of objectives and the missing compatibility show new a thinking
direction of Pentax.

1. So far the design objective was to reach as much compatibility as
technically possible But now is the goal: as few compatibility as still
straight necessarily.

2. Change in the camera operation, so far operation by the aperture ring
(MZ-5n, Mz-s), or by aperture ring and thumb wheel (Z-1p), now only by the
thumb wheel, since then no aperture ring lenses is anymore necessary.

To 1:
>From *ist and *istD we see, that we have in the future no more compatibility
to older lenses, even if this is technically feasible, since it is not not
wished from Pentax. Only he current reduced compatibility to K and M
objectives is, in order to use also the F/FA soft lenses. The aperture
simulator is not a matter of price, a Mz-6 for 300 euro has it in.
Even an exposure measurement with work stop down aperture with * ist would
be technically without additional expenditure possible, is however missing.
Further example: With * ist/*istD power zoom shot is not any longer
supported, I cannot use my FA* 2.8/80-200 on *istD in a way I'm used to.
By the missing power zoom contacts it will not give USM or IS, because in
the patents these power zoom contacts are always needed.

To 2.
Since the operation was changed over, *ist and *istD by thumb wheel to be
only adjusted. The aperture can not be adjusted by the aperture ring. During
a parallel operation of my MZ-S and *istD I have always to change the way of
operation reorientation. Originally I did want to buy a *ist as a back-up
for the MZ-S, but now not anymore.
Also all *ists (* istM for 600 euro, * istS for 900 euro) future cameras
will only have the thumb wheel operation, as a *istD for 1600 Euro also only
have the thumb wheel.
Therefore also all new lenses will be only FAJ lenses (see already 18-35),
because an aperture ring disturbs only the *ist cameras operation.
It is intended, that these lenses should no longer work to the MX, LX or
Mz-s (see 1), because it is supposed that new cameras should to be bought.

Pentax loses thereby the only selling arguement in relation to the
competition, the k-mount compatibility. Why should I buy a *istD with the
pertinent lenses, if I can not use these lenses with my LX and MZ-S?

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

2003-06-08 Thread Brendan

The main reason I'd want a full KAF2 mount is so I can
stick a 16mm mir on the thing and have a 24mm lens damnit.

__ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca

Re: Bug Hints?

2003-06-08 Thread Brendan

 chill 'em, in the fridge for 5 min and they'll slow
down ( if not freeeze )

--- "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote: > Some mosquitos got into my house.  Some have
fallen
> to bug spray.
> But a few I managed to trap in plastic containers,
> thinking they
> might make interesting macro subjects.
> 
> Uh, anybody got advice for slowing them down enough
> to shoot?
> The one that starved to death curled up in a rather
> un-lifelike
> posture.  Do I need to get ahold of some ether
> somehow, or are
> there more accessible tricks?
> 
>   -- Glenn
>  

__ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

2003-06-08 Thread Dario Bonazza 2

That's exactly my opinion too.

Dario Bonazza
www.aohc.it

> Pentax loses thereby the only selling arguement in relation to the
> competition, the k-mount compatibility. Why should I buy a *istD with the
> pertinent lenses, if I can not use these lenses with my LX and MZ-S?
>
> If I transfer to a digital camera, I can equaly buy a 10D and the suitable
> lenses equal, since lens compatibility is not any more with Pentax design
> objectives and I cannot trust Pentax when I investment in it.
>
> I have now 20 F/FA (4 FA*, 2 Limited) lenses and only one A* and one K
lens,
> as well as a LX, a Z-1p and a Mz-s.
> I will not buy anymore lenses, I will start to sell a part of my equipment
> to have the money for buying a 10D and with 3 lenses.
> Now, I can understand Boz (K-Mount page) very well, who changed to Canon.
>
>

Bug Hints?

Some mosquitos got into my house.  Some have fallen to bug spray.
But a few I managed to trap in plastic containers, thinking they
might make interesting macro subjects.

Uh, anybody got advice for slowing them down enough to shoot?
The one that starved to death curled up in a rather un-lifelike
posture.  Do I need to get ahold of some ether somehow, or are
there more accessible tricks?

-- Glenn

Re: *ist D revisited

2003-06-08 Thread Antti-Pekka Virjonen

At 11:47 6.6.2003 -0400, you wrote:
>Well, the consolation is that the 15 would only be a 22.5 on the digital
>anyway.
>
>Ciao,
>Graywolf

True, but the closest new production lens, the FA 20/2.8 would be a 30 which is 
far from superwide... :-)

Antti-Pekka

Re: Digital vs. film cave test

Anthony Farr wrote:

For the purpose
of a lecture, refusal to advance to digital workflow is sheer Ludditism.
Call me a Luddite, but I found that the safest way is to prepare the 
"slides" on a computer and print them on letter sized tranparencies for 
overhead projectors. When something goes wrong with a lecture, it goes 
really wrong, like in having a blown fuse somewhere and no electricity 
to the power outlets. You can still salvage the lecture by handing out 
the transparencies to the audience and going to plan B lots of talk and 
drawings on the whiteboard. With Powerpoint you have a wide choice between
a) Blue Screen Of Death
b) Windows insisting that you have to (un)install some stupid 
network/printer/whatever driver before continuing and wants some OEM CDs 
inserted
c) pop-out messages all over the place, with warnings that you are low 
on system resources or disk space, and offering to close your active 
programs (Powerpoint) or delete your files in order to make more 
resources available
d) some X-rated screen saver starting out of the blue
e) your batteries going flat and you don't have the charger because the 
laptop said it had a full charge; in the rare event that you do have the 
charger, there is no extra unused power outlet where to plug that one too
f) XP detecting that too many hardware changes have happened and wanting 
you to phone Microsfot in order to get an authorisation number to continue
...and many many others

The Digital Age has come. Enjoy !

cheers,
caveman

Re: Pentax k-mount

That's so no one can download the updated firmware from their website and
analyze it instead, heh? Most protection schemes only keep the ignorant out.
There are many hackers who find such a thing to be an interesting challenge.

Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto


- Original Message -
From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Many late microcontrollers have on-board EEPROMs and code protection
security.
> I've just been down this path with a W78E58.

Re: Digital vs. film cave test

2003-06-08 Thread Anthony Farr

You leave my hairy butt out of this ;-)

Butt seriously now,  what Caveman did was to compare a slideshow with a
presentation (Powerpoint?).  It would be insane to project any photo with a
CCD projector if the image quality of the projection was a concern.  However
if any graphical elements were to be mixed with the photos then it would be
insane to pursue the old fashioned, all film path.  I've produced graphics
and captions for those (even superimposed captions into slides), and the
time and cost (both labour and material) were ridiculous.  For the purpose
of a lecture, refusal to advance to digital workflow is sheer Ludditism.
For the audiences' requirements, ultimate quality is not a concern.  If it
was then an old fashioned slideshow would be in order, but forget graphics
if the budget is tight.

Caveman, as a joke, compared apples to oranges.  Now you are arguing apples
while I argue oranges.  The troll worked, and we got sucked into its vortex.

regards,
Anthony Farr

- Original Message - 
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, 9 June 2003 10:02 AM
Subject: Re: Digital vs. film cave test


>
> - Original Message -
> From: Anthony Farr
>
>
> Keep saying it all you like, but if the needed use is projection, then a
> print is as useless as mammaries on a nun.
> For a test to be valid, it has to take into account the end use. Any
> test that ignores this fact is no longer a test, but a pissing contest.
> Sometimes, tests just are not fair.
> When I was looking at cars the last time, my intended purpose was to
> have a vehicle that would get me out to my father in laws farm in any
> weather condition.
> My test bed was a farmers field not to far out of town, and a winch to
> pull the failures out of the muck.
> I discovered that an Isuzu Trooper was much better than a Honda Civic
> for my intended use.
> Was the test biased towards the sport utility?
> Sure, but to not test for the conditions I anticipated would have been
> hairy butt stupid.
>
> William Robb
>
>
>
>

Re: *ist D revisited

Har!
But it is true, it does not make much sense buying a
new body (e.g. PZ-1 , MZ-S etc.) and then using it
with K/M lenses.
It does not make much sense buying a new Pentax body from their current 
offer unless:

1. All you want is just a camera and a 28-90 zoom and make it cheap, please;

or

2. You already have a large array of expensive Pentax lenses and your 
existing bodies are beaten up and difficult to service.

It seems that they are concerned only with customer type 1. So just take 
care to never get in situation 2. If you're already there... well, you 
have my sympathy.

cheers,
caveman

Re: *ist D revisited

2003-06-08 Thread Anthony Farr

Many buyers just plain don't want second hand gear!

They want Pentax to make a new camera that functions with the lenses to a
degree that they think is desirable.  From what I've learned the new cameras
will allow full diaphragm function in manual mode but without metering and
that is as much as I would desire so I'm no longer bitching about that.
Others are happy if the meter will work in stopdown mode and want Pentax to
fix what SHOULD be simply a matter of the camera's CPU software.  Still
others want open aperture metering but that would require a mechanical
aperture simulator for K & M series lenses.  Some others want no less than
every mode the lenses supported on their contemporary Pentax cameras, which
brings Av autoexposure into the discussion. It's definitely too late for the
impending cameras to get the last two functions, so we'll just have to cross
our fingers for the future releases.

regards,
Anthony Farr

- Original Message - 
From: "alexanderkrohe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

(earlier correspondence snipped)
>
> Har!
> But it is true, it does not make much sense buying a
> new body (e.g. PZ-1 , MZ-S etc.) and then using it
> with K/M lenses. With these K/M lenses all the new
> bodies will basically work like a ME-super.
>
> Alexander
>
> __
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
> http://calendar.yahoo.com
>
>

Somewhat OT: Information on Vivitar 600mm Solid Cat

Here's a question,  I have one these but I don't have a lens hood.
Does anyone out there have the screw in filter size for the front of
this monster, or some sort of suggestion on what to use as a hood?
Thanks

Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

Re: Just tried a ist (or is it an ist)...

It's funny, but before Milford Camera went out of business the manager 
mentioned how
much more solid the ZX-L, (MZ-6) was than it's Nikon, Canon and Minolta 
counter parts.
So much for quality.  By the way, last I checked the ZX-5n was back on the 
Pentax USA
web site as a current model, I guess it's removal was a bit premature.

At 10:24 PM 6/8/03 -0400, you wrote:
Thanks, Cameron. This strengthened my opinion on what Pentax is really 
into these days.

cheers,
caveman
Cameron Hood wrote:
[...] the lens mount is crippled for no other reason than software/greed. 
[...] Very, very cheaply built. Terrible feel on the scroll wheel, like 
it was ready to break and /or malfunction at any minute. Viewfinder was 
mediocre at best,
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

Re: Pentax k-mount

It seemed just as silly then as it does now, and I'm a software engineer.

At 10:25 PM 6/8/03 -0400, you wrote:
On June 8, 2003 10:19 pm, Peter Alling wrote:
> Since most 30 year old appliances fulfill their purposes more
> than adequately why would one want a networked refrigerator let
> alone a wireless one?  On second thought I don't want to know.
The common suggestion would be they would keep track of what was 
in the
fridge. Re-ordering from your internet supermarket. Telling you when the milk
was going bad. They would connect with the microwave and share info. Say you
made something in the microwave it would tell the fridge to add it to the
order.

Much of this was during the tech boom when money was being thrown at
anything.
Nick
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

Re: Pentax k-mount

On 8 Jun 2003 at 14:20, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> And that there are any bytes left over in the address space
> to stick the new code into.  (Of the two, recognizing the
> JMP instructions is the more easily solvable.  How many
> different embedded controllers are in common use these
> days?  ID the controller and look it up, or try different
> interpretations of the code until you find one that starts
> making sense.)

Many late microcontrollers have on-board EEPROMs and code protection security. 
I've just been down this path with a W78E58.

Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

On 8 Jun 2003 at 22:16, Pål Jensen wrote:

> Isn't it possible to use the aperture ring on the *ist D? That really sucks!

Accordion to all the reports thus far the aperture ring will be purely 
decorative. However you will be able to glance down at it (it has to be in the 
"A" position of course) for consolation purposes.

Why do you think we have been complaining?

Do the complaints seem more reasonable now?

Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998

Re: *ist D revisited

On 8 Jun 2003 at 21:05, Mark Roberts wrote:

> In fact, it would have made the camera *more* attractive to beginners,
> even those who don't have (and never intend to buy) pre-A lenses: People
> *like* the idea of non-obsolescence. It makes them fell more confident
> in what they're buying. Especially when it costs $1500.00.

I'd love to get into the minds of the designers/marketeers/engineers 
responsible for this unfathomable decision. Whoever they are they obviously 
don't use or have any hard earned cash in Pentax cameras. :-(


Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998

Re: Pentax lens compatibility (WAS: Re: *ist D revisited)

On 8 Jun 2003 at 21:47, Caveman wrote:

> Cut the c**p, Bruce. The "average Nikon user" has a P&S and not a D100, 
> and all he knows is how to turn it on and which button to press in order 
> to take a photo, and that it must be good stuff because it's a Nikon and 
> that's "professional" isn't it. Most Nikon users (average or not) can't 
> tell a Kaf from a Kaf2 mount, so why should Paal know all the AI AI-S 
> AI-P AF AF-D s**t.

Maybe the "average Nikon user" is as skilled as the average Sony digicam user? 
Their latest TV ad features a dude sleep walking with a Sony camera taking 
snaps along the way. On awakening the next morning all the resultant pics are 
perfect of course, you can guess the tag line :-)

Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998

Re: OT fridges (was Re: Pentax k-mount

2003-06-08 Thread Nick Zentena

On June 8, 2003 10:40 pm, Caveman wrote:
> Nick Zentena wrote:
> > The common suggestion would be they would keep track of what was in the
> > fridge. Re-ordering from your internet supermarket.
>
> C'mon. So if I buy by mistake the wrong film and I keep it in the fridge
>   some time before using or trashing it, the fridge will keep reordering
> the stuff until my death ? Scary.

Worse it might not stop with death. You know the stories about people who die 
and nobody notices? Well the fridge would keep stocking up on  things. I 
guess the person dropping them off would start to wonder.

Nick

OT fridges (was Re: Pentax k-mount

Nick Zentena wrote:
	The common suggestion would be they would keep track of what was in the 
fridge. Re-ordering from your internet supermarket. 
C'mon. So if I buy by mistake the wrong film and I keep it in the fridge 
 some time before using or trashing it, the fridge will keep reordering 
the stuff until my death ? Scary.

cheers,
caveman

FS VS1 135mm 2.3 for K mount

2003-06-08 Thread Wayne Willis

Bought one on ebay and was given the other my grandfather for birthday.
Anyone interested? Offers over $150US
I accept paypal
thanks

Re: Pentax k-mount

Peter Alling wrote:
Since most 30 year old appliances fulfill their purposes more
than adequately why would one want a networked refrigerator let
alone a wireless one?  
Because they're really cool ;-)

cheers,
caveman

Re: Pentax k-mount

2003-06-08 Thread Nick Zentena

On June 8, 2003 10:19 pm, Peter Alling wrote:
> Since most 30 year old appliances fulfill their purposes more
> than adequately why would one want a networked refrigerator let
> alone a wireless one?  On second thought I don't want to know.

The common suggestion would be they would keep track of what was in the 
fridge. Re-ordering from your internet supermarket. Telling you when the milk 
was going bad. They would connect with the microwave and share info. Say you 
made something in the microwave it would tell the fridge to add it to the 
order.

Much of this was during the tech boom when money was being thrown at 
anything. 

Nick

Re: Just tried a ist (or is it an ist)...

Thanks, Cameron. This strengthened my opinion on what Pentax is really 
into these days.

cheers,
caveman
Cameron Hood wrote:
[...] the lens mount is crippled for no 
other reason than software/greed. [...] Very, very cheaply built. Terrible feel on the scroll 
wheel, like it was ready to break and /or malfunction at any minute. 
Viewfinder was mediocre at best,

Re: Pentax k-mount

Since most 30 year old appliances fulfill their purposes more
than adequately why would one want a networked refrigerator let
alone a wireless one?  On second thought I don't want to know.
At 09:28 PM 6/8/03 -0400, you wrote:
you haven't seen the Bluetooth-enabled Toshiba refrigerator.

Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 21:11
Subject: Re: Pentax k-mount
> Well no, probably not.  However Java was designed for embedded software
> systems.
> Truthfully I haven't seen a toaster over or coffee maker complicated 
enough to
> need embedded systems but then I haven't taken a modern one apart.
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

Re: Clear glass focussing screen?

Check Boz's page under focusing screens.  He list's them all.

At 01:52 PM 6/8/03 -0400, you wrote:
No, Don, I can not remember the designation for that screen (might have been
SC), sorry. I looked through my stuff. I have an MX service manual
(downloaded from Mark Roberts site), but not a users manual. Strangely the
service manual does not even show the standard screen.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: "Dr E D F Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: Clear glass focussing screen?
> Do you have any details? I've been searching but have come up with nothing
> so far.
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

Re: Clear glass focussing screen?

There's an LX screen that will fit your bill exactly I believe and the it will
fit into an MX or LX with no trouble whatsoever.
At 12:49 AM 6/8/03 -0700, you wrote:
I need a K mount Pentax body with a clear glass focussing screen - without
focussing aids like split image or those micro-prisms. Anyone got any ideas?
The ME Super I'm using is perfect in other respects as it can be used in
automatic mode and reads the exposure very well. And the slow speeds are
useful. Changing the screen is not an inviting prospect and would mess up a
lot of other things.
Even a ring of clear glass around the centre of the screen would be enough.
How about an used MX with a plain screen? You can switch the screen 
yourself and any screens for Z-1p, MZ-S, or MZ bodies will do.

regards,
Alan Chan
_
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

Re: Pentax lens compatibility (WAS: Re: *ist D revisited)

Cut the c**p, Bruce. The "average Nikon user" has a P&S and not a D100, 
and all he knows is how to turn it on and which button to press in order 
to take a photo, and that it must be good stuff because it's a Nikon and 
that's "professional" isn't it. Most Nikon users (average or not) can't 
tell a Kaf from a Kaf2 mount, so why should Paal know all the AI AI-S 
AI-P AF AF-D s**t.

cheers,
caveman
Bruce Rubenstein wrote:
So, a Ph.D. (?) geologist, Pentax user, isn't smart enough to understand 
what the average Nikon user knows? There's an interesting conclusion 
that can be drawn here, buy you wouldn't get it.

BR

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

The Nikon D100 has various limitation it takes the Nikon experts to 
figure out. It is certainly beyond my abilities.

Re: Pentax lens compatibility (WAS: Re: *ist D revisited)

2003-06-08 Thread Bruce Rubenstein

So, a Ph.D. (?) geologist, Pentax user, isn't smart enough to understand 
what the average Nikon user knows? There's an interesting conclusion 
that can be drawn here, buy you wouldn't get it.

BR

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

The Nikon D100 has various limitation it takes the Nikon experts to figure out. It is certainly beyond my abilities.

Re: Pentax k-mount

2003-06-08 Thread Herb Chong

you haven't seen the Bluetooth-enabled Toshiba refrigerator.

Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 21:11
Subject: Re: Pentax k-mount


> Well no, probably not.  However Java was designed for embedded software 
> systems.
> Truthfully I haven't seen a toaster over or coffee maker complicated enough to
> need embedded systems but then I haven't taken a modern one apart.

Re: Pentax k-mount

Sounds about right to me as well, if he's really lucky the whole thing is 
programmed
in Java, it was originally designed as a language for toaster ovens.

At 12:13 PM 6/8/03 -0400, you wrote:
Humm?

Been a long time since I did machine code programing. But since the firmware
for the camera is undoubtedly in CMOS or EEPROM these days. It would just be
a case of copying it out. Mucking around until you found the proper place in
the code, inserting a call to your code (tacked on to the end of the
existing software) and copying the new firmware back to the camera. No need
to mess with the existing code except the place where you put the call. If
you need to keep the code you replaced with the call, you add it to your new
code so the call takes you to it also.
Most of your time will be spent dissassembling the old code to find the jump
point you need. I admit his 15 minutes is optimistic, but a man-week sounds
reasonable, and that would be worthwhile.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: "Lon Williamson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 5:57 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax k-mount
> Arnold, be careful with that.  Figuring out how to add such a thing
> when messing with a binary image is no 15 minute job on _this_ side of
> the factory.  Been there, done that, weeks are involved
>
> -Lon
>
> Arnold Stark wrote:
> > I won't either buy a Nikon or Canon DSLR. If Pentax does not hear us and
> > does not offer better compatibilty on a DSLR that I can afford, then I
> > will either buy a better film scanner, or I will wait for Cosina to
> > bring a DSLR in true k-mount. Or I willpull out the memory chip and
> > reprogram that *ist D camera myself. It can' take more than 15 minutes
> > to implement metering in manual mode with DOF preview activated.
>
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

Re: Clear glass focussing screen?

And, I seem to recall the LX screens will fit in an MX.

Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto


- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 2:40 PM
Subject: Re: Clear glass focussing screen?


> I have the equivalent for the LX . Just took it out and replaced it with
the
> grid screen...(I have grid on every camera I own accept one PZ1...
> The cross hairs screen is made for microphotography...
> Vic
>

Re: Pentax to close Head Office, Repair Station and Warehouse in Vancouver!

Well, it's Pentax's corporate decision, but it sounds like a step back in
customer service.  While living in Toronto, I really enjoyed being able to
pop over to Pentax to get my camera or lenses serviced, and get them back
the same week.  As well, you could get the most obscure acccessories, and
talk to knowledgeable people.  I'm sure the Pentaxians in Vancouver will be
very disappointed at this news.
Just another excuse to strip my own gears.  :-)

regards,
Alan Chan
_
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: The *ist camera

Actually I have no complaint on the *ist, not even the aperture coupling 
thing because all my F/FA lenses will work. But the QC thing really got to 
my nerve. Well... I should stop now as I have been repeating myself far too 
many times (just hope the mesage would be passed to Japan though the English 
speaking God somehow).

regards,
Alan Chan
"I have been reading the posts about this camera and wonder why so many,
perhaps most, of the members of this group are so interested in such a
crappy little thing?"
I won't buy a starkist. I might buy one for my wife if she needs another 
body. She is now using my old ZX-50. I am, though, very interested in the 
starkist because, for an entry/medium level body, it is packed with many of 
the features that I use on my PZ-1p bodies. I hope this means that 
higher-quality bodies with these features will be forthcoming. In 
particular, offering center-weighted and spot metering on the starkist 
means, I hope, that it will be possible to use slide film in the less 
expensive Pentax cameras.
_
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: The *ist camera

Alan (and others making a fuss including myself) have bought new and 
expensive
Pentax kit recently, so how has this helped with *ist compatibility issues?
Actually Pentax showed me how attractive the FAJ idea is by showing me the 
faulty 'A' button.  :-)  [I am surprised I can still laugh]

regards,
Alan Chan
_
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*   
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: The *ist camera

If you want Pentax to listen, then do something that directly effects their 
bottom line - like buying something from them that is currently in 
production.
I just did, with FA*200/2.8 & FA31/1.8. Both had QC problem and costed me 
lots of time & energy to get the replaced or fixed. I doubt many insane 
people like me on earth would still stick with Pentax after so many problem 
with their BRAND NEW lenses. Mind you they aren't cheap lenses, but * &  
LIMITED lenses. But I don't think one customer could do anything. If I were 
rich enough, I would fly to Pentax Japan and throw my faulty 200 & 31 right 
to their office to show them I weren't kidding. They do have an QC issue 
needed to be addressed.

regards,
Alan Chan
_
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

I've been told that Pentax have no plans of removing the aperture ring from 
the more expensive lenses. As usual, I might have been told bullshit...
I think if they planned to remove the simulator on all future bodies (I am 
not saying they will, but if they would), it mightl be a matter of time they 
removed the aperture rings on all lenses.

regards,
Alan Chan
_
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

With the thumb wheel at the
Z-1p, the aperture is not exact. Will the aperture with the thumb wheel of
the *ist, *istD be correct?
The same doubt could be raised with Canon or Minolta system, except you will 
never find out because you have nothing to compare with.

regards,
Alan Chan
_
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

FS: Film Scanners

2003-06-08 Thread Mark Cassino

I have two film scanners for sale.

The first is a Minolta Dimage Scan Elite. The specs for it can be found here:

http://www.minoltausa.com/eprise/main/MinoltaUSA/MUSAContent/CPG/CPGProducts?cname=scan&fname=scan_dual&Mname=DiMAGE_Scan_Elite

This scanner has been a real workhorse and has kicked out hundreds of scans
for me over the last few years. It features Digital ICE with dos a great
job of removing dust, scratches, and streaks from the scans. the software
the comes with it also includes a powerful image adjustment tool that is
basically a combination of the curves and levels tools found in Photoshop
and other image editing software. The 3.2 D-Max does a good job with shadow
areas in slides.

The 2820 dpi maximum sized produce a 2800 x 4000 pixel TIFF file - which
translates to a 13 x 9 300 dpi print without interpolation.

This is a SCSI scanner, not USB. I'm selling the scanner, driver software,
Photoshop 5.0 LE, power cord, scsi cable, film holders, and manual. A photo
of everything except the manual (forgot about it) is here:

http://www.markcassino.com/fersale/minolta.jpg

Please note that the SCSI card is not included in this package, so if you
do not have SCSI already in your PC you will need to add a card.

Scanner is great condition and is working fine. I won't mention how much I
paid for this in 1999, but refurbished units are selling on ebay for $250.
I'm asking half that, $125, plus shipping.

The second scanner is my old HP Photosmart SCSI scanner - not the S20, but
the earlier SCSI scanner.

This scanner is a hybred that can handle print film, slides, and small
prints. Maximum resolution for 35mm film is 2400 dpi, 300 dpi for prints.
It did a fine job with the negatives I sent it's way and could handle a lot
of slides, but the low dmax makes scanning denser slides a problem.

Photo is here:

http://www.markcassino.com/fersale/hp.jpg

Please note that the SCSI cable is not included.

The package I'm selling contains the scanner, an ISA SCSI card, manual,
drivers, calibration card. I stopped using this when I upgraded to Win XP,
but have recently learned that HP has released updated drivers for XP,
though I have not run thi sunit under anyting except Win 95, 98, and ME.
The updated drivers are here:

http://h20015.www2.hp.com/en/softwareCategory.jhtml?lc=en&pagetype=software&prodId=pspscan&sw_lang=en&cc=us

This is a very basic scanner but can produce some fine results - especially
with negatives. $50 plus shipping.

Email me if interested.

- MCC

- - - - - - - - - -
Mark Cassino
Kalamazoo, MI
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- - - - - - - - - -
Photos:
http://www.markcassino.com
- - - - - - - - - -

Re: The *ist camera

2003-06-08 Thread Joseph Tainter

"I have been reading the posts about this camera and wonder why so many,
perhaps most, of the members of this group are so interested in such a
crappy little thing?"
I won't buy a starkist. I might buy one for my wife if she needs another 
body. She is now using my old ZX-50. I am, though, very interested in 
the starkist because, for an entry/medium level body, it is packed with 
many of the features that I use on my PZ-1p bodies. I hope this means 
that higher-quality bodies with these features will be forthcoming. In 
particular, offering center-weighted and spot metering on the starkist 
means, I hope, that it will be possible to use slide film in the less 
expensive Pentax cameras.

Joe

Re: P30 vs. Super program (Super A)?

Thanks to everybody who answered my message about my old P30 camera. I´m 
new
in the forum, and I like it a lot. Some of you recommended me to get a
manual old Pentax Super Program (Super A here in Europe). Is the Super
better enough to get it even having the P30? I like manual SLR, so I would
go for one of them if it´s really worthy: there are some Super Program
bodies in eBay to bid for. So, can anybody tell me the differences between
both cameras? Maybe best the MZ-M (ZX-M)?
P.D.- Is the Super ME the same camera than the Super Program?
Super A is the most feature rich Pentax K mount body, and it is the best on 
paper. However, as Pentax have proven time and again, no camera should be 
too perfect. So they installed a few things to balance things out.
1) Dim & coarse focus screen (worse then P50).
2) Relatively low viewfinder magnification in its era.
3) Noise mirror/shutter (worse than P50, don't even touch the Motor Drive 
A).
4) Too much vibration from the mirror/shutter (worse than P50).

However, it is the only manual focus camera with 4 expoure modes - manual, 
auto, aperture priority & shutter priority. It is also the only one with TTL 
flash beside the LX. This model is also quite reliable. Dirt self-timer & 
shutter release button contacts are common problem on used models, but they 
don't require new parts to fix. The area near the semi-transparent plastic 
on the top plate is the weak part so don't bang on it. IMHO, if you expect 
super sharp images handheld, get the ME Super or MX. The Super A will 
disappoint you due to the mirror flip. I don't recommend MZ-M due to its 
poor viewfinder.

regards,
Alan Chan
_
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online  
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

Re: P30 in 2003?

The bright viewfinder was the only thing I missed when I sold the P30t ( 
had
it for some months). And I think the sound of the MZ-M-motor is not more
bothering than the CLACKK of the P30t-shutter.
BTW: Is the viewfinder of the MZ-S brighter than that of the MZ-M (and the
MZ5-N, - I think it's the same)?
I am sure you can evaluate that, Alan, am I right?
I hade the P50 which is the elder brother of the P30. It has brighter and 
better viewfinder than the supposed should be good Super A/Program. 
Personally, I would not consider any MZ/ZX model if you plan to use manual 
focus, except the MZ-S. The reason is that they all have highly distorted, 
low magnification, and difficult to manual focus viewfinders. I believe the 
problem lies at their poor quality uncoated plastic eyepieces which distort 
everything you see. Pentax abandoned the good old multicoated glass 
eyepieces since the Z/PZ & MZ/ZX series, until the MZ-S. For this reason, if 
you want AF body with good viewfinder, MZ-S is your only choice (Z-1p is ok 
too, but ok only). However, at 0.75X magnification, it is still lower than 
the P30 that you had. But it did not seem to be a problem the last time I 
tried it with some manual focus lenses. MX has the highest viewfinder 
magnification, ME/ME Super 2nd. I currently use the MZ-M screen in the MX 
and the viefinder is bight and "big".  :-)

regards,
Alan Chan
_
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

Re: *ist D revisited

2003-06-08 Thread KT Takeshita

On 03.6.8 5:18 PM, "Alan Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Oh yes, the 40/2.8 is fun to work with too. Where do you want to proceed
> 1st? Front or back?  :-)

You are baaad, Alan! :-).

Cheers,

Ken

Re: OT-So What are You? was: Late Saturday fun

2003-06-08 Thread Cotty


>Hey Cotty,
>
>You're funny! :-)
>
>- THaller
>
>P.S. I mean funny - haha, not funny - strange...

I've got some news for you buddy...you were right first time ;-)



Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   |  People, Places, Pastiche
||=|  www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk

Re: MX vs LX or MZ-3 vs. MZ-S or ? (Long Boring Ramble!)

Thanks for the replies all, I'm surprised you all weren't too tired to 
respond after reading that. :-)
When I saw a post that long, I just apply the "fast reading" method I learnt 
from TV ads. And you know what? It works!! But I remember nothing afterward, 
say few minutes later.  :-)

But I'm shocked at the diversity of responses! :-o Who would have thought 
that there would be so many different opinions here at PDML!! :-)
We disagree on almost everything, that's PDML.  :-)

And I wonder if older bro is lurking around here or just psychic! He sent 
me a private message from the labusas motorcycle board saying he'd lend me 
his D60 and a lens, because he's never going to touch it again now that he 
has the D10! :-)
If I were you, I would take his offer and then unscubscribed from the list 
soon after.  :-)

regards,
Alan Chan
_
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

Re: MX vs LX or MZ-3 vs. MZ-S or ? (Long Boring Ramble!)

although I've read about some that have had meter/led problems with theirs.
AFAIK, there are 2 versions of MXs with 2 different circuit boards. The old 
one has 4 switches on them and they oxidize over time. The new IC has 1 
switch only and should be more reliable, if the camera was kept properly. I 
have been stripped parts from a broken MX lately. Even though many parts of 
the camera are rusting, the IC is in mint condition, and it is the late 
model.

As far as I can see, after stripping down the MX completely, not much could 
go wrong with this model (don't know about earlier version). The most common 
problem I have seen is rusting because they were not properly stored.

regards,
Alan Chan
_
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*   
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: Clear glass focussing screen?

I don't have the ME Super to play with so I am not too certain, but I don't 
think you can switch the screen of the ME Super yourself. Also, if the 
viewing is going to be dim, it is a good idea to look for a newer screen. 
For instance, LX2000/Z-1p/MZ screens. The Z-1p/MZ screens are slightly 
smaller but they will work.

regards,
Alan Chan
There was a clear glass with crosshairs screen for the MX intended for just
such use. Maybe one could be fitted to your ME Super.
_
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*   
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

Alexander wrote:

>Still I
> think expensive stuff will support the aperture ring,
> similar as the expensive Nikon gear does.

I've been told that Pentax have no plans of removing the aperture ring from the more 
expensive lenses. As usual, I might have been told bullshit...


Pål

Re: *ist D revisited

Alexander wrote:

> But it is true, it does not make much sense buying a
> new body (e.g. PZ-1 , MZ-S etc.) and then using it
> with K/M lenses. With these K/M lenses all the new
> bodies will basically work like a ME-super.

I can symphatize with those affected. However, I believe Pentax have done some math: 
How many K and M mount lenses are there? I cannot imagine there are many of those who 
want to use, say, the M 35/2.8 on a DSLR or any of the other numerous, rather 
pedestrian leses. Not yo mention the old zooms. Those really good K lenses, apart from 
the 50mm lenses which are dirt cheap an numerous anyway, that some actually migth want 
to use, like say the 15/3.5, or for that matter, the 35/3.5 or 85/1.8, they are all 
quite rare. How many of those who own these rare lenses ar actually going to use them 
on a DSLR? I believe that however you do the math, you end up with very few potential 
customers. 

Pål

Re: Al barrel (was: *ist D revisited )

You, know what, Alan? A magnet will tell you instantly if it is steel or
some sort aluminum alloy. Steel or brass will be heavy. Steel magnetic,
brass not magnetic. Alloy will be light, and not magnetic. Aluminum alloys
can range from something almost as soft as lead, to something they use for
armor plating in hardness. The only problem aluminum on aluminum is not a
good bearing surface (tends to gall and stick, think of filter rings. and
this is the answer to your question below) so is not usually used by good
engineers. Aluminum on brass works very well.
Funny you mentioned this. The magnet idea came to my mind last night, but it 
was too late to experiment. Now I have to figure out where to get a magnet 
for the job (don't want to strip my radio). Unlike the HOYA filter threads 
which are quite soft (except PL/CPL), the retaining rings of Pentax lenses 
are hard and won't be stuck. But it could be aluminium alloy as many have 
already pointed out. I'll let you guy knows when I finished the experiment.  
:-)

regards,
Alan Chan
_
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: *ist D revisited

2003-06-08 Thread Mark Roberts

Pål wrote:

> Are you sure? I suspect it does signalize the end of
> the world. In fact, limiting K/M lenses use on a digital 
> camera is an act of majestic proportions of enormous 
> long term significance.

What? A company screwing it's most loyal customers? No, not the end of
the world. Not even news these days. :(

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

2003-06-08 Thread alexanderkrohe

Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 22:08:47 +0200
From: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?R=FCdiger_Neumann?="
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Hi RÜdiger,

> Hallo
> my problem is not the one K-lens I have. But I like
to use the aperture 
> ring
> like on the MZ-S, but that is not possible on the
*ist, *istD and I 
> fear on
> all coming *ists. I like to use power zoom on my FA*
2.8/80-200, not 
> possible
> on the new *ists. 

I guess the power zoom has only few followers. 

> I like to buy the new FAJ 18-35, but that will not 
work on
> my LX at all and only reduced on my MZ-S. I also
fear that the coming 
> lenses
> in autum will be also only FAJ lenses, since lenses
with aperture ring 
> will
> not make sense at all on the *ist/*istD.

Look at the B&H web page. They already stock two of
the FAJ lenses. They are really cheap. They are
obviously targeted to the entry level market. They are
about offering cheap camera kits. 

> On the list was the argument, that the with the use
of the aperture 
> ring
only at the MZ-S, the aperture is more accurate. With
> the thumb wheel 
> at the
> Z-1p, the aperture is not exact. Will the aperture
with the thumb wheel 
> of
> the *ist, *istD be correct?

We will find it out. The *ists are a different camera
generation compared to the PZ-1, so I would expect
higher accuracy.   

> Pentax is just sacrifing its best argument for
buying Pentax without 
> any
> technical advantage, the compabiltity.
>

I think this is irrelevant for new users. They would
have to pay for something they won't ever use. Still I
think expensive stuff will support the aperture ring,
similar as the expensive Nikon gear does.

> regards
> Rüdiger

Enjoy,
Alexander

__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com

Re: Al barrel (was: *ist D revisited )

> Is aluminum some kind of "American" spelling, or aluminum and aluminium
> indicates any subtle difference, or no distinction at all?
Both the  same product. No distinction.
And I thought the US aluminium was lighter (as indicated by its spelling), 
damn, I mean aluminum. Oh... I am lost...

regards,
Alan Chan
_
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: *ist D revisited

2003-06-08 Thread alexanderkrohe

Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 21:45:09 +0200
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=E5l_Jensen?=
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> Alexander wrote:

> > Yes, I do regret that too but it is not the end of
the
> > world ... 
> 
> 
> Are you sure? I suspect it does signalize the end of
> the world. In 
> fact, limiting K/M lenses use on a digital camera is
an act of majestic 
> proportions of enormous long term significance. :o)
> 
> Pål

Har! 
But it is true, it does not make much sense buying a
new body (e.g. PZ-1 , MZ-S etc.) and then using it
with K/M lenses. With these K/M lenses all the new
bodies will basically work like a ME-super.

Alexander

__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com

Re: Al barrel (was: *ist D revisited )

Do those super strength aluminium alloys cost a lots more than, say steel?

regards,
Alan Chan
I've dealt with designing and fabricating parts out of aluminum for most
of my professional life, and in the past 25+ years for aero- and outer
space programs and let me tell you, there are aluminum alloys available
that can match the strength and come close to the thermal expansion of
good steel.
What the average consumer has been exposed to are soft and weak,
comparatively speaking.
No reason to expect that the camera industry wouldn't have just much
interest in making parts of the best aluminum alloys, with properties
chosen to do the job.
Which is not to say that there aren't some parts from manufacturers who
don't care about ultimate strengths and dent resistance and wear
properties, but I can assure you, the major manufacturers certainly do.
_
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

Re: *ist SLR and K-mount lenses

This "promise" was given by Pentax UK awhile back. However, one should 
never trust Pentax people in such matter as the rumor mill is usually more 
reliable! So who knows?
Whats more, more lenses are promised this fall. This is apparently the 
"good stuff". I put more faith in this "rumor".
I hate "good stuff", they cost me money.

regards,
Alan Chan
_
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

Re: *ist D revisited

So who do they sell the expensive gear to?
Last time buyers.  :-)

regards,
Alan Chan
_
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

Re: *ist D revisited

It always amazes me how many (true) experts in various areas we have in 
this
list (and how one subject goes way off track for extreme :-).  I have my 
own
expertise but it is not the photography related.
Good to have you guys as we do not know when we need you next time :-).
What's even more amazing is how the experts disagree with each other.  :-)

regards,
Alan Chan
_
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*   
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: *ist D revisited

I would not touch my Limiteds, but I was looking at M40/2.8 as an ideal
candidate.
No, no, no, don't tempt me :-).
Oh yes, the 40/2.8 is fun to work with too. Where do you want to proceed 
1st? Front or back?  :-)

Please.  I want to know everything.
Everyone does, even lies.  :-)

regards,
Alan Chan
_
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

Re: OT:My CD cover

2003-06-08 Thread brooksdj

 
 So, about that name:  Nurah Blooze?  I understand the > Blooze part, but I suspect I'm
missing 
something obvious about the Nurah part.
> 
> congrats,
> frank
>From the 1968(i think)John Mayhall album(yes that correct,Album,not Cd)Raw Blues.
They are 
the Nuraw Blooze

Dave
BTW thanks for the comments.

Re: Al barrel (was: *ist D revisited )

2003-06-08 Thread frank theriault

Wow, Tom,

If that's supposed to be (phonetically) a French Canadian accent, it's the worst
I've ever seen (or read).  

T Rittenhouse wrote:

> 
> French Canadian: Theet stuff
>
> Sorry, Frank, I couldn't resist. Glad to hear you got the bike back on the
> road.
>
> Ciao,
> Graywolf
> http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto

--
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist
fears it is true." -J. Robert
Oppenheimer

Re: Pentax to close Head Office,

2003-06-08 Thread brooksdj

> Well, it's Pentax's corporate decision, but 
it sounds like a 
step back in
> customer service.  While living in Toronto, I really enjoyed being able to
> pop over to Pentax to get my camera or lenses serviced, and get them back
> the same week.  As well, you could get the most obscure acccessories, and
> talk to knowledgeable people.  I'm sure the Pentaxians in Vancouver will be
> very disappointed at this news.
> 
> Pat White

How true Pat,unfortunately all the Pentax gear i now own is not serviceable(maybe the
6x7??)
at Mississauga.Its good that we have 2-3 good,reliable camera repair places in the GTA.
OTOH the D1 i own is an American model,so if i have to repair,i cannot sent it to 
Nikon,
also in Mississauga,but the states.The one in Toronto will only do CCD cleanings
for US cameras.

Dave

Re: Arrrrgh!

2003-06-08 Thread Thomas Haller

Hi Paal,

> "It turns out that front lens tube on my just repaired FA645 33-55 
zoom is not straight but points slightly to the left..."
>
Rats, sorry to hear that. That's a lot money to have spent not to get 
the lens fixed right. Maybe you can take a picture of the problem, just 
to feel better...

- THaller

Re: K-mount compatibility (was Re: *ist D revisited)

2003-06-08 Thread Artur Ledóchowski

- Original Message -
From: "Caveman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: K-mount compatibility (was Re: *ist D revisited)

> While you guys are having fun with it... let me add that dropping
> backward compatibility in K-mount à la Nikon means that from this moment
> on, Pentax will be competing with C/N/M based on strictly their FA lens
> lineup quality, features, pricing and completeness.

Yes, and it seems that Pentax has just thrown the gauntlet before C/N/M. OK,
so be it. If it means there will be the MZ-5n/3 successor, IS/USM, more
FA*'s, Limiteds and FA lenses of the built quality *at least* matching the
FA 24-90, then I can live with that and most probably accept and enjoy. I'm
not going to get rid of my Super A, so my plain K-mount lenses will not
collect dust. If the compatibility with KA-lenses is maintained then it will
still be more than the competition offers. But if Pentax fails to provide
the current and potential costomers with sufficient excuses for abandoning
the K-mount compatibility then...
Regards
Artur

Re: K-mount compatibility (was Re: *ist D revisited)

Pål Jensen wrote:

While you guys are having fun with it... let me add that dropping 
backward compatibility in K-mount à la Nikon means that from this moment 
on, Pentax will be competing with C/N/M based on strictly their FA lens 
lineup quality, features, pricing and completeness.
For new buyers (which are only buyers) the current line-up is what its all about. And you forgot the A and F lenses which constitute the bulk of all K mount lenses. In addition, most of the M lenses ecxist in A version as well.

Take out the A and F lines of lenses too. Now that the compatibility 
dance has started, no sane buyer would want anything but the latest model.

cheers,
caveman

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

>From Pal
>
>> Hallo
>> my problem is not the one K-lens I have. But I like to use the aperture
ring
>> like on the MZ-S, but that is not possible on the *ist, *istD and I fear
on
>> all coming *ists.
>
>Isn't it possible to use the aperture ring on the *ist D? That really
sucks!
>
>
>>I like to use power zoom on my FA* 2.8/80-200, not posible
>> on the new *ists.
>
>Are you sure you really want an *ist?


Yes I want to use my 2.8/80-200 on the coming *istD, and I had bought a *ist
as a back-up for my MZ-S, but the aperture ring will not work in a way like
it works on the MZ-S. You will have the same problem, as you are used to the
aperture ring of the 645 lenses.
regards
Rüdiger

My Pentax Used bookmarks

2003-06-08 Thread Thomas Haller

Happy Weekend!

For what it's worth, here are my Pentax Used bookmarks. I had to take  
the stupid IE bookmark file home and use my Mac Safari browser to get  
them out.

Note: Some of the big players might be missing since they were already  
in my regular Pentax folder, but I do see all my current favorites in  
here, so here is what you get! :-)

Note2: Some of the longer ones may get line breaks inserted where the  
lines wrap, use a text editor and make them all one line of text before  
you try to use them as bookmarks. You can spot them easily as the line  
below the long bookmark does not start with "http://";.

Enjoy! - THaller

http://www.aaacamera.com/35mm_cameras.html
http://www.abesofmaine.com/
http://www.adoramacamera.com/
http://www.keh.com/hmpg/index.cfm
http://www03.bhphotovideo.com/
http://www.ap-ts.com/
http://www.cameraquest.com/
http://www.cameraworld.com/ 
photocatlist.asp?SPECIAL=BLANK&srch=CAMERA&bottom=true&items=Camera+SLR& 
fa=0&manufacturers=0&price=10&submit=Search+Cameras&showcase 
=4&qs=slr_camera
http://www.cameta.com/
http://www.craigcamera.com/dealers.htm
http://www.dels-cam.com/
http://focuscamera.com/cgi-local/default.pl/=rf/=32085509http:// 
www.kcamera.com/main/links.htm
http://www.kcamera.com/
http://www.mcbaincamera.com/index.html
http://www.mcbaincamera.com/SLR/pentax/mz3.htm
http://www.pacificrimcamera.com/catalog/cq11.htm
http://www.ritzcamera.com/cgi-bin/ncommerce3/ExecMacro/ritzcamera/ 
home.d2w/ 
report?Krypto=lCcaC5p%2B1IJsQ42bV%2FIThP7pO7L05%2Fsn2PQCLpDUiKYq84Ya1hW2 
4OJ5SIx4U2f9QXrkUn4OIQHYThJ7u173k5Qfjf%2FXSKK1H6Adq4g5j9aEKtiB1ST%2B2PoF 
15m4vX45qZRBJIoT3XLo1W3CDh25jQ4%2BcVkUt%2Bo2auUb8KXbd7tkFW40xA2exaCTf7DE 
iaUl4ThCS3OQaG%2BchmQLqE5U%2FjqbFAE8OIWkcIl0mK0ENIkAIcpZXhRiILqc%2FyWo%2 
FSrURi4nINAajPu77VNdi8vSXA%3D%3D

http://www.cameraclub.com/
http://www.woodcam.com/
http://www.camera-direct.com/
http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/cameras/pentax_repair_shops.html
http://abccamera.hypermart.net/clear.htm
http://www.kenmorecamera.com/acb/Category.cfm?&DID=7&CATID=62
http://www.lensrepro.com/USED/used-pentax.htm
http://www.cambridgeworld.com/Used_Pentax_Equipment_Used/used_pentax.htm
http://www.bocaphoto.com/products/used/pentax.htm
http://www.percivalcameras.org.uk/used%20pentax.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bh6.sph/ 
FrameWork.class?FNC=CatalogActivator__Acatalog_html___SID=F5DF7E4F760___ 
CatID=2871
http://www.classic-cameras.com/pentaxk.htm
http://www.thompsonphoto.com/used/
http://www.gassers.com/Used/UPentax.html
http://www.central-camera.com/used/pentax.htm
http://www.goodwinphotoinc.com/35mm/Pentax/pentax.html
http://www.cameratech.net/used_pentax35.html
http://www.chriscamera.com/south/UsedPentax.htm
http://www.precision-camera.com/buy/usedpentax.htm
http://porterscamerastore.com/used.html
http://www.the-camera-house.co.uk/index.htm
http://www.melgray.freeserve.co.uk/ 
index.html?top.html&left.html&displays/pentax.html
http://www.charlottecamera.com/ 
dir2.icl?secid=0&subsecid=35&orderidentifier=ID103884113984870245B6CB6A8
http://www.brooklyncam.com/inventory/pentax35.shtml#pentaxk
http://www.pentaxuser.co.uk/pages/classifieds.htm
http://www.smilephotovideo.com/store.cfm?store=used
http://www.adorama.com/ 
catalog.tpl?op=category&sid=105426705192636851&cat1=Used

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

Rüdiger wrote:


> Hallo
> my problem is not the one K-lens I have. But I like to use the aperture ring
> like on the MZ-S, but that is not possible on the *ist, *istD and I fear on
> all coming *ists. 

Isn't it possible to use the aperture ring on the *ist D? That really sucks!


>I like to use power zoom on my FA* 2.8/80-200, not posible
> on the new *ists. 

Are you sure you really want an *ist?


> On the list was the argument, that the with the use of the aperture ring
> only at the MZ-S, the aperture is more accurate. With the thumb wheel at the
> Z-1p, the aperture is not exact. Will the aperture with the thumb wheel of
> the *ist, *istD be correct?

I've heard they have changed the protocol...

Pål

Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)

2003-06-08 Thread Mark Roberts

"Rüdiger Neumann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>my problem is not the one K-lens I have.

I envy you.
I have a K 15mm f/3.5
It would have been a useful - no, essential - lens for me on a DSLR.
:(

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: K-mount compatibility (was Re: *ist D revisited)



> While you guys are having fun with it... let me add that dropping 
> backward compatibility in K-mount à la Nikon means that from this moment 
> on, Pentax will be competing with C/N/M based on strictly their FA lens 
> lineup quality, features, pricing and completeness.


For new buyers (which are only buyers) the current line-up is what its all about. And 
you forgot the A and F lenses which constitute the bulk of all K mount lenses. In 
addition, most of the M lenses ecxist in A version as well.

Pål

Pentax lens compatibility (WAS: Re: *ist D revisited)

Alexander wrote:
- Original Message - 
> This is not so. The LX had a worse compatibility than
> the *ist and *istD. The LX was introduced just 4 or 5
> years after introduction of the K-mount, so it eas
> incompatible with any lens older than 5 years. By
> contrast, the the *ist and *istD are introduced 20 (!)
> years after introduction of the A-lenses (which
> inherently made the aperture ring redundant). So is
> only incompatible with any lens older than 20 years.  

The Pentax *ist D will compatible with Pentax lenses introduced the last 20 years.
The Canon D10 is compatible with Canon lenses introduced the last 16 years. Those 
older cannot even be mounted. 
The Nikon D100 has various limitation it takes the Nikon experts to figure out. It is 
certainly beyond my abilities.
Minolta lenses doesn't fit any digital camera at all. Not even vaporware!

So it seems to me that Pentax is best in business when it comes to compatibilty of 
DSLR's with older lenses although it could have been better.

Pål

Arrrrgh!

It turns out that front lens tube on my just repaired FA645 33-55 zoom is not straight 
but points slightly to the left. The lens was impact damaged and repaired at the price 
of $750. Every lens tube seem to be replaced. In addition, the lens makes a noise and 
you can feel a vibration at the focal lenght of 46mm while zooming. If I push the 
front lens tube upwards while zooming the dent in zooming action at 46mm dissapears. 
Of course its only mm off but it is visible. I don't know how it will affect image 
quality but I think I at least need to give Pentax service a call. The worst thing is 
that this lens was repaired in Holland and I just returned the loaner lens. Arrrgh!

Pål

P30 vs. Super program (Super A)?

2003-06-08 Thread Jose Luis Gonzalez Martin

Thanks to everybody who answered my message about my old P30 camera. I´m new
in the forum, and I like it a lot. Some of you recommended me to get a
manual old Pentax Super Program (Super A here in Europe). Is the Super
better enough to get it even having the P30? I like manual SLR, so I would
go for one of them if it´s really worthy: there are some Super Program
bodies in eBay to bid for. So, can anybody tell me the differences between
both cameras? Maybe best the MZ-M (ZX-M)?

Thank you!




P.D.- Is the Super ME the same camera than the Super Program?

Re: To Pentax in Japan (does anybody have their email address?)

2003-06-08 Thread Mark Roberts

Arnold Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>An aperture simluator may be "expensive", but how can 5 lines of 
>software to enable metering with stopped down k-mount lenses be expensive.

If the aperture simulator can be put on a competitively priced $200.00
camera like a ZX-7, its cost is trivial in the context of a $1500.00
camera.

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: Clear glass focussing screen?

2003-06-08 Thread Pentxuser

I have the equivalent for the LX . Just took it out and replaced it with the 
grid screen...(I have grid on every camera I own accept one PZ1... 
The cross hairs screen is made for microphotography...
Vic

Re: Clear glass focussing screen?

2003-06-08 Thread Rfsindg

Don,
You are looking for an SD-11 screen for the LX (gray box) or
an SD screen for the MX (black box).  The LX screens are here...
 http://www.euronet.nl/~pimr/lxfsmain.html
and here...
 http://www.euronet.nl/~pimr/fs_descr.html
The MX screens are labeled similarly, but no numbers.
There is a note on the bottom of the first page on the special purposes of 
the SD-11 and SD-21 screens.
Regards,  Bob S.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>  No, Don, I can not remember the designation for that screen (might have 
been
>  SC), sorry. I looked through my stuff. I have an MX service manual
>  (downloaded from Mark Roberts site), but not a users manual. Strangely the
>  service manual does not even show the standard screen.

Re: Pentax to close Head Office,Repair Station and Warehouse in Vancouver!

2003-06-08 Thread fastpat

Well, it's Pentax's corporate decision, but it sounds like a step back in
customer service.  While living in Toronto, I really enjoyed being able to
pop over to Pentax to get my camera or lenses serviced, and get them back
the same week.  As well, you could get the most obscure acccessories, and
talk to knowledgeable people.  I'm sure the Pentaxians in Vancouver will be
very disappointed at this news.

Pat White

Re: Digital vs. film cave test

Anthony Farr wrote:

My point about using prints as the means of comparison is that it requires
neither capture medium to be converted to the other as part of the process,
and very fine prints can be made from either by their own native workflow
methods.
And on what magic "digital" media do you intend to print ? I don't even 
bother comparing a slide to a CD or a hard drive or a memory card. ;-)


You made a nice lampoon of the classic film v digital comparisons that use
digital's own native display methods but require film to be converted to
digital format by questionable means 
Yes, that was one of my purposes. I plead guilty for that.

That in itself should be the point of your exercise, not any retrospective
claim that the test was serious.
And I still submit that there is a serious part to it too, which 
basically tells that, for projected images, the classic film based 
workflow produces better results than a full digital workflow. You have 
to mix some film in the digital process to get to some better results, 
but then what is the advantage of using digital. In the "pure digital 
workflow" we have the advantage of fast production without any photo 
processing lab mixing into our affairs and delaying things. If we mix 
film there we have the worst of both worlds. Film-like turnaround times 
and costs, without the quality.

cheers,
caveman
cheers,
caveman

Re: Al barrel (was: *ist D revisited )

2003-06-08 Thread Rfsindg

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >Because of the drab weather in the UK, they have to introduce more
> >letters to make their language more coulorful.
>  
>  Boy, you're gonna hear some 'coulorful' language in a minute Bob!

Cotty,
My spell checker only speaks 'Merikan.  I knew there was a U in colourful  
over there, I just thought it was a little more to the left.   :-)
Bob S.

pic of mine on ebay and passing comments on other stuff

2003-06-08 Thread Ann Sanfedele

well, I'm selling it myself - or hoping too.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=14895&item=3227182035

sorry I haven't been contributing more to the
chatter lately guys, I've really trying to keep
nose to grindstone and feeling very pressured - I
just skim the posts.

This month's synchronicity had some nice stuff,
but I noticed that there were few in total
agreeing with some others that the restriction and
assignment aspect is too daunting.

An all BW pug would be nice, as some one
suggested.  How about "From my Window" as
a theme?

I love to shoot in the rain, but haven't done much
lately of any kind - and it is getting to
be old.  So much rain in NY that if it isn't
raining I feel and obligation to spend as much
time outside as possible for exercise :)

Wonder if anyone was at Belmont Track with a
pentax

annsan

Re: Pentax k-mount

2003-06-08 Thread Herb Chong

15 minutes work like originally asserted? they make enough cameras to make custom 
microcontrollers.

Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 14:20
Subject: Re: Pentax k-mount


> Herb Chong commented:
> > you assume you can recognize a Jump instruction.
> 
> And that there are any bytes left over in the address space
> to stick the new code into.  (Of the two, recognizing the
> JMP instructions is the more easily solvable.  How many
> different embedded controllers are in common use these
> days?  ID the controller and look it up, or try different
> interpretations of the code until you find one that starts
> making sense.)

Re: Al barrel (was: *ist D revisited )

Oh, sorry, from the subject line I thought we were talking about lens
barrels. Next time I read one of your posts, I will be sure to put on my
swami hat.

Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto


- Original Message -
From: "Bruce Rubenstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 1:51 PM
Subject: Re: Al barrel (was: *ist D revisited )


> I said nothing about their lens barrels (try reading the words in front
> of you), which are aluminum alloy. I said something can be steel (as in
> stainless) and not have a magnet stick to it. A magnet is not a
> definitive test for all steels.

Re: OT: Technical Challenge

The Caveman predicted:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > available addresses to the point that not only could every
> > PC in the world have its own permanent address, but every
> > future "toasternet"-enabled appliance in every home could have its
> > own address.  (At least until people started putting chips
> > into every piece of furniture and every knicknack "just because 
> > they could" and networking those...)
> 
> The digicams should definitely have one each, and be permanently 
> connected to the net via sattelite link. Then Good Things (TM) could 
> happen, like the manufacturer uploading to it new versions of firmware 
> each time one is available, the FBI could look through your viewfinder 
> to see if you're not into some illegal activity, your wife could do that 
> too, Microsoft could check if you have the proper number and type of 
> licenses for the current year, you may receive advertising on your LCD, 
> etc... I just can't wait it... now *that* would be the real Digital Age.

Thou frightenest me.  Now I've got to start figuring out
how one would design an "area of effect" firewall for 
wireless devices carried on one's person, so as to be
able to filter the intrusive connections. 

-- Glenn

Re: MX vs LX or MZ-3 vs. MZ-S or ? (Long Boring Ramble!)

2003-06-08 Thread Lukasz Kacperczyk

First of all - sorry for my previous "empty" reply :-)

> [  ]  Keep buying used MXs ?

Yes.

> [  ]  Buy a used LX?

No.

> Or do I move on to an AF body? And if I go AF, which MZ?
>
> [  ]  An MZ-3 (black)?

No.

>
> [  ]  An MZ-S?

Yes.

> [  ]  Move to digital (wait for
> the mythical Pentax D)?

Maybe (if you're patient enough).

I have a MX and a MZ-S, and consider the latter to be an "AF MX". Sure the
viewfinder isn't that big, but it's mighty contrasty, and a joy to look
through. It's very well built, easy to operate, compact, has about
everything a MX user would want and more, is fully compatibile (I have 6
lenses now - K 50/1.4, FA 50/1.4, Revuenon 55/1.2, FA 28/2.8, M 100/2.8 and
A 24-50/4 [though I'm planning to sell the last one] and with all of them I
can use centerweighed and spot metering, I don't mind not being able to use
matrix metering with the M and K lenses). I'm sure you wouldn't like neither
the MZ-3 nor MZ-5n, because of their viewfinders and plastic construction,
and I'm scared by the multitude of LX glitches (spelling?). I guess a PZ-1/p
could be a cheaper alternative to the MZ-S, if you don't mind more plastic
and a bigger body.

Juzt my 2 cents.

regards,
Lukasz

Re: Pentax k-mount

Herb Chong commented:
> you assume you can recognize a Jump instruction.

And that there are any bytes left over in the address space
to stick the new code into.  (Of the two, recognizing the
JMP instructions is the more easily solvable.  How many
different embedded controllers are in common use these
days?  ID the controller and look it up, or try different
interpretations of the code until you find one that starts
making sense.)

-- Glenn

Re: Digital vs. film cave test

2003-06-08 Thread Anthony Farr

- Original Message - 
From: "Caveman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

>
> Then I will submit that the best quality "print" you can get with film
> is actually a slide.
>
> cheers,
> caveman
>

Very well then, if you want to make a comparison that calls for film to be
viewed as a projected slide, make the best slide from a digital image file
that it's possible to make, and view it via the very same projector that the
film original is using.

My point about using prints as the means of comparison is that it requires
neither capture medium to be converted to the other as part of the process,
and very fine prints can be made from either by their own native workflow
methods.  You certainly could digitise the film if you believe that digital
printing is better, but you wouldn't need to, and you could print the
digital image as a C-type print if you wanted, and that would be nice, too.

You made a nice lampoon of the classic film v digital comparisons that use
digital's own native display methods but require film to be converted to
digital format by questionable means (a Flextight scanner might be damned
good but that doesn't make it the best possible means of digitising film).
That in itself should be the point of your exercise, not any retrospective
claim that the test was serious.  You clearly introduced the test as
"Digital vs. film cave test", but it was actually damned good slide
projector vs. so-so digital projector.

regards,
Anthony Farr

Re: MX vs LX or MZ-3 vs. MZ-S or ? (Long Boring Ramble!)

2003-06-08 Thread Lukasz Kacperczyk


===
www.fotopolis.pl
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
 internetowy magazyn o fotografii
- Original Message - 
From: "Thomas Haller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "PDML" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 8:54 AM
Subject: MX vs LX or MZ-3 vs. MZ-S or ? (Long Boring Ramble!)


> Hello Folks,
> 
> I am an enthusist photographer, not a professional, but I take a lot of 
> pictures. Landscapes, autos, and lots of close up to macro stuff, like 
> flowers, knives, and bits of machinery.
> 
> I prefer inanimate objects, but have taken good pictures of people if 
> they forget I'm there and I can take many shots of them. If I "love" 
> the subject (again usually inanimate objects) I often get what I 
> consider awesome photos.
> 
> I "never" use flash (okay maybe a little fill-in if I absolutely _have_ 
> to, but it makes me feel like I've failed somehow). I usually use ASA 
> 400-3200 unless I'm shooting for detail where I'm "forced" to use ASA 
> 25-100. I like low light, night and early morning.
> 
> I like small compact cameras. I could never get used to a F3HP, it was 
> just too big and clunky!
> 
> I typically use a metered "manual" mode even if AE or SE or a program 
> exposure mode is available, but I'd use AE if I needed to. I want to 
> compose and set exposure with the lens wide open, then have it close 
> down when I shoot.
> 
> I prefer the, oh I don't know what  to call it, the drama or focus of 
> B&W photography and I "see in B&W" but I have a really good color sense 
> (like matching colors, using complimentary colors - I even taught 
> ceramic underglazing) so if I take my time I've made good color 
> pictures, but usually of slower moving subjects like flowers ;-).
> 
> Once I bought a Epson Color 800 and now my new Epson 2200, I've taken 
> to having my B&W negs or color slides scanned (PhotoCD and a friend's 
> Nikon CoolScan). Then I use Photoshop and make my own prints. I'm in 
> the market for my own film/slide scanner.
> 
> I started with my Dad's Leica IIIg with a 50mm Summicron (if I remember 
> correctly) , which took "magical" pictures where the subject somehow 
> stood apart from the rest of the picture. I remember a remarkable roll 
> of casual shots I made of my little brother in his sandbox that came 
> out like I was a pro at LIFE magazine.
> 
> But when I was old enough to realize what I was holding, I got scared 
> and bought a Konica Auto S2 rangefinder, with which I created some my 
> best pictures, albeit after hours of cropping and exposure experiments 
> in the darkroom. (I will still take it out for barbecues or other 
> occasions where I don't want to bother with the SLRs.)
> 
> Then I was convinced to buy an SLR to use different lenses, and found a 
> whole world of close-up pictures, wide angle and telephoto. My tool was 
> a Minolta SRT-101 with a few MD lenses. I bought the body and the 50mm 
> lens and my Dad bought a 28mm and a 100mm, When I left home, I left the 
> Minolta behind.
> 
> When I could afford another SLR, I found the Pentax MX (with 50mm 1.4 M 
> lens) and felt like I had found the "perfect" camera. Bright viewfinder 
> with good coverage, unobtrusive LED metering and shutter speed 
> indicators and even the aperture showed with that little prism window. 
> DOF, mechanical shutter, that 1.4 lens, oh gosh I could go on and on, 
> as I'm sure most of you can imagine. :-) Soon came more lenses, 
> filters, macro, shades, a couple more MX bodies, winders and so forth.
> 
> I even played with an LX for a while, loaned to me, and I really 
> appreciated the more sensitive meter, and of course the quality of the 
> body, but I actually preferred the viewfinder of the MX. (I could not 
> afford an LX then, anyway!)
> 
> Now I seem to be at a crossroad, one you have probably travelled past 
> already, and I am hoping you can help me choose a path. As much as I 
> love my old Pentax equipment, it all seems to be getting awfully old, 
> and I keep having to send bodies out more often for repair and 
> adjustment, breaking those winder battery door screws, and even my baby 
> 1.4M doesn't mount like it used to.
> 
> One response (as it seems to me) is to buy more MX bodies and Pentax 
> SMC-M lenses, in the best condition I can find, and just keep going the 
> way I have been.
> 
> Another way to go seems to be to "move up" to a used LX body, as the MX 
> bodies are what is getting the most expensive and troublesome to 
> maintain, and keep collecting SMC-M or -A lenses.
> 
> But I can imagine circumstances when AF would extend my domain, for 
> pictures of fast moving objects that are difficult to keep in focus 
> manually. (Can you say Laguna Seca?) And I've made plenty of "metering 
> mistakes" that might have been prevented by the newer matrix metering 
> systems.
> 
> So, another way to go seems to be to step up to the plate and buy 
> either an MZ-3 (black) or an MZ-S, the

Re: To Pentax in Japan (does anybody have their email address?)

2003-06-08 Thread Arnold Stark

Hi Pål,

Many stick to the equipment of the era from when they got into photography.

For me this would be the M, A and F bodies and lenses. However, today
my favourites are K-series, LX, F/FA*, Limiteds. I do not seem to be in
accordance with the "many" - but heavily influenced by the PDML ;-)

Nikon ressurected the FM2 in the form of the FM3a but buyers are simply too few.

I wonder what Nikon expected. Didn't they know their own FM2 sales
numbers? Actually, I think that to the conservative type of
photographers that were supposed to buy the FM3a, the FM2 still is the
more convincing product, while the FM3a simply is too electronic

In addition, there are no shortage of well built modern equipment. It is just that many complain about its cost which is silly really, as doesn't really cost more, often less, compared to older stuff when adjusted for inflation etc.

I do not complain about the prices of new equipment. Pentax prices
generally are OK. However, the build quality of some items - especially
zooms - could be better. Just compare the build qualtiy of the FA24-90
to that of the first generation of AF zooms (e.g. F28-80 or F35-105)

If you own 30 lenses you certainly could afford new gear if you stuck to a more "normal" number of lenses :o)

Well, the big number of old lenses happened only after I had acquired
some new AF lenses

I can't see the problem; you own a complete set of lenses compatible with a Pentax DSLR.

Yes, but I want to decide which k-mount lens I may use on an *ist D. I
do not want Pentax to take the decision for me. Naturally, AF lenses
much better fit the *ist D. However, if I want to use the *ist D with a
particular K- or M-series lens - e.g. the K17/f4 Fish-Eye, or the
M85/f2, my favourite portrait lens, or the K28/f3.5, which is better
than my F28/f2.8 - then I do neither need nor want Pentax do decide for
me that I should not be able to meter properly with any such lens when
combined with the *ist D. I am quite certain that stop-down-metering
would only require some minor reprogramming of the camera, and I want
Pentax to do it for the benefit of all users of k-mount equipment, and I
guess it would do no harm at all but only good to the number of *ist Ds
that will be sold.

The *ist D falls into the most competitive area of DSLR's where the price envelope is being pushed. I don't think Pentax can afford extravagant compatibility for a minority where the competition and market leaders can not.

An aperture simluator may be "expensive", but how can 5 lines of
software to enable metering with stopped down k-mount lenses be expensive.

Arnold

Re: Clear glass focussing screen?

No, Don, I can not remember the designation for that screen (might have been
SC), sorry. I looked through my stuff. I have an MX service manual
(downloaded from Mark Roberts site), but not a users manual. Strangely the
service manual does not even show the standard screen.

Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto


- Original Message -
From: "Dr E D F Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: Clear glass focussing screen?


> Do you have any details? I've been searching but have come up with nothing
> so far.

Re: Al barrel (was: *ist D revisited )

2003-06-08 Thread Bruce Rubenstein

I said nothing about their lens barrels (try reading the words in front 
of you), which are aluminum alloy. I said something can be steel (as in 
stainless) and not have a magnet stick to it. A magnet is not a 
definitive test for all steels.

BR

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

And nickel/cobalt alloys are magnetic. Or maybe you are saying Pentax uses
high chromium steel for their lens barrel?
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: "Bruce Rubenstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: Al barrel (was: *ist D revisited )
 

The most common types of stainless steel are not magnetic. This is true
for the Pentax lens mounts.

Re: OT: Technical Challenge

The digicams should definitely have one each, and be permanently 
connected to the net via sattelite link. Then Good Things (TM) could 
happen, like the manufacturer uploading to it new versions of firmware 
each time one is available, the FBI could look through your viewfinder 
to see if you're not into some illegal activity, your wife could do that 
too, Microsoft could check if you have the proper number and type of 
licenses for the current year, you may receive advertising on your LCD, 
etc... I just can't wait it... now *that* would be the real Digital Age.

cheers,
caveman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
available addresses to the point that not only could every
PC in the world have its own permanent address, but every
future "toasternet"-enabled appliance in every home could have its
own address.  (At least until people started putting chips
into every piece of furniture and every knicknack "just because 
they could" and networking those...)

OT: Technical Challenge

Somebody posted a comment in my LiveJournal saying that this:

"needs to be a photorealistic poster, so folks can buy it and 
tape it to the inside top shelf of friends' fridges."  I figured
getting the perspective exactly right to make a tromp l'oeil
poster would be an interesting exercise.  Ideas on where to start?
(I was thinking to start by standing where the victim would be
standing, and choose a focal length to fill the frame at that
distance.  Is it that easy?)

-- Glenn



PS:  For anyone who doesn't get the "IPv6" reference, the
proposed version 6 of the Internet Protocol (we're currently
using version 4, I believe) would multiply the number of
available addresses to the point that not only could every
PC in the world have its own permanent address, but every
future "toasternet"-enabled appliance in every home could have its
own address.  (At least until people started putting chips
into every piece of furniture and every knicknack "just because 
they could" and networking those...)

Re: Al barrel (was: *ist D revisited )