Re: What are the symptoms of the sticky mirror syndrome?
That is the standard behavior for a LX with bad batteries. At 09:53 PM 9/21/03 +0200, you wrote: Hi, Sid. Could be depleted batteries. The mirror movement is mechanical, as are the shutterspeeds from 1/2000 to 1/90. In auto, however, the shutter is electronically controlled. I remember the mirror froze in Up position once the batteries ran out of juice on my LX once. Don't remember if I tried to switch to manual to get the mirror back down. So I can't tell if my problem was like yours in that respect hth, Jostein - Pictures at: http://oksne.net - - Original Message - From: Sid Barras [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax discussion list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2003 10:38 PM Subject: What are the symptoms of the sticky mirror syndrome? Hi LX owners: My new to me LX has developed a disturbing habit after only the fourth roll of film: It's hanging up in the middle of the exposure cycle: In the auto mode, when the shutter button is pushed, the mirror goes up and the camera freezes before the shutter curtain sequence begins. The only way I can get the camera to exit this situation is to change the dial to one of the manual shutter speeds. Very disconcerting! I was set to take group and individual shots of my daughter's soccer team; luckily I had my glove box camera (IQ Zoom 105WR) in the assigned location, and could complete the photos. Any LX owners able to identify this condition? Thanks! Sid B I drink to make other people interesting. -- George Jean Nathan
Re: Sept PUG Comments
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1774996size=lg Geez, you know, Marnie, I like that much much better! You're right, it brings John (the guy with the scowl - I was actually a participant, and brought my Spottie along g) away from the centre, which looks better, and it brings the largest placard into the centre - I like it there, draws one into the photograph. I like that much, much better too! Better balance, concentrates the story, even pops the guy with the megaphone out better. That one's a keeper. Glad you found review all right, when I saw Dag's I kicked myself. Now why I can give responses/critiques/whatever in one or two lines? LOL. Too wordy by half. Marnie aka Doe Luckily our critiques aren't going to be critiqued. ;-)
Re: 300D first impressions
on 24.09.03 3:26, Amita Guha at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nate's 300D arrived today. So far I really like it. The ergonomics seem fine to me. Yeah, it's a little plasticky, but that's ok. I'll have a better idea of its capabilities once I get it outside, hopefully this weekend. Let me know if you have any questions about it. I've heard that it is neccessary to press the button and rotate command dial to change aperture value. Is it really possible? I thought it would be enough just to rotate command dial if you are in Av mode. And what about metering? Is it possible to freely switch between matrix and partial metering? -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Sept PUG Comments
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1774996size=lg Geez, you know, Marnie, I like that much much better! You're right, it brings John (the guy with the scowl - I was actually a participant, and brought my Spottie along g) away from the centre, which looks better, and it brings the largest placard into the centre - I like it there, draws one into the photograph. I like that much, much better too! Better balance, concentrates the story, even pops the guy with the megaphone out better. That one's a keeper. You win some contact but loose some of the crowd. Hmmm, I'm not sure... Glad you found review all right, when I saw Dag's I kicked myself. Why? Your suggestion was good. Now why I can give responses/critiques/whatever in one or two lines? LOL. Too wordy by half. :-) I had to, I was determined to comment them all, but some of the photos would have deserved more words. Another thing is that a history teacher once guessed that I would study some natural science. Why? Because I had answered all the questions in the first test in his class with one sentence each. My class mates had used one page on each question :-) Marnie aka Doe Luckily our critiques aren't going to be critiqued. ;-) Perhaps, but it would have been nice if some of them were discussed. DagT (man of too few words ;-)
Re: Sept PUG, comments
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] snip Stone by Dag Thrane Oh my! Talk about capturing the moment! You caught the millisecond! Thanks, it took some stones... :-) snip DagT
Top eBay photo searches OT
http://www.ebay.com/newsletter/Photo_information.html#dmiss1 Purely for your edification. Peter
Re: Complete Sept PUG Comments - loooooong
Dag T [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gianfranco Irlanda, Spaghetti Cat I hate that straw above the cat, but nice shot. Hi Dag, Now that you point me that out, I figured that I didn't really notice it before... and I hate that too, now. :-( I guess I should watch better my own pictures. Think that I even chose that shot for my visiting card years ago... Thanks for taking the time to comment. Ciao, Gianfranco = __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Re: Sept PUG, comments
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Spaghetti Cat by Gianfranco Irlanda It's an interesting scene. I find the cat gets a bit lost in the background pattern. Wonder if a colour version would have solved that? Well, maybe... At that moment I had with me the Z-1p too, loaded with velvia (I almost always have with me at least two cameras with different films) but I didn't take any picture of the cat with it. I was surprised to see the cat, having noticed first the plastic tureen full of spaghetti in the bush and nothing more. Probably the effect in BW is closer to what I saw. Thanks a lot for taking the time to comment. Ciao, Gianfranco = __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Re: 300D first impressions
I'll be more interested in everybody's (and hopefully my) impressions after living with their new camera for 6 months. - Original Message - From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 11:16 PM Subject: RE: 300D first impressions -Original Message- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Amita Guha Subject: 300D first impressions Nate's 300D arrived today. So far I really like it. The ergonomics seem fine to me. Yeah, it's a little plasticky, but that's ok. I'll have a better idea of its capabilities once I get it outside, hopefully this weekend. Let me know if you have any questions about it. A buddy of mine just bought one. He loves it. Pretty much everyone loves their first DLSR. It's not that much of a reflection of how good it is, but how cool DSLR's are. tv --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.520 / Virus Database: 318 - Release Date: 9/19/2003
Re: What's the difference between F FA Lenses?
Hi Thomas, I haven't noticed the multisegment reading to adjust with the focus distance. As for the flash, perhaps the P-TTL mode may consider the distance but it's not likely for the older plain TTL flash mode. For instance, the displayed range by the flash unit does not change with the distance. As far as I know, the distance info is only used by cameras bundled with smart modes in order to correctly select the landscape, portrait or macro mode. Servus, Alin Thomas wrote: TS Isn't it true that the FA lenses also communicate the distance to the TS body, so that better evaluation of the matrix metering can be done? TS Doesn't this also apply to flash modes?
Re: What's the difference between F FA Lenses?
on 24.09.03 12:45, Alin Flaider at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I haven't noticed the multisegment reading to adjust with the focus distance. As for the flash, perhaps the P-TTL mode may consider the distance but it's not likely for the older plain TTL flash mode. For instance, the displayed range by the flash unit does not change with the distance. P-TTL makes full use of distance information as long as flash is not tilted or in wireless mode (logical). Here are (very) technical details: http://164.195.100.11/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2Sect2=HITOFFu=/netahtml /search-adv.htmr=2f=Gl=50d=PTXTp=1S1=(((pentax+AND+flash)+AND+TTL)+AND +SLR)OS=pentax+and+flash+and+TTL+and+SLRRS=(((pentax+AND+flash)+AND+TTL)+A ND+SLR) As a matter of fact I have some photos, where there was an object near and the other (where the focus was set) far. The one that was near (defocused) was overexposed, while the other was exposed perfectly. In this situation normal TTL would took in cosnideration light reflected from near objects and as a result we would have underexposed main object(s). Pretty smart. In this matter P-TTL works similar to Minolta's ADI system, or Nikon's 3D matrix flash metering. It's a pity, that Pentax didn't included this information in advertising materials about AF360 and P-TTL enabled bodies. BTW, AFAIK not only FA but also older F lenses provide distance inormation. -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: 300D first impressions
The photographer I work with (who skipped the AF generation of cameras) now goes around at events with his 10D and a dumb grin, mumbling, This is too easy. BR From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pretty much everyone loves their first DLSR. It's not that much of a reflection of how good it is, but how cool DSLR's are.
Re: Re: Complete Sept PUG Comments - loooooong
Fra: Gianfranco Irlanda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dag T [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gianfranco Irlanda, Spaghetti Cat I hate that straw above the cat, but nice shot. Hi Dag, Now that you point me that out, I figured that I didn't really notice it before... and I hate that too, now. :-( Oooops, sorry about that. That's one of the dangers of letting others comment your photos. I guess I should watch better my own pictures. Think that I even chose that shot for my visiting card years ago... Thanks for taking the time to comment. You're welcome! I guess ones own photos are the hardest to watch. That's why I need others to comment. DagT
Re: Complete Sept PUG Comments - loooooong
Dag, you did a great job commenting on all the September submissions. Thanks for your efforts. As to your comments on my entry, you are right on the mark, IMHO. The composition is not strong: it was my first attempt to use the macro capabilities of my Optio S, and in the bright sunlight, it was damn hard to see anything in the video display. Because opf the angle, I couldn't use the optical viewfinder. As to the colors and technical aspects, that was all the Optio itself, on full automatic, so I can't take any credit! Dan Dag T wrote: OK, a glass of wine, 3 kids in bed, nothing better to do (well, actually). Time to get unpopular: Dan Matyola, Cactus Flower OK, not a strong composition, but nice colours and technically good. Another colour of the background in the lower corners could add something extra.
Re: What's the difference between F FA Lenses?
I don't have it in front of me, but the brochure for the Pentax PZ-1 (the first Pentax camera with multisegment metering) describes the different situations the multisegment metering can adjust for. A couple of them, like strong backlighting and sidelighting, are compensated more, I believe, if the subject in focus is at a middle distance as opposed to a far distance. I think it compensates more for a person at portrait distance against a bright background than it would for a landscape shot with a bright background, for example. There may be other situations in which focus distance is taken into consideration, as well. I suppose that with an A lens, the multisegment metering works, but without some of that extra information about focus distance that could influence the camera's metering of some shots. Joe Hi Thomas, I haven't noticed the multisegment reading to adjust with the focus distance. As for the flash, perhaps the P-TTL mode may consider the distance but it's not likely for the older plain TTL flash mode. For instance, the displayed range by the flash unit does not change with the distance. As far as I know, the distance info is only used by cameras bundled with smart modes in order to correctly select the landscape, portrait or macro mode. Servus, Alin Thomas wrote: TS Isn't it true that the FA lenses also communicate the distance to the TS body, so that better evaluation of the matrix metering can be done? TS Doesn't this also apply to flash modes?
Re: Top eBay photo searches OT
Interesting. I see that Sonly made it into the top brands. Must be an up-and-coming company... :) chris On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.ebay.com/newsletter/Photo_information.html#dmiss1 Purely for your edification. Peter
Pentax RAW file format
Had a play with a *istD in a local camera store today. I'd have to say I was impressed. I took along my CF card to grab some shots, and took a few RAW files to have a peek at. For anyone who is interested in technical details, these are in fact TIFF files with a .PEF extension. Most TIFF loading someware won't directly work with them, as they are 12bit/channel, and have only a single channel. The Photometric identifier is also something I don't recognise, and isn't documented in the TIFF headers... no doubt some GRGB bayer photometric. Hopefully Pentax will make documentation of custom photometric IDs and tiff tags available. In any case, this makes the files trivial to parse and load for us third party types, well done again Pentax. My only complaint is that the 12 bit data is padded to 16 bit. This makes the raw file bigger than it needs to be; they are over 12MB, where they should only need to be 9MB or so. This reduces storage on CF, and slows write times, seemingly unnecesarily. If anyone at Pentax is listening, please could we have non-padded PEF files? It may also be of interest that the PEF file seems to be 3040x2024 resolution, with all pixels seemingly active. Various other RAW files I've used have the entire sensor area (which Pentax quote as 3110x2030), but have black (masked) areas present. I am not sure yet if the PEF contains the appropriate ICC profile to correctly convert the file. Love, Light and Peace, - Peter Loveday Director of Development, eyeon Software
Portrait Lens Question
I've not done much portrait work, and I have a question about portrait lenses. Is the 'desirable' focal length of ~85mm to get a slightly flattened perspective, in order to de-emphasise features on peoples faces etc? Or is it to allow a good photographer to subject distance? Or both? Just curious about the ideal portrait lens on a *istD. Obviously the FOV crop factor of 1.5 means that a 50mm lens has the same field of view as a 75mm lens, but, still being 50mm focal length has the same perspective on any camera. If the perspective was the main concern here, then still having an 85mm lens would be ideal, but then the FOV would be a lot tighter and might necessitate a lot larger distance to the subject. Thanks! Love, Light and Peace, - Peter Loveday Director of Development, eyeon Software
Re: Portrait Lens Question
on 24.09.03 15:24, Peter Loveday at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just curious about the ideal portrait lens on a *istD. Obviously the FOV crop factor of 1.5 means that a 50mm lens has the same field of view as a 75mm lens, but, still being 50mm focal length has the same perspective on any camera. If the perspective was the main concern here, then still having an 85mm lens would be ideal, but then the FOV would be a lot tighter and might necessitate a lot larger distance to the subject. FOV at the same magnification scale should be equal with 35mm and *istD when using the sme lens. *istD will have greater DOF than 35mm at equal distance to subject. But then you will see just a part of image seen on 35mm frame, thus you will have to make the distance between you and the subject greater to maintain equal magnification scale. Am I right? -- Best Regards Sylwek
Reply: Complete Sept PUG Comments - loooooong
OK, a glass of wine, 3 kids in bed, nothing better to do (well, actually). Time to get unpopular: David J Brooks, Blackwater River Almost looks like a cold winter with frost from the morning fog still on the trees, nice IR effect. I miss something in the composition, some point of interest in the picture, and I have a problem with the dark tree on the right. I debated when i was framing the shot in the view finder,should i leave the tree in or out. I decided to leave it in for contrast,but i see you point. As far as composition,the dam was the focal point,but comes out rather small using the 28mm and scan. I made an enlargement for the upcoming fair and the dam shows up well in it. As soon as i drove up to this bridge, i knew it was a winner.g As others have mentioned,thanks for taking the time to do this,Dag Dave Brooks OK, that´s it, forgive any rotten English, it´s been a long evening. Good Night :-) DagT
Re: Complete Sept PUG Comments - loooooong
Can I hijack? I have taken about 5 pictures in my entire life but can I? On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Dag T wrote: Thomas Moraitis, Sunset with Drying octopusses Sunsets are popularIt is not a bad one, but in this case I miss something in the other end of the line. The composition is too heavily concentrated on the left. Also, I would have preferred to have the horizon clear below the octopuses. One radical suggestion: crop until only the line the sun, perhaps the horizon and a few octopuses remain. When I saw it I thought fill-in flash on the post (hopefully deflected to keep it soft). What would you make of this suggestion? I don't want the detail of the octopus, but feel I am missing something from the lamp. Being a fellow ex-pat com-pat, this picture says a few things to me :-) Joseph Tainter, Notre Dame From Upstream I like the light in the lower part of the building, but don´t like the way the towers are cut. I´d prefer either more or less. I always have this problem when I take buildings. Assuming you go for less, won't you lose the top of the round roof at the front? Would you go even lower? Dag Thrane, Stone Hey, that´s me, OK, revenge is yours :-) As I have no picture I perhaps shouldn't, but here goes: I would like perhaps something more at the bottom to frame the foot. That's what I hate most about my upright pictures. I am also pondering on the possible merits of a bit more DOF to expose the hand fully (is it motion that makes it blurred?). I get the morbid feeling here that perhaps the stone is *behind* the hand (and perhaps the child) and going towards it! Frank Theriault, The Demonstration Determined, but not too angry. OK PJ shot from a demostration. The white jacket against all the dark ones helps a lot to the composition. This looks to me more like a souvenir from the demonstration, rather than a picture of it. The impression I get about the demonstration was that it was rather sparse and too well behaved. It's a fine picture, with an I was there feeling. It's just the title I am wondering about (and thus the interpretation). Ann Sanfedele, Yellow chairs Yellow? Nice colours ;-) The fuzzy circle at the right bothers me, besides that I like these skinny chairs. Would you align the floor with the frame of the picture? Would a straight shot from the front be boring? The tulip was my favourite. Kostas (trying to learn-thanks for the commentary)
Re: PUG Comments
Well, they're really guidelines more than anything, but I don't mind writing something a little clearer for a webpage. I don't have one of my own, but if someone wants to host it, let me know. chris On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chris, Could you put your critique suggestions up on a web page? Maybe with John Francis' additions? I've printed them out. And I'll keep them, but who knows how long that will last? I mislay papers all the time. And knowing how I handle my email (no real handling), eventually the originals will be lost in my file cabinet (archived email). I gather you don't want to be official and sort an authority or critiquemaster (critimeister :-)) or anything, but I don't think throwing them on a web page would necessarily lay that mantle on you. Anyway, on a web page they could be available for reference for scattered people like myself and others who may come along later, like newbies. Just an idea. Take with salt. Marnie aka Doe
Re: Evaluating Photographs
I like to hear both pro and con of the pictures i send in.This helps me in deciding if i need to change a framing or lightinng for that particular style of subject matter,or keep things the way they are for the time being.I have pretty thick skin.although Shel came close to breaking it on ocassion.vbg I think the general comments stopped coming at the level they did after one submitter was ripped apart (by the above)and a pretty long flame came out of that IMSMC. Dave aol Me too! /aol Well said. chris On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's silly. There are no qualifications needed to comment on photographs. All you have to do is write down how you felt or experienced looking at it, and maybe why. This isn't judging a photo competition where you have to look for all sorts of arcane details. BR From: Kathleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] I love looking at all of the PUG monthly photos, but I do not feel qualified to comment on the photos insofar as offering praise, criticism, or suggestions for improvement.
Re: 300D first impressions
On 24/9/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: I'll be more interested in everybody's (and hopefully my) impressions after living with their new camera for 6 months. Nearly one year on here with a D60 and my God It's still working!!! Yup - right out of the box!!! I thought it would instantly stop at 6 months + one day, for it would be entirely obsolete. But no, I can - do - still shoot with it. Unbelievable. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Pentax RAW file format
On 24/9/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: Had a play with a *istD in a local camera store today. I'd have to say I was impressed. I took along my CF card to grab some shots, and took a few RAW files to have a peek at. For anyone who is interested in technical details, these are in fact TIFF files with a .PEF extension. Most TIFF loading someware won't directly work with them, as they are 12bit/channel, and have only a single channel. The Photometric identifier is also something I don't recognise, and isn't documented in the TIFF headers... no doubt some GRGB bayer photometric. Hopefully Pentax will make documentation of custom photometric IDs and tiff tags available. In any case, this makes the files trivial to parse and load for us third party types, well done again Pentax. My only complaint is that the 12 bit data is padded to 16 bit. This makes the raw file bigger than it needs to be; they are over 12MB, where they should only need to be 9MB or so. This reduces storage on CF, and slows write times, seemingly unnecesarily. If anyone at Pentax is listening, please could we have non-padded PEF files? It may also be of interest that the PEF file seems to be 3040x2024 resolution, with all pixels seemingly active. Various other RAW files I've used have the entire sensor area (which Pentax quote as 3110x2030), but have black (masked) areas present. I am not sure yet if the PEF contains the appropriate ICC profile to correctly convert the file. er but did it take a nice shot? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Complete Sept PUG Comments - loooooong
The real question for me on the balloon ride shot was to what degree to make the balloon a silhouette, and you and W. Robb have both commented on that aspect of the picture. Ideally, I wanted most of the balloon to be a silhouette but some of the faces to be visible by the light of flame. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Portrait Lens Question
All perspective is set by the camera to subject distance. Period. Irrespective of the image format. If perspective is the driving factor (natural noses, ears, etc. or a specific exaggeration), then the length of the lens is selected for framing - to get the most out of the small 35mm or digital sensor frame. Sometimes perfection in perspective isn't necessary, and the lens is selected to give or accommodate a convenient photographer to subject distance. It's still all about making the most out of the available film/sensor real estate. Regards, Bob... Do not suppose that abuses are eliminated by destroying the object which is abused. Men can go wrong with wine and women. Shall we then prohibit and abolish women? -Martin Luther From: Peter Loveday [EMAIL PROTECTED] I've not done much portrait work, and I have a question about portrait lenses. Is the 'desirable' focal length of ~85mm to get a slightly flattened perspective, in order to de-emphasise features on peoples faces etc? Or is it to allow a good photographer to subject distance? Or both? Just curious about the ideal portrait lens on a *istD. Obviously the FOV crop factor of 1.5 means that a 50mm lens has the same field of view as a 75mm lens, but, still being 50mm focal length has the same perspective on any camera. If the perspective was the main concern here, then still having an 85mm lens would be ideal, but then the FOV would be a lot tighter and might necessitate a lot larger distance to the subject.
RE: 300D first impressions
your self destruct mechanism is obviously as faulty as the AF then! ;-) -Original Message- From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 24 September 2003 15:35 To: pentax list Subject: Re: 300D first impressions On 24/9/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: I'll be more interested in everybody's (and hopefully my) impressions after living with their new camera for 6 months. Nearly one year on here with a D60 and my God It's still working!!! Yup - right out of the box!!! I thought it would instantly stop at 6 months + one day, for it would be entirely obsolete. But no, I can - do - still shoot with it. Unbelievable. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Sept PUG Comments
Glad you found review all right, when I saw Dag's I kicked myself. Why? Your suggestion was good. Now why I can give responses/critiques/whatever in one or two lines? LOL. Too wordy by half. :-) I had to, I was determined to comment them all, but some of the photos would have deserved more words. DagT (man of too few words ;-) When talking about kicking myself, I was just referring to the length of my comments. In a very concise way you zeroed in on picture highlights and weaknesses, while I fumbled around trying to verbalize my reactions. And I completely missed the zebra joke. Do'h! Oh, well, I suppose one can get better at critiquing, just as one can get better at photography. But somehow I think being an experienced and good photographer probably helps a tad. ;-) Marnie aka Doe Although it is easier to say that one likes something, than to say *why* one isn't wild about something.
Re: 300D first impressions
Nearly one year on here with a D60 and my God It's still working!!! Yup - right out of the box!!! I thought it would instantly stop at 6 months + one day, for it would be entirely obsolete. But no, I can - do - still shoot with it. Unbelievable. Cheers, Cotty Well, of course it isn't set to expire when the 300D comes out -- only when something priced higher when than the D60 comes out. Say in a month or two. Marnie aka Doe ;-)
P30 and AF201SA
Hi, Does anybody have the above combination? I just bought the AF201SA (thanks Eric) and I expected it to set the aperture and speed automatically in the P mode; I tried it in near-darkness and, while the flash worked, the mirror stayed open for a second, so... I don't have a manual for the P30 (the Pentax site only has a manual for the P30t), can anybody check for me please? The flash works fine on the MZ-50. TIA, Kostas
Re: Pentax RAW file format
er but did it take a nice shot? But of course - yet another wonderful photo of the inside of a camera store. It's amazing how many of those seem to accumulate over the years. :) Love, Light and Peace, - Peter Loveday Director of Development, eyeon Software
New to the list
Hi there, I'm new in the list. My name is André, I'm brazilian and I own a MZ-M (ZX-M) and a K1000 (that I use most of the time). Besides it's weight I worship that camera. I hope I can learn a lot here. P.S.: Sorry about my english, sometimes I think it sounds terrible. André
Discontinue of the FA* 2.8/80-200
Hallo on http://www.pentax.de/pentaxeurope/pentaxeurope_prod/pentaxeurope/v2/de/photo /pricelist.html is a new Pentax Preislist (starting from 15.9.2003) In the list is a footnote that the FA*2.8/80-200 will not be available for long anymore. This is the same with the FA 35-80, which has already a replacement with the FAJ 28-80. Will there be a replacement of the 2.8/80-200 ??? hopefully a FA* 4/70-200 which is not so heavy and cheeper. The MZ-3 is not in the list anymore. The list has also the S4, 555 and 33WR and the *istD The official price of the *istD is 1800 und mit FA18-35 2100 The 18-35 alone is 499 Euro, far to expensive. regards Rüdiger
Re: Top eBay photo searches OT
Interesting. I see that Sonly made it into the top brands. Must be an up-and-coming company... :) Aah yes, that would be the search under ' it sonly a Praktica but golly does it take nice pictures - the last time I used it Peter
Re: Sept PUG Comments
Quoth Marnie aka Doe Although it is easier to say that one likes something, than to say *why* one isn't wild about something. More socially correct, too :-) My photography professor had a firm rule for class critiques. You HAD to start with a positive comment. Having made the positive comment you could go on to say what you might want to change about the work. This rule was designed to keep things civil and it worked very well. I actually find it easier to put into words what bothers me about something than why I like it. I realize that doesn't exactly contradict what you said. I guess the hierarchy of difficulty to analyze my reaction in words would be, for me: Easiest: I like that. Next: I don't really like that. Next: I don't like that because the colours are muddy and it smells like burnt hair. Hardest: I like that because its texture reminds me of fluffy clouds on a lazy day and is therefore restful, and it has a slight trace of the scent of roses, which are my favourite flower. Hmm?
Re: Sept PUG Comments
På onsdag, 24. september 2003, kl. 17:29, [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Glad you found review all right, when I saw Dag's I kicked myself. Why? Your suggestion was good. Now why I can give responses/critiques/whatever in one or two lines? LOL. Too wordy by half. :-) I had to, I was determined to comment them all, but some of the photos would have deserved more words. DagT (man of too few words ;-) When talking about kicking myself, I was just referring to the length of my comments. In a very concise way you zeroed in on picture highlights and weaknesses, while I fumbled around trying to verbalize my reactions. OK, thanks, but keep up the good work :-) DagT
Only of interest to UK folks and sl OT again hookey stuff
Stolen Fuji Digital apparently all from local burglaries although the police report also notes that the majority of these things are not yet available in the UK.and stranger still all boxed in perfect condition. How odd. F401 # 2HL06032 # 23L04336 #23L04360 F402 #24L09689 #24L09684 F410s with UW housing x2 #32A60149 F601 # 2ML06153 F700 # 33A10396 S5000 # 33L06092/5/6/7 F700 # 33L03574/6/9 A203 # 24A00653/659
Re: Discontinue of the FA* 2.8/80-200
Rüdiger wrote: RN Will there be a replacement of the 2.8/80-200 ??? FAJ* 80-200/2.8 ? :oT Servus, Alin
Re: New to the list
Hi, and welcome to the list. Don't worry about your English. It sounds fine to me, and as long we can understand what you're saying it doesn't matter how you say it. The K1000 is a great simple camera, though I have to admit that I *like* its heaviness. Feels more sturdy to me. chris On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Andre Albano wrote: Hi there, I'm new in the list. My name is André, I'm brazilian and I own a MZ-M (ZX-M) and a K1000 (that I use most of the time). Besides it's weight I worship that camera. I hope I can learn a lot here. P.S.: Sorry about my english, sometimes I think it sounds terrible. André
Re: Sept PUG Comments
På onsdag, 24. september 2003, kl. 18:25, skrev [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Quoth Marnie aka Doe Although it is easier to say that one likes something, than to say *why* one isn't wild about something. More socially correct, too :-) My photography professor had a firm rule for class critiques. You HAD to start with a positive comment. Having made the positive comment you could go on to say what you might want to change about the work. This rule was designed to keep things civil and it worked very well. That´s a nice rule. I try to do something like that. I actually find it easier to put into words what bothers me about something than why I like it. I realize that doesn't exactly contradict what you said. I guess the hierarchy of difficulty to analyze my reaction in words would be, for me: Easiest: I like that. Next: I don't really like that. Next: I don't like that because the colours are muddy and it smells like burnt hair. Hardest: I like that because its texture reminds me of fluffy clouds on a lazy day and is therefore restful, and it has a slight trace of the scent of roses, which are my favourite flower. On the receiving side the hierarchy of comments is: worst: bad photo better. Nice photo even better: I like it because. best: I don´t like it, because ...simply because there is more to learn from the latter, it may point out something you have overlooked, and you get a chance to decide if you agree with the reasons or not. DagT
Re: Max. aperture labelling on FAJ lenses
Actually, f-stop varies with focal length at all aperture settings. So you only know the approximate f-stop at intermediate focal lengths. These lenses are pretty worthless with manual exposure, and manual, or on-the-strob-sensor flash. If you are using slide film. The varience is only 1 stop so negative film does pretty well regardless. Not having extensive experience with digital I am not sure how well it will work with them in manual mode. Once again you probably will not even notice it in automatic modes. Donald A. Morrison wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote: - Original Message - From: Donald A. Morrison Subject: Max. aperture labelling on FAJ lenses Hello all, I notice that the max. aperture label printed on the barrel of the FAJ lenses contains more numbers than is usual, eg. the aperture of the FAJ 18-35 is indicated as 1:4(22) - 5.6(32). Can anyone tell me what the significance is of the bracketed 22 and 32? Minimum aperture at 35mm. William Robb So the minimum aperture varies with focal length as well as the maximum aperture? Sounds nasty. Many thanks, DAM. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com
Re: Discontinue of the FA* 2.8/80-200
on 24.09.03 18:35, Alin Flaider at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FAJ* 80-200/2.8 ? :oT Or worse DA 80-200/2.8 - suitable only for APS DSLR... -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Discontinue of the FA* 2.8/80-200
This makes a 80-200mm IS (or whatever) more plausable? Wishful thinking, i know. /Paul From: Rüdiger Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Discontinue of the FA* 2.8/80-200 Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 18:22:19 +0200 Hallo on http://www.pentax.de/pentaxeurope/pentaxeurope_prod/pentaxeurope/v2/de/photo /pricelist.html is a new Pentax Preislist (starting from 15.9.2003) In the list is a footnote that the FA*2.8/80-200 will not be available for long anymore. This is the same with the FA 35-80, which has already a replacement with the FAJ 28-80. Will there be a replacement of the 2.8/80-200 ??? hopefully a FA* 4/70-200 which is not so heavy and cheeper. The MZ-3 is not in the list anymore. The list has also the S4, 555 and 33WR and the *istD The official price of the *istD is 1800 und mit FA18-35 2100 The 18-35 alone is 499 Euro, far to expensive. regards Rüdiger _ Add MSN 8 Internet Software to your existing Internet access and enjoy patented spam protection and more. Sign up now! http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/byoa
Re: P30 and AF201SA
In programmed AE mode the camera will be set to 1/100 and the aperture will also be set according to where you have the switch - Red, Green or Yellow . But this information applies to the AF200SA since the 201 was probably not yet on the market at the time the P30 manual was written. Don ___ Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery See New Pages The Cement Company from HELL! Updated: August 15, 2003 - Original Message - From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:00 PM Subject: P30 and AF201SA Hi, Does anybody have the above combination? I just bought the AF201SA (thanks Eric) and I expected it to set the aperture and speed automatically in the P mode; I tried it in near-darkness and, while the flash worked, the mirror stayed open for a second, so... I don't have a manual for the P30 (the Pentax site only has a manual for the P30t), can anybody check for me please? The flash works fine on the MZ-50. TIA, Kostas
Introducing the remarkable new Pentax *Ist D
Pentax.co.uk is back up. Pentax officially launched its highly anticipated *ist D digital SLR at Sandown races on the 29th August 2003. A number of the UK's leading photographic editors attended the launch and put the *ist D through its paces (although time was also taken by many to have a flutter or two on the series of Pentax sponsored races that took place on the day!). The *ist D was received warmly by all those attending, with many pointing to a number of key features that truly distinguishes it from its competitors. Housed in the world's smallest, lightest SLR body, the *ist D comes equipped with an array of advanced functions and use-friendly features. These include: a large CCD with an impressive 6.1 effective megapixels; a responsive SAFOX VIII autofocus system with 11-point AF sensor; a 16-segment multi-pattern metering system; a bright viewfinder with a newly developed compact glass pentaprism; and, significantly, compatibility with Pentax's existing 35mm-format interchangeable lenses and accessories. So why the hell can I only find a hands on in an obscure digital photography mag, but no mention anywhere of this day? Also press release on new DA lens SERIES!! PENTAX Corporation is proud to announce that it is currently in the final stage of development of the compact, high-performance smc PENTAX-DA series of interchangeable lenses, exclusively designed for use with PENTAX digital SLR cameras. sounds like quite a few new DA lenses... The image circle in the DA-series lenses is designed to perfectly match the size of the CCD (23.5mm x 15.7mm) incorporated in PENTAX's digital SLRs, optimizing the performance of these cameras. The new design also contributes to a drastic reduction in size, weight and production cost, compared to 35mm-format counterparts with similar specifications. So more than one DSLR using the small sensor is confirmed - sounds like they will all use this size for now... As the first model of the new DA series, PENTAX plans to market the smc PENTAX-DA Zoom 16mm~45mm F4 ED AL (tentative name, equivalent to 24.5mm~69mm in the 35mm format; marketing date to be announced), which features a three-times zoom ratio with focal lengths covering ultra-wide to moderate-telephoto ranges when mounted on the new PENTAX *ist D digital SLR camera. It also incorporates an Extra-low Dispersion (ED) glass lens element and two aspherical lens elements for true-to-life image reproduction and size reduction. Its simple, functional design, coupled with the elimination of an aperture ring, considerably improves the camera's operability. So the elimination of the aperture lens actually improves operation? Sounds like it would be hard to justify why more expensive glass doesn't take advantage of this 'improved operability', so higher end glass without the aperture ring in the future? Or is this just a marketing person talking through their rear end. I expect much more cursing and swearing at Pentax over the next 6-12 months!!
Re: Message from NY Institute of Photography
I wonder if Pentax is big enough to absorb the inevitable losses that a price war would necessitate? They need market share with the *ist D, and they need it now. I'd be worried. cheers, frank Yeah, but we're talking digicams here, not DSLRs, right? Although that probably affects the market for DSLRs. Interesting. Marnie aka Doe I welcome a price war.
Re: Sept PUG, comments
Thanks for your comments. I agree it would have been better if centered more. This flower was, however, four inches off the ground in the middle of a patch of prickly pear cactus. I did get some shots that were composed better, but did not as clearly portray the detail I was looking for, such as the grains of pollen. My main objective was to show how cool the Optio S is, as you put it, and that is why I picked this shot and submitted it without any fixing up in PhotoShop. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cactus Flower by Dan Matyola I'm also reeealll partial to flowers. Though I think I would've been tempted to centre this one. Handheld in macro mode? Aren't those Optios cool?!
Re: New to the list
Hi! Welcome. Your English is just fine, at least from my (Israeli born in Russia) point of view. You're bound to have much fun with these fellows. Boris On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 13:13:44 -0700 Andre Albano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi there, I'm new in the list. My name is André, I'm brazilian and I own a MZ-M (ZX-M) and a K1000 (that I use most of the time). Besides it's weight I worship that camera. I hope I can learn a lot here. P.S.: Sorry about my english, sometimes I think it sounds terrible. André
New York photo stuff
Hey, is anyone else going to Photo Plus Expo October 30-Nov. 1? http://www.photoplusexpo.com/ Free code, for the exhibitor's floor, good until October 3: EDK10A0 Also, the Ansel Adams exhibit at MOMA ends on November 3... Amita
Vs: sometimes it just weighs too much
Sigma - especially the 4-5.6/70-300 DL macro is quite good, the APO is only slightly better and more expensive. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Päivä: 24. syyskuuta 2003 5:15 Aihe: sometimes it just weighs too much i am considering the FA 80-320 lens as a lightweight alternative to carrying around my FA* 80-200 f2.8. how much will i be losing? i think that my FA 24-90 is about as low quality as i want to go. are there other auto focus 80-200 or somewhat longer lenses worth considering? Herb
Re: New York photo stuff
i plan to be there, but can only make Saturday. Herb - Original Message - From: Amita Guha [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 1:18 PM Subject: New York photo stuff Hey, is anyone else going to Photo Plus Expo October 30-Nov. 1? http://www.photoplusexpo.com/
Re: Discontinue of the FA* 2.8/80-200
On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 09:49, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: on 24.09.03 18:35, Alin Flaider at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FAJ* 80-200/2.8 ? :oT Or worse DA 80-200/2.8 - suitable only for APS DSLR... -- Best Regards Sylwek Or even Worse: FAJ* 80-200/2.8 IS DA To really spite those of us who like to use film. -Scott
RE: 300D first impressions
On 24/9/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: your self destruct mechanism is obviously as faulty as the AF then! ;-) Personally I have never had a problem with the AF - maybe I'm doing something wrong? AFAIK, the AF is working fine. I only us it shooting sporty things which is not often. I use manual focus for most everything. Landscapes - AF is of no consequence. Street - I pre-focus and shoot quickly. Portraits - manual on the eyes every time. I am just a manual focus kinda guy. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: New to the list
On 24/9/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: Hi there, I'm new in the list. My name is André, I'm brazilian and I own a MZ-M (ZX-M) and a K1000 (that I use most of the time). Besides it's weight I worship that camera. I hope I can learn a lot here. Hi André, Welcome to the list. P.S.: Sorry about my english, sometimes I think it sounds terrible. No worries, nobody here can hear you. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Help me record the shots
Kostas, I had a period of noting down technical details of every shot I took. I stopped doing that later, but it was (and in periods still is) a very useful exercise. A small notebook and a pencil is robust, convenient battery-independent, and does not erase it's memory even if it gets wet. :-) If your notebook is lot at hand when you shoot, how likely are you to keep a PDA or a dictaphone at ready? Take notes on whatever you find most convenient, there's no definite standard. To subsequently free yourself from the note-taking, look for patterns in the way you do different subjects. Judging from my own experience, I'd say that for similar subjects, you will find that you will tend to use the same settings most of the time. Once recognised, it becomes easy to remember. hth, Jostein - Pictures at: http://oksne.net - - Original Message - From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 1:51 PM Subject: Help me record the shots I was going through the PUG and remembered the question I have had for quite a while: is there a standard or easy way to record the details of the shots taken? I am trying with a bit of scrap-paper, but it just so happens that when I take the shot I don't have it with me, or there is no time to note it down for I will lose the next shot or sth. What do you people use? Thanks, Kostas
Re: Portrait Lens Question
DOF is dependent on the set aperture and focal length of the lens only. This is why a 50mm lens has the same DOF, for a given f-stop, on a film or partial frame DSLR. BR From: Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] FOV at the same magnification scale should be equal with 35mm and *istD when using the sme lens. *istD will have greater DOF than 35mm at equal distance to subject. But then you will see just a part of image seen on 35mm frame, thus you will have to make the distance between you and the subject greater to maintain equal magnification scale. Am I right?
Re: Help me record the shots
Take notes on whatever you find most convenient, there's no definite standard. To subsequently free yourself from the note-taking, look for patterns in the way you do different subjects. Judging from my own experience, I'd say that for similar subjects, you will find that you will tend to use the same settings most of the time. Once recognised, it becomes easy to remember. hth, Jostein I find this very good advice. I actually bought a tiny tape recorder, thinking to record aperture/shutter speed (especially for positive film) so I could learn from it (since I do those manually). Well, I've only used it about twice -- when first starting. (I'll have to have something else to do with the recorder.) Just carrying a camera and lenses was enough, having to carry a recorder also was too much. Also it was not helpful for spontaneous shots, and tedious when doing more planned shots. And often I was repeatedly using the same aperture and shutter speed in similar situations. So when I reviewed what I had recorded, I found it wasn't really telling me anything I wasn't noticing for myself. Though I wouldn't mind that aspect of a DSLR, having the info. for each pic recorded. I recently took some shots using an IS lens (Canon) at the beach shooting some at both 1/60 and 1/30 handheld. I wanted to see if I could shoot 1/30 handheld with an IS. A lot of the shots have come out blurry, being able to see which were 1/30 would be helpful -- i.e. as with digital recording. However, OTOH, I can pretty much guess which of the ones *are* the 1/30s -- the blurry ones. Marnie aka Doe :-)
Favorite light meter?
Now the the *istD is making its way through the sales process, those of us with K and M lenses are going to have to make a choice: use a light meter or modify the mount. Given that many of us, including myself, will probably opt for the former, what light meter would be nice to have in a kit and why? I've basically used my camera's spot meter to do anything involving metering, but this might be clumsy to do on the *istD with having to switch modes to use the K/M lenses. I.e., i've heard that it wont meter at all in manual mode when using non A lenses. Cheers rg
RE: Favorite light meter?
RE: Favorite light meter? First favorive : My brain. Second favorite : Gossen Multi-Pro digital Third favorite : Pentax Digital Spot Fourth favorite : SL clip-on analog Fifth favorite : Polaroids on my 4X5 LEAST FAVORITE : exposed and developed conventional film That about does it JCO J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -Original Message- From: Robert Gonzalez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 2:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Favorite light meter? Now the the *istD is making its way through the sales process, those of us with K and M lenses are going to have to make a choice: use a light meter or modify the mount. Given that many of us, including myself, will probably opt for the former, what light meter would be nice to have in a kit and why? I've basically used my camera's spot meter to do anything involving metering, but this might be clumsy to do on the *istD with having to switch modes to use the K/M lenses. I.e., i've heard that it wont meter at all in manual mode when using non A lenses. Cheers rg
Re: Discontinue of the FA* 2.8/80-200
I'd be willing to bet money that Pentax leaves off the aperture ring on the new f2.8 tele zoom. The AF cameras that people would use this lens on either have crippled mounts or can set the aperture via the body, so why encourage people to use old bodies when they could spend money upgrading to the latest and greatest? This explains why they didn't upgrade the sorely out-of-date 80-200/2.8 earlier. Now that the DSLR is out, they have a good excuse for leaving off the aperture ring. If they had to make something in the mount electronic, why couldn't it be the focusing? At least then they'd only be 5 years behind Canon's AF technology instead of 10. :) To give Pentax credit, they held off making fundamental changes to their bayonet mount when other companies like Canon and Minolta radically altered theirs with the introduction of AF cameras. And even now, while we can't stop FAJ lenses down manually, they at least can be mounted on crippled AF cameras and used wide open if you need to. And at least we can still mount all Pentax lenses on the new crippled cameras, even if we lose functionality with the M-series and earlier lenses. It's not much, but it's something. That being said, I find it inexplicably stupid for Pentax to remove the aperture ring at this point in time. They're turning their great AF lenses into crippled tools designed for people who can't be bothered to use an aperture ring. In doing so, they're alienating the people who use Pentax because of its body/lens compatibility, and who like using MF bodies or lenses with new equipment. The big problem is that Pentax is also alienating those people who like using good AF equipment, since they don't seem to be in any hurry to introduce USM/AF-S/HSM, or IS/VR, or useful things like lock-on focus tracking, etc. So if Pentax can't attract the technology lovers, and is alienating the people who like using older technology, who do they have left? Beginners looking for an easy-to-use SLR, I guess. While I'm whining about Pentax, I should also point out that they don't make an ultra-wide f2.8 zoom like Canon's 16-35/2.8 L USM or Nikon's AF-S 17-35/2.8 ED-IF. Should be fun trying to sell a DSLR priced the same as (or slighter higher than) a D100/10D with fewer good lenses available for it. Just so I don't come across as a total Pentax basher, I still think they make some of the best MF and MedF stuff out there, and I like their unique approach to AF cameras (Z-1p, MZ-5n/3, etc.). However, they do manage to piss me off a lot, so think of this like a photo critique... pointing out the bad as well as the good. chris On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, [iso-8859-1] Rüdiger Neumann wrote: Will there be a replacement of the 2.8/80-200 ??? hopefully a FA* 4/70-200 which is not so heavy and cheeper.
Re: Portrait Lens Question
How do you account for the fact that ps digital cameras can still blur the background for some portrait shots? With focal lengths around 7-12mm or so, pretty much everything should be in focus, shouldn't it? chris On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: DOF is dependent on the set aperture and focal length of the lens only. This is why a 50mm lens has the same DOF, for a given f-stop, on a film or partial frame DSLR. BR From: Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] FOV at the same magnification scale should be equal with 35mm and *istD when using the sme lens. *istD will have greater DOF than 35mm at equal distance to subject. But then you will see just a part of image seen on 35mm frame, thus you will have to make the distance between you and the subject greater to maintain equal magnification scale. Am I right?
Re: Favorite light meter?
Cosina/Voigtlander makes a tiny averaging meter that will fit in the accessory shoe of a camera. It's about an inch and a half square and an inch tall. I use one with my screwmount Leica, and it's quite good. Paul Robert Gonzalez wrote: Now the the *istD is making its way through the sales process, those of us with K and M lenses are going to have to make a choice: use a light meter or modify the mount. Given that many of us, including myself, will probably opt for the former, what light meter would be nice to have in a kit and why? I've basically used my camera's spot meter to do anything involving metering, but this might be clumsy to do on the *istD with having to switch modes to use the K/M lenses. I.e., i've heard that it wont meter at all in manual mode when using non A lenses. Cheers rg
Re: Portrait Lens Question
high depth of field is not infinite depth of field. no, it shouldn'd all be in focus. Herb - Original Message - From: Chris Brogden [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 4:10 PM Subject: Re: Portrait Lens Question How do you account for the fact that ps digital cameras can still blur the background for some portrait shots? With focal lengths around 7-12mm or so, pretty much everything should be in focus, shouldn't it?
Re: Complete Sept PUG Comments - loooooong
På onsdag, 24. september 2003, kl. 15:42, skrev Kostas Kavoussanakis: Can I hijack? I have taken about 5 pictures in my entire life but can I? Why not? On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Dag T wrote: Thomas Moraitis, Sunset with Drying octopusses Sunsets are popularIt is not a bad one, but in this case I miss something in the other end of the line. The composition is too heavily concentrated on the left. Also, I would have preferred to have the horizon clear below the octopuses. One radical suggestion: crop until only the line the sun, perhaps the horizon and a few octopuses remain. When I saw it I thought fill-in flash on the post (hopefully deflected to keep it soft). What would you make of this suggestion? I don't want the detail of the octopus, but feel I am missing something from the lamp. In my view, the picture is not well balanced, more details in the post will not help, on the contrary I think a fill in flash would draw more attention away from the octopuses. Being a fellow ex-pat com-pat, this picture says a few things to me :-) Joseph Tainter, Notre Dame From Upstream I like the light in the lower part of the building, but don´t like the way the towers are cut. I´d prefer either more or less. I always have this problem when I take buildings. Assuming you go for less, won't you lose the top of the round roof at the front? Would you go even lower? Dag Thrane, Stone Hey, that´s me, OK, revenge is yours :-) As I have no picture I perhaps shouldn't, but here goes: I would like perhaps something more at the bottom to frame the foot. That's what I hate most about my upright pictures. I am also pondering on the possible merits of a bit more DOF to expose the hand fully (is it motion that makes it blurred?). I get the morbid feeling here that perhaps the stone is *behind* the hand (and perhaps the child) and going towards it! I agree that it may be too tightly cropped at the bottom. Regarding the hand it is motion blurred, so more DOF would not help. I have seen the weird illusion that the stone might as well be behind him, actually it a kind of thing that I enjoy. It adds something, I think... Thanks for the comments! Ann Sanfedele, Yellow chairs Yellow? Nice colours ;-) The fuzzy circle at the right bothers me, besides that I like these skinny chairs. Would you align the floor with the frame of the picture? Would a straight shot from the front be boring? It didn´t bother me. In fact, I think I liked the slight disorder (as well as the colours ;-) The tulip was my favourite. Right now I agree, but there were several good pictures there, so I may change my mind tomorrow :-) Kostas (trying to learn-thanks for the commentary) DagT (trying to learn by commenting :-)
OT: Duplicate messages?
Anyone else getting duplicate messages, delayed messages -- i.e. repeated messages? Weird never had the list do this to me before. Marnie aka Doe
Re: Portrait Lens Question
- Original Message - From: Chris Brogden Subject: Re: Portrait Lens Question How do you account for the fact that ps digital cameras can still blur the background for some portrait shots? With focal lengths around 7-12mm or so, pretty much everything should be in focus, shouldn't it? Depth of field is not focal length dependent. William Robb
Re: Duplicate messages?
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 2:42 PM Subject: OT: Duplicate messages? Anyone else getting duplicate messages, delayed messages -- i.e. repeated messages? Weird never had the list do this to me before. Happens from time to time. Right now my PDML messages return to me immediately (I hit send/recieve, and what is in my outbox is in my PDML folder on the same cycle). William Robb
Re: Portrait Lens Question
How do you account for the fact that ps digital cameras can still blur the background for some portrait shots? With focal lengths around 7-12mm or so, pretty much everything should be in focus, shouldn't it? Depth of field is not focal length dependent. William Robb Isn't it a combination of focal length and aperture? Maybe a silly question, but that's my impression. Bill
Re: Discontinue of the FA* 2.8/80-200
I'm sure they are not selling that well at the price they are listed... (in Italy 2500 euro, something like $2800...) I too am hoping for a replacement, if they can make it lighter and less expensive, and, better for me, for a FA* 70-200/4. I saw that also the FA 85/2.8 Soft, the A 15/3.5 and the 28/3.5 Shift are listed with a limited availability... Well, what about a FA* 14/2.8 AL? Or a FA 13/3.2 AL Limited... :-) Gianfranco PS: I really cannot understand why there's a bodycap for the *Ist D listed on its own... is it any different from the usual K mount one?? - Original Message - From: Rüdiger Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 6:22 PM Subject: Discontinue of the FA* 2.8/80-200 Hallo on http://www.pentax.de/pentaxeurope/pentaxeurope_prod/pentaxeurope/v2/de/photo /pricelist.html is a new Pentax Preislist (starting from 15.9.2003) In the list is a footnote that the FA*2.8/80-200 will not be available for long anymore. This is the same with the FA 35-80, which has already a replacement with the FAJ 28-80. Will there be a replacement of the 2.8/80-200 ??? hopefully a FA* 4/70-200 which is not so heavy and cheeper. = __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
RE: Portrait Lens Question
From: Chris Brogden Subject: Re: Portrait Lens Question How do you account for the fact that ps digital cameras can still blur the background for some portrait shots? With focal lengths around 7-12mm or so, pretty much everything should be in focus, shouldn't it? Depth of field is not focal length dependent. William Robb No, but with the low reproduction ratio and small fstops most PS digitals have, there is going to be far more DOF than when using a typical 35mm film camera JCO
Re: Portrait Lens Question
My E-10 has a 9-36 zoom, which for this sensor acts like a (roughly) 38-150 zoom in 35 mm. So at 9, it has the same perspective as a 38 and so on, at least as far as I can tell.
Re: Favorite light meter?
Modern: Sekonic L308B-II Takes one common battery. Does flash as well. Everything but a spot. Can be had used for way $100. Classic: Brockway-labelled old Sekonic. Commonly $25. Really nice reflected/incident. -- -- Collin Brendemuehl KC8TKA Ron Santo deserves enshrinement in Cooperstown. -- Me --
Re: Portrait Lens Question
PS cameras and lenses can blur anything. How do you account for the fact that ps digital cameras can still blur the background for some portrait shots? With focal lengths around 7-12mm or so, pretty much everything should be in focus, shouldn't it? -- -- Collin Brendemuehl KC8TKA Ron Santo deserves enshrinement in Cooperstown. -- Me --
Photos w/ Mamiya/Sekor-SX 21mm F4 (M42) lens
There has been some interest in the 20/21mm SLR lenses here lately so I took posted a few shots using the MAMIYA/SEKOR-SX 21mm F4 (M42) lens on this page: http://www.jcoconnell.com/temp/ms21mm/ms21mm.htm Later, JCO J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com
Photography Exhibit
For anyone planning on being in the Detroit, Michigan (USA) area in the next few months, the Detroit Zoo is once again hosting a travelling exhibit of the BG Wildlife Photographer of the Year. This is the contest put on by BBC Wildlife Magazine, displayed at the London Museum of Natural History, and underwritten by the BG Group. http://flood.nhm.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wildwin/2002/ In the past, the 90 or so finalists were displayed at the Zoo as mounted prints, in sizes averaging about 16 x 20, with the winners being shown at 24 x 30 or thereabouts. This year, they are displaying the photos as they are seen at the host museum, as large transparencies mounted in light boxes. The two winning photos are displayed at around 3 ft x 5 ft. This is truly a stunning exhibit if you have any interest in Nature Photography, or just photography in general. It's well worth the admission price of US$9. It will be here until January 18, 2004.
Is it Art?
Following the previous thread on this subject, I put the question to my 17 month old son upon the completion of his latest masterpiece. Here's him pondering the question. http://wwwstaff.murdoch.edu.au/~sking/pages/art.htm Maybe it would be art if he was weeing in his nappy... Simon PS No comments on the photograph please, it's a family snapshot, not art. :-)
Re: Is it Art?
no, it's Bob. 8-) Herb - Original Message - From: Simon King [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 6:00 PM Subject: Is it Art? Following the previous thread on this subject, I put the question to my 17 month old son upon the completion of his latest masterpiece. Here's him pondering the question. http://wwwstaff.murdoch.edu.au/~sking/pages/art.htm Maybe it would be art if he was weeing in his nappy... Simon
Re: New to the list
Welcome aboard, Andre, Your English is way better than my Portuguese! (That's because I don't speak Portuguese at all) :-) Besides, some of the worst English written here is from our members in England. Try reading some of Cotty's posts some time... g You'll have fun, and learn a lot too. Nice to have you here. cheers, frank from Toronto, Canada Andre Albano wrote: Hi there, I'm new in the list. My name is André, I'm brazilian and I own a MZ-M (ZX-M) and a K1000 (that I use most of the time). Besides it's weight I worship that camera. I hope I can learn a lot here. P.S.: Sorry about my english, sometimes I think it sounds terrible. André -- Hell is others -Jean Paul Sartre
RE: New York photo stuff
I plan on going, Probably on Thursday with a photographer buddy. Will post when things are confirmed. Possibly a NYCPDML meeting? Lunch? Butch Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself. Hermann Hesse (Demian)
Re: Complete Sept PUG Comments - loooooong
Hi, Kostas, Thanks for taking the time to comment on my photograph. Yup, I was at the demo, as a participant. That was back in my days as a radical. Then I realized that there will be no revolution, and if there is one, it will inevitably fail. But here I am, going off on a tangent. As I said in another post, some months I just 'know what's going to work. No thought as to what I want to submit. Other months, I dither, I can't decide what I want to put in, and at the last minute I throw something in that usually just doesn't quite work. This was one of those months. At the time I submitted it, for some reason, I thought it was a winner. I was wrong. g That's why I like people doing critiques, though. I'm gradually learning that taking photographs is only a small part of this endeavor. Choosing what to show is just as important. thanks again, frank Kostas Kavoussanakis hijacked: Frank Theriault, The Demonstration Determined, but not too angry. OK PJ shot from a demostration. The white jacket against all the dark ones helps a lot to the composition. This looks to me more like a souvenir from the demonstration, rather than a picture of it. The impression I get about the demonstration was that it was rather sparse and too well behaved. It's a fine picture, with an I was there feeling. It's just the title I am wondering about (and thus the interpretation). -- What a senseless waste of human life -The Customer in Monty Python's Cheese Shop sketch
Re: Sept PUG Comments
A favorite pro Outdoor Photographer friend of mine takes photo critiquing very seriously and will almost always say something positive about an image no matter what. He then goes on and comments on the hows and whys of an aspect of the image that could improve the image. He never has said he dislikes an image, but he does let you know when he likes it. I personally enjoy hearing others comment on my images (pro con) and have actively solicited it in the PUG and elsewhere. A simply I like it because... or I don't like it because ... is appreciated. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 12:25 PM Subject: Re: Sept PUG Comments Quoth Marnie aka Doe snip My photography professor had a firm rule for class critiques. You HAD to start with a positive comment. Having made the positive comment you could go on to say what you might want to change about the work. This rule was designed to keep things civil and it worked very well. I actually find it easier to put into words what bothers me about something than why I like it. I realize that doesn't exactly contradict what you said. I guess the hierarchy of difficulty to analyze my reaction in words would be, for me: Easiest: I like that. Next: I don't really like that. Next: I don't like that because the colours are muddy and it smells like burnt hair. Hardest: I like that because its texture reminds me of fluffy clouds on a lazy day and is therefore restful, and it has a slight trace of the scent of roses, which are my favourite flower.
On Topic:Finally got one
http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=2952229482category=30075rd=1 After months of sniped frustration,i got something i wanted.Now i can get a bit closer to the fall colours when i head up north for our ThanksGiving weekend. They were going for $499 Can and up locally,so i think i got a half decent deal,and its a real brick and mortar store too. Whoo Hoo Brother Dave
Re: Is it Art?
As I understand it, Simon, There's nothing to ponder. As the creator of the piece, your son need only pronounce it to be art for it to be so. As a consequence of that pronouncement, he will become an artist. It's that simple! As far as the weeing in his nappy part, well, that won't affect the status of the work that has been displayed. The soaked nappy, OTOH, will be art, if he considers it so. That's a quick distillation of what I've learned over the last couple of days (just teasing, Marnie et al) vbg BTW, wonderful shot, Simon. Now ~that's~ art!! g cheers, frank Simon King wrote: Following the previous thread on this subject, I put the question to my 17 month old son upon the completion of his latest masterpiece. Here's him pondering the question. http://wwwstaff.murdoch.edu.au/~sking/pages/art.htm Maybe it would be art if he was weeing in his nappy... Simon PS No comments on the photograph please, it's a family snapshot, not art. :-) -- What a senseless waste of human life -The Customer in Monty Python's Cheese Shop sketch
Re: Photography Exhibit
Thanks Bill. Also for anyone in the area, a local art center (Meadowbrook Art Center, Novi, Michigan) has a small exhibition of Monte Nagler's work. Monte is one of the better B+W photographer in the area if not the country. I believe it runs through October 11th. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Bill Sawyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Mark Cassino [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Kenneth R. Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 5:45 PM Subject: Photography Exhibit For anyone planning on being in the Detroit, Michigan (USA) area in the next few months, the Detroit Zoo is once again hosting a travelling exhibit of the BG Wildlife Photographer of the Year. This is the contest put on by BBC Wildlife Magazine, displayed at the London Museum of Natural History, and underwritten by the BG Group. http://flood.nhm.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wildwin/2002/ In the past, the 90 or so finalists were displayed at the Zoo as mounted prints, in sizes averaging about 16 x 20, with the winners being shown at 24 x 30 or thereabouts. This year, they are displaying the photos as they are seen at the host museum, as large transparencies mounted in light boxes. The two winning photos are displayed at around 3 ft x 5 ft. This is truly a stunning exhibit if you have any interest in Nature Photography, or just photography in general. It's well worth the admission price of US$9. It will be here until January 18, 2004.
Re: Is it Art?
LOL. Great shot. Looks exactly like one of those artistes standing next to their work at a show. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/24/03 06:00PM Following the previous thread on this subject, I put the question to my 17 month old son upon the completion of his latest masterpiece. Here's him pondering the question. http://wwwstaff.murdoch.edu.au/~sking/pages/art.htm Maybe it would be art if he was weeing in his nappy... Simon PS No comments on the photograph please, it's a family snapshot, not art. :-)
M 1.4 50mm question
Hi, Saw one of these for sale at a reduced price at a local camera shop. They were selling it for about $127 Cdn, which the Bank of Canada Quick Currency Convertor tells me is $93.78 US. Is that anywhere near a decent price (considering this is a reputable shop, so I'll get a warranty and all)? What about if I go offer them like $100Cdn (that would be about $74US? Anyone have any comments and/or thoughts on this lens? It seems fairly well built and smooth to use. thanks, frank -- What a senseless waste of human life -The Customer in Monty Python's Cheese Shop sketch
Re: Introducing the remarkable new Pentax *Ist D
On 24/9/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: So why the hell can I only find a hands on in an obscure digital photography mag, but no mention anywhere of this day? AP are reviewing this week and will publish this coming Saturday. I'll precis when it arrives. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Favorite light meter?
On 24/9/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: Now the the *istD is making its way through the sales process, those of us with K and M lenses are going to have to make a choice: use a light meter or modify the mount. Surely an option exists to modify the camera? Seriously! Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Discontinue of the FA* 2.8/80-200
On 24/9/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: That being said, I find it inexplicably stupid for Pentax to remove the aperture ring at this point in time. They're turning their great AF lenses into crippled tools designed for people who can't be bothered to use an aperture ring. Out of context by itself [the above], so apologies for that Chris. However, if I may put a pair of pennies into the pot here - I have now been using lenses with no aperture ring for nearly one year. I knew after about one month that it was the right thing, for me. I find it much quicker and easier to use a lens without an aperture ring - and yet I have only been using lenses *with* aperture rings since 1978 or so. One month - that's all it took. Personally I prefer no aperture ring on the lens because I don't have to move my hand from focus ring to aperture ring and back (constantly - depending on subject / lighting), and even if using AF (which I don't very often), balancing a camera / lens combo on my left hand by having to grasp the aperture ring is both awkward and slow. Yet on my MX, I wouldn't have it any other way. The aperture ring is dead. Long live the aperture ring! Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: M 1.4 50mm question
- Original Message - From: frank theriault Subject: M 1.4 50mm question Hi, Saw one of these for sale at a reduced price at a local camera shop. They were selling it for about $127 Cdn, which the Bank of Canada Quick Currency Convertor tells me is $93.78 US. Is that anywhere near a decent price (considering this is a reputable shop, so I'll get a warranty and all)? What about if I go offer them like $100Cdn (that would be about $74US? Anyone have any comments and/or thoughts on this lens? It seems fairly well built and smooth to use. I think thats a bit high, especially since Pentax is no longer supporting the mount (you can use this as a bargaining tool, perhaps. Of all the 50mm lenses I have, I like the M f/1.4 just about the best. I do like the K better overall, but the M is a really nice little optic. William Robb
Re: M 1.4 50mm question
Thanks Bill, and everyone else who answered/commented on my post. The concensus seems that it's a nice lens, but the price is a bit steepish. I'll see if I can get them down a bit. If they won't, I know they're not a rare lens, so I can wait. thanks again, frank William Robb wrote: I think thats a bit high, especially since Pentax is no longer supporting the mount (you can use this as a bargaining tool, perhaps. Of all the 50mm lenses I have, I like the M f/1.4 just about the best. I do like the K better overall, but the M is a really nice little optic. William Robb -- What a senseless waste of human life -The Customer in Monty Python's Cheese Shop sketch
Re: M 1.4 50mm question
Hi Frank, I think it's a very good lens. I have two of them and as far as I can tell, they perform identical to each other. Both a bit worse wide open than either the K50/1.4 or FA50/1.4 that I also own, but I prefer the bokeh of the M50/1.4 and I think that it is quite sharp for impromptu portraits from about f/2 and below. I rarely use a 50mm lens stopped down past about f/5.6 but when I have it seems to perform well at those apertures also. I actually prefer the M50/1.4 to the K or FA. Here is an example of a PUG submission with the M50/1.4 stopped down to either f/2 or f/2.5 http://pug.komkon.org/02sep/sbanana.html The price is maybe kind of high, but probably only compared to buying online with the associated risks. You only live once, if you want it, buy it! William in Utah. PS. How's that for enablement? ;-) - Original Message - From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 4:29 PM Subject: M 1.4 50mm question Hi, Saw one of these for sale at a reduced price at a local camera shop. They were selling it for about $127 Cdn, which the Bank of Canada Quick Currency Convertor tells me is $93.78 US. Is that anywhere near a decent price (considering this is a reputable shop, so I'll get a warranty and all)? What about if I go offer them like $100Cdn (that would be about $74US? Anyone have any comments and/or thoughts on this lens? It seems fairly well built and smooth to use. thanks, frank -- What a senseless waste of human life -The Customer in Monty Python's Cheese Shop sketch
RE: Favorite light meter?
why not put it in manual and set shutter speed approx what you think you will need. Then fire test shots adjusting fstop until image looks right on LCD? JCO J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -Original Message- From: Andre Langevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Favorite light meter? How about if you meter wide open in aperture priority and then adjust the settings in manual? If you know one correct aperture/shutter-speed/iso combination, you know them all and can adjust for over/under exposure as needed for a particular subject/lighting situation. It's probably faster than a light meter and you don't have to take your eye away from the viewfinder. Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] Right! The most practical meter is in the camera... But will there be a lot of fiddling to go from this meter reading to the picture taking, like changing mode etc.? I'm not familiar with the D as I have not followed much of the discussions about its virtues and flaws. Andre --
Re: OT - My Big Move
Indeed. We in Toronto know what the West thinks of us, and we really don't care. In fact, we don't really care what the West thinks about anything. But you guys already know that, don't you? vbg Soon I'll be in Nova Scotia, and I'll get to go back to hating Toronto, just like I did when I lived in Montreal. cheers, frank William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: frank theriault Subject: OT - My Big Move Hogtown (as Toronto is sometimes derisively referred to) We have a few more derisive names out here, let me tell you. William Robb -- What a senseless waste of human life -The Customer in Monty Python's Cheese Shop sketch
Re: M 1.4 50mm question
Hey, I remember that shot, W in U! She's a real cutie, and that's one terrific photo of her. Funny (and I don't mean this as a criticism of your post), but I'm always amused when I hear, I rarely use the lens wider than [insert an aperture here]. Why buy a fast lens if you aren't going to use it wide open a lot? I have an M 2.0 50mm. If I was happy shooting at 5.6, I'd stick with that lens. That being said, I guess I know what you mean. You rarely use your M 1.4 wider than 5.6, but you have the option to do so, if need be. Still, it always strikes me as odd... Having gotten that off my chest, I do appreciate your comments, really vbg cheers, frank William Johnson wrote: Hi Frank, I think it's a very good lens. I have two of them and as far as I can tell, they perform identical to each other. Both a bit worse wide open than either the K50/1.4 or FA50/1.4 that I also own, but I prefer the bokeh of the M50/1.4 and I think that it is quite sharp for impromptu portraits from about f/2 and below. I rarely use a 50mm lens stopped down past about f/5.6 but when I have it seems to perform well at those apertures also. I actually prefer the M50/1.4 to the K or FA. Here is an example of a PUG submission with the M50/1.4 stopped down to either f/2 or f/2.5 http://pug.komkon.org/02sep/sbanana.html The price is maybe kind of high, but probably only compared to buying online with the associated risks. You only live once, if you want it, buy it! William in Utah. PS. How's that for enablement? ;-) -- What a senseless waste of human life -The Customer in Monty Python's Cheese Shop sketch
Re: Complete Sept PUG Comments - loooooong
hi. thanks for commenting on my sept pug photograph. (thanks for another thing - I had to check up on the word 'triptych') :-) Sridhar G. Sridar, Terrace Great idea, I like the lines and the repetitions in the windows, as well as the picture in the middle. This is a natural triptych.
Re: Portrait Lens Question
The big problem is finding a reputable site to look this up. Internet searches bring up so many conflicting answers, even from the so-called authoritative sites, that optical physics seems based more on opinion and limited experience than optical laws. So I wasn't questioning the validity of your answer; I was trying to see how my observations could be accounted for by the answer. This topic has come up on PDML several times before, and there are always at least two people, with two conflicting answers, who both insist that they are right. I'll hit the books sometime later and see what actual published works have to say about it, as I suspected edited materials will tend to be more accurate than most websites. So, just to clarify, if I take two photos--one with a 28mm lens and one with a 100mm lens--while standing in the same spot and shooting at the same aperture, and then enlarge a segment of the 28mm photo until it has the same coverage as the 100mm shot, the perspective will remain the same, but the DOF will be different? That's what I'm trying to understand... I thought that the DOF would be the same as well. Thanks, chris On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Bruce Rubenstein wrote: You make it sound like some sort of optical physics that I made up and have to defend. I just try to keep track of what does what. Beyond that I would suggest some independent research on the topic. Not to be snide, but I see endless discussions and arguments over things here that can be looked up. BR From: Chris Brogden [EMAIL PROTECTED] How do you account for the fact that ps digital cameras can still blur the background for some portrait shots? With focal lengths around 7-12mm or so, pretty much everything should be in focus, shouldn't it?
Re: On Topic:Finally got one
Woo hoo indeed. Nice lens for a good price. Now all you need is a 45mm and you're set to go. :) chris On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=2952229482category=30075rd=1 After months of sniped frustration,i got something i wanted.Now i can get a bit closer to the fall colours when i head up north for our ThanksGiving weekend. They were going for $499 Can and up locally,so i think i got a half decent deal,and its a real brick and mortar store too. Whoo Hoo Brother Dave
Re: M 1.4 50mm question
Ease of focusing for one. Fast lens = brighter viewfinder. Not to mention the coolness factor. I probably won't shoot my K50/1.2 at 1.2 *that* often, but focusing is super easy and I get to carry around a big honkin' piece of glass. Please, no jokes about compensating... :) chris (P.S. Ok, I lied. I actually shoot at 1.2 pretty often. DOF is small... so small.) On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, frank theriault wrote: Funny (and I don't mean this as a criticism of your post), but I'm always amused when I hear, I rarely use the lens wider than [insert an aperture here]. Why buy a fast lens if you aren't going to use it wide open a lot? I have an M 2.0 50mm. If I was happy shooting at 5.6, I'd stick with that lens.
