Re: OT: Another cycling injury :(
On Oct 14, 2007, at 9:53 PM, Peter McIntosh wrote: Ouch! Having dislocated a shoulder, I'd rather break a collarbone... They checked me for a dislocated shoulder and from what I've heard I am quite glad I didn't do that. Beware nurofen (or ibruprofen in general) - it's been shown to slow bone healing. I've got statistics somewhere, but can't find them off- hand... The surgeon who screwed my elbow back together (plate and 9 screws after smashing it into 5 pieces during a BMX race) also advised against its use if I could tolerate the pain. I've been prescribed both paracetamol and codeine. I'm not using them as much as I'm allowed to. The bone isn't bothering me unless I bump it but my muscles are really aching, which I think is largely due to being partially immobile. The closest I've come to that previously was sleeping with three cats in the bed. I notice nobody has asked the obvious question, though: how's the bike? ;-) I still haven't looked at it. I know the front wheel has a small kink which should be repairable. I know the brakes still function, and there's not really a lot else to go wrong :) I'll have it looked over very thoroughly in the next week or two. FWIW I had my broken helmet replaced today. The manufacturer only has a crash-replacement discount in the USA but the shop had them on special with a really good discount. I had to choose a different colour though as they only had two left in my size. - Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Pentax SMC-DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 ED [IF] SDM Review
Klaus has reviewed the Pentax SMC-DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 ED [IF] SDM over on Photozone: http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/pentax_50135_28/index.htm John The information transmitted is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you have received an email in error please notify Carmel College on [EMAIL PROTECTED] then delete all copies of it from your systems. Although Carmel College scans incoming and outgoing emails and email attachments for viruses we cannot guarantee a communication to be free of all viruses nor accept any responsibility for viruses. Although Carmel College monitors incoming and outgoing emails for inappropriate content, the college cannot be held responsible for the views or expressions of the author. The views expressed may not necessarily be those of Carmel College and Carmel College cannot be held responsible for any loss or injury resulting from the contents of a message. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: GESO: SF Fleet Week Air Show (Blue Angels More)
From: John Celio [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2007/10/15 Mon AM 05:51:35 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: GESO: SF Fleet Week Air Show (Blue Angels More) Did my post not make it to the general list? I've never seen something get no responses. Perhaps there were too many pics in the gallery? I kinda thought they were good... John -- http://www.neovenator.com http://www.cafepress.com/neovenatorphoto Didn't have time to look (or do much else) over the weekend. Good composition and presentation. if you are photographing prop driven planes and helis, you need to use a slower shutter speed to stop them looking like scale models held in the air by an invisible string. About 1/125th for props, maybe slower for helis. - Original Message - From: John Celio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PDML@pdml.net Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2007 4:42 PM Subject: GESO: SF Fleet Week Air Show (Blue Angels More) http://picasaweb.google.com/neopifex/AirShow2007?authkey=9Paapknvlfo There are 59 (!) photos in the gallery (I really need an editor...), so if you want to try a small handful first, try this link: http://www.neovenator.com/2007/10/big-gallery-of-air-show-photos-blue.html Those are a few of my favorites, though I had a hard time picking them out. The one I posted last week is part of the main gallery, though I haven't had time to try that de-blurring software on it yet. It took me long enough to get through all 321 (!) shots I took at the show! All photos were taken with the K500mm f4.5 at approx 1/2000, f8, ISO 400. John Celio -- http://www.neovenator.com http://www.cafepress.com/neovenatorphoto -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. - Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Lens Neglect
Thanks Godders. On Oct 14, 2007, at 8:42 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Good shot. Godfrey Paul Stenquist wrote: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6528958 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Lens Neglect
Thanks Jack. I hadn't shot wide open with this lens in a long time. I wanted to see if it was as good as I remember. Have to use it more often. Paul On Oct 14, 2007, at 10:49 PM, Jack Davis wrote: Superb lens performance! Jack --- Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a superb lens that I don't use often enough: the K 135/2.5. Here's a K10D shot at f2.5/1.500th ISO 100. http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6528958 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. __ __ Check out the hottest 2008 models today at Yahoo! Autos. http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Glorious Gourd
Well, I'm pleased that it brought a smile. Paul On Oct 14, 2007, at 9:01 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/14/2007 5:12:46 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Another shot with the K 135/2.5 at the farmer's market this afternoon. http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6529425size=lg == That's sort of amusing. Heh. Marnie aka Doe :-) - Warning: I am now filtering my email, so you may be censored. ** See what's new at http:// www.aol.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Lens Neglect
Lovely shot Paul. For some reason, when i photograph red flowers, all i get is glob of red and no detail. You have a lot on this one. Dave On 10/14/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a superb lens that I don't use often enough: the K 135/2.5. Here's a K10D shot at f2.5/1.500th ISO 100. http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6528958 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Geso Photos from the Thanksgiving weekend
:-) Some of those water shots were meant to be panos, one of which i have done. Thanks for the comments though, much appreciuated Dave On 10/14/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/14/2007 5:36:34 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ahhh. Sorry Marnie, i thought you were talking about the water/scene shots. My Bad.:-) Good point though Dave = I think it applies to some of the water scenes shots too. Like the red tree could have been much more effective silhouetted as much as possible against the water with the tree closer. Other of the water shots were more wide landscapes, a different type of shot. But I did really notice it the most in the people shots. Just a suggestion to try closer. Isolate and identify the elements you like about a scene or a people shot and zoom in on it more (not necessarily literally zoom) to make it stand out so others can see what captured your interest. Anyway, that's my suggestion, and like all advice it's free, ergo, worth what you paid for it. :-) It's also MY reaction, so take with a big grain of salt. HTH, Marnie - Warning: I am now filtering my email, so you may be censored. ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer Being Sued
I also don't believe that you should be required to pay for copies. Well that's not true, if the fees were actually paying what the copies were worth, that would be fine. Especially since actual costs of running the office are already paid for by tax dollars. You can make all the hand copies you want. However just try to make a copy with an electronic device. If you brought your own hand scanner you will either a.) not be allowed to use it or b.) be charged a fee for copying a public record. Sometimes exactly the same fee as if you were using the copy machine. This is unconscionable. The fees are not revenue neutral. If they were I wouldn't object. John Sessoms wrote: From: P. J. Alling I don't belong to any service, when I click on the link below it takes me to a page with the Docket for the case. You only have to log in to read the details. This I believe should be open to everyone. It's a public proceeding, but apparently the public isn't trusted with public knowledge. It *IS* open to the public. Anyone can subscribe. This is a revenue neutral access site, i.e. they cover the costs of providing records online with subcription fees rather than taxes. The search to find if the record exists is free. You could go down to the courthouse and read the documents for free. If you want copies of the documents to take with you, you have to put money in the copy machine. Same difference. -- Remember, it’s pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Happy B'Day K-mount Page
I used Boz's site many times in researching my early 2000 purchases, when i decided in really wanted to get back into photography. Thanks for all thew work Dave On 10/13/07, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I notice that he mentions that On October 12, 1997 I posted a message on some Internet forum titled Here is a list of all Pentax-made K-Mount lenses and sent a link to an HTML page with a single table containing some 40 lenses. I think that mailing list was this one. How soon they forget... David Savage wrote: For those of you who don't frequent DPReview, Bojidar has reminded us that his K-mount page is now 10 years old: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036message=25185517 And he's updated it's look too http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/ Cheers, Dave -- Remember, it's pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Glorious Gourd
Hope you got the gourds permission.;-) Great detail on the middle woman. Dave On 10/14/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Another shot with the K 135/2.5 at the farmer's market this afternoon. http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6529425size=lg -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: GESO: SF Fleet Week Air Show (Blue Angels More)
John, there's lots of my posts that get no responses. Your gallery was very nice. I didn't comment since I didn't see anything that I could offer a constructive criticism about, exposure seemed to be good, most were sharp and good looking, and considering the limitations of your equipment you were very skillful, and I enjoyed looking at them. (Are you happy now?) John Celio wrote: Did my post not make it to the general list? I've never seen something get no responses. Perhaps there were too many pics in the gallery? I kinda thought they were good... John -- http://www.neovenator.com http://www.cafepress.com/neovenatorphoto - Original Message - From: John Celio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PDML@pdml.net Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2007 4:42 PM Subject: GESO: SF Fleet Week Air Show (Blue Angels More) http://picasaweb.google.com/neopifex/AirShow2007?authkey=9Paapknvlfo There are 59 (!) photos in the gallery (I really need an editor...), so if you want to try a small handful first, try this link: http://www.neovenator.com/2007/10/big-gallery-of-air-show-photos-blue.html Those are a few of my favorites, though I had a hard time picking them out. The one I posted last week is part of the main gallery, though I haven't had time to try that de-blurring software on it yet. It took me long enough to get through all 321 (!) shots I took at the show! All photos were taken with the K500mm f4.5 at approx 1/2000, f8, ISO 400. John Celio -- http://www.neovenator.com http://www.cafepress.com/neovenatorphoto -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Remember, it’s pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The more things change...
On 10/14/07, Norm Baugher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Score... Norm, don't make me come down there:-) Good point George. Dave George Sinos wrote: To bring this around to Pentax... I'd estimate the ages of the women were from late twenties to early thirties. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Tele's
The last two times i have gone to use my Sigma 300 F 4 with its Sigma 1.4 tele, i can't help but notice it does not seem to focus properly.I can tell in the finder and on screen as well. I know the 300 focuses properly on its own, as i have the printed results to show its still quite sharp. There does seem to be a very minor bit off play with the tele at the lens mount and lens mount.Not much a mm or so. Could that be enough to make a wonky connection. I have not cleaned any connections, but they look OK.Both K10D and PZ-1 showed these signs. Any thoughts. Dave -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Q re DA 16-45/4 on Film
Boris I can see what you're trying to do, and I think you've hit on the truth here. What you need is a second lens dedicated to APS-C. I'd get the 20-35mm if I could afford it. The 18-35mm is fine on the MZ-6 but if you decide to get a more capable or robust, film body from Pentax you're going to find the 18-35 without an aperture ring limiting. While the 16-45 is has a great reputation, it duplicates a large portion of the range of the other previously mentioned lenses. (It's also big, especially when you compare it to the FA). Since you're going to have an APS dedicated lens why not go really wide? The DA 12-24 will give you a the same AOV on a digital body as the FA 20-35 gives you on film, on the other hand it too is not a diminutive lens. I've been leaning lately towards he 10-17mm fisheye. It's relatively small, (not a lot bigger than the FA 20-35, certainly more compact than the other two DA lenses mentioned, and it's a real fisheye, ( with little or no fisheye effect in the 16-17mm range, giving you wide end of the 16-45. I got to handle one on a K10D lately, (we have a local shop, well within a reasonable drive distance anyway, that actually carries more than the basics in Pentax), and it's very nice. Boris Liberman wrote: Which basically means that for the really wide angle I cannot get away with just one lens (16-45/4). I may have to have both this one and some other lens, such as 20-35/4 or my FAJ 18-35... Thanks. Boris William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Boris Liberman Subject: Q re DA 16-45/4 on Film Hi! Ladies and Gentlemen, has any of you actually tried the DA 16-45/4 on film? I'd like to know what is the shortest focal length that can be used on film (full frame) wide open with corners of the frame that are printably sharp. It covers the full fram at about 20mm, but I expect the corners wont get sharp (if at all) until closer to 24mm. William Robb -- Remember, it’s pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The more things change...
On 10/14/07, George Sinos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is the group of people that a camera maker needs as buyers today. I'm glad Pentax is providing old guys like me with great stuff. But we won't be around to use legacy glass forever. See you later, gs http://georgesphotos.net About 4-5 times a year, on the equine BB i help moderate, the question of what camera to buy for the novice comes up. Most reply the obvious Nikon and Canon models. I always reply with a check out the K100 or K10d from Pentax, and list its features. Every time, they come back a few days/weeks later and have bought the newest Canon or Nikon. Sometime they mention that the salemen suggested not to go Pentax. I quess the Nikon/Canon kick back is better. But, i still try.:-) Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Signing Photo's
For those that do sign their work, what pen(s) do you use. I notice a lot of my fellow equine photographers sign the sale print, some were that can be seen, but not to distractiong for the photo. To show Copyright notices as explained to me., Dave -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Tele's
It's a sigma with a sigma TC, (I know not helpful but you didn't ask for helpful only thoughts). David J Brooks wrote: The last two times i have gone to use my Sigma 300 F 4 with its Sigma 1.4 tele, i can't help but notice it does not seem to focus properly.I can tell in the finder and on screen as well. I know the 300 focuses properly on its own, as i have the printed results to show its still quite sharp. There does seem to be a very minor bit off play with the tele at the lens mount and lens mount.Not much a mm or so. Could that be enough to make a wonky connection. I have not cleaned any connections, but they look OK.Both K10D and PZ-1 showed these signs. Any thoughts. Dave -- Remember, it’s pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Signing Photo's
Dave, you're using digital, why not just include the signature as part of the printed image. Then you don't have to worry about the effect the ink may have on the longevity of the image. David J Brooks wrote: For those that do sign their work, what pen(s) do you use. I notice a lot of my fellow equine photographers sign the sale print, some were that can be seen, but not to distractiong for the photo. To show Copyright notices as explained to me., Dave -- Remember, it’s pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Signing Photo's
My edition prints have title, caption and signature outside the image area at the bottom, written by hand with pencil. If I use an ink pen, I use a pen with acid free archival ink available from art supply stores. Godfrey On Oct 15, 2007, at 5:21 AM, David J Brooks wrote: For those that do sign their work, what pen(s) do you use. I notice a lot of my fellow equine photographers sign the sale print, some were that can be seen, but not to distractiong for the photo. To show Copyright notices as explained to me., -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Signing Photo's
For matte prints an ordinary pencil is fine, for everything else I've read good things about Pigma Micron pens. Cheers, Dave On 10/15/07, David J Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For those that do sign their work, what pen(s) do you use. I notice a lot of my fellow equine photographers sign the sale print, some were that can be seen, but not to distractiong for the photo. To show Copyright notices as explained to me., Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Signing Photo's
#3 pencil om the matte. If not matted, fine tip Sharpie. Jack --- David J Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For those that do sign their work, what pen(s) do you use. I notice a lot of my fellow equine photographers sign the sale print, some were that can be seen, but not to distractiong for the photo. To show Copyright notices as explained to me., Dave -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos. http://autos.yahoo.com/index.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Tele's
On 10/15/07, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's a sigma with a sigma TC, (I know not helpful but you didn't ask for helpful only thoughts). True. I really need to think more.LOL Well it didi work well for about 2 years, now all of a sudden its acting up. It must be the tele as the lens works fine. Any ~helpfull~ comments as to what to check etc. Dave David J Brooks wrote: The last two times i have gone to use my Sigma 300 F 4 with its Sigma 1.4 tele, i can't help but notice it does not seem to focus properly.I can tell in the finder and on screen as well. I know the 300 focuses properly on its own, as i have the printed results to show its still quite sharp. There does seem to be a very minor bit off play with the tele at the lens mount and lens mount.Not much a mm or so. Could that be enough to make a wonky connection. I have not cleaned any connections, but they look OK.Both K10D and PZ-1 showed these signs. Any thoughts. Dave -- Remember, it's pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Lens Neglect
Thanks Dave. -- Original message -- From: David J Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lovely shot Paul. For some reason, when i photograph red flowers, all i get is glob of red and no detail. You have a lot on this one. Dave On 10/14/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a superb lens that I don't use often enough: the K 135/2.5. Here's a K10D shot at f2.5/1.500th ISO 100. http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6528958 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Photographer Being Sued
On 10/15/07, John Sessoms [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Bob Blakely I assume you believe you have rights. Are they valuable to you? If someone deprives you of a right, don't you feel harmed in some way even if what you lost (control over actions on your property) did not cause any monetary loss? Such a thing should be a cause for a civil suit, if for no other reason than to secure your right. In such a case, I have no problem with a court finding $0 for damages, but still assigning such punitave awards as is necessary to dissuade the person (and others) from usurping your rights or the rights of others. The problem here is there has been no loss of rights by the plaintiff; no infringement of the plaintiff's rights. There is no damage to the plaintiff. The land in question is [was] opened to public use (e.g. tourism). The photographer did no trespass in taking the photos, even without specific permission. Even better excuse to buy a 600 and tele and hide in the bushes.:-) Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Glorious Gourd
Thanks Dave. I foucused on the middle woman. She was the prettiest :-). But she's also the one who was interacting with the gourd:-)). I believe I was at f4 or 5.6. (Can't look now. I'm at work.) I wanted enough DOF to get decent sharpness on all three while blurring the busy background. Markets are fertile ground for walkaround shooting. Paul -- Original message -- From: David J Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hope you got the gourds permission.;-) Great detail on the middle woman. Dave On 10/14/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Another shot with the K 135/2.5 at the farmer's market this afternoon. http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6529425size=lg -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Signing Photo's
On 10/15/07, Jack Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If not matted, fine tip Sharpie. Not the most archival stable choice. Cheers, Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Another cycling injury :(
I saw the X-rays on Saturday but couldn't reply until today. Ouch! That looks awful. It reaffirms my decision to be a runner. You're too old for a lollipop. I think that deserves at least a new prime lens. Make the most of your couch time. David Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/15/2007 2:16 AM On Oct 14, 2007, at 9:53 PM, Peter McIntosh wrote: Ouch! Having dislocated a shoulder, I'd rather break a collarbone... They checked me for a dislocated shoulder and from what I've heard I am quite glad I didn't do that. Beware nurofen (or ibruprofen in general) - it's been shown to slow bone healing. I've got statistics somewhere, but can't find them off- hand... The surgeon who screwed my elbow back together (plate and 9 screws after smashing it into 5 pieces during a BMX race) also advised against its use if I could tolerate the pain. I've been prescribed both paracetamol and codeine. I'm not using them as much as I'm allowed to. The bone isn't bothering me unless I bump it but my muscles are really aching, which I think is largely due to being partially immobile. The closest I've come to that previously was sleeping with three cats in the bed. I notice nobody has asked the obvious question, though: how's the bike? ;-) I still haven't looked at it. I know the front wheel has a small kink which should be repairable. I know the brakes still function, and there's not really a lot else to go wrong :) I'll have it looked over very thoroughly in the next week or two. FWIW I had my broken helmet replaced today. The manufacturer only has a crash-replacement discount in the USA but the shop had them on special with a really good discount. I had to choose a different colour though as they only had two left in my size. - Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. !SIG:4713064a112741342821193! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Signing Photo's
I sign gallery prints on the mat, in pencil with a date. I sometimes add a small series number in the opposite corner (3 of 25, for example). However, lately I've been placing that on an information sheet that I attach to the back of the frame. I generally don't offer unmatted, unframed prints. Paul -- Original message -- From: David J Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] For those that do sign their work, what pen(s) do you use. I notice a lot of my fellow equine photographers sign the sale print, some were that can be seen, but not to distractiong for the photo. To show Copyright notices as explained to me., Dave -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
PESO -- Mel and Baileys
Speaking about neglected lenses. I've got a bunch of lenses I never seem to use here's one of them. 24mm makes for a nice medium wide AOV on APS-C sensors. I decided to leave this as an environmental portrait, though there were a number of crops that worked. http://www.mindspring.com/~happydogsoftware/PESO%20--%20melandbaileys.html Equipment: Pentax *ist-Ds/smc Pentax A 24mm f2.8 Notes: This was shot at ISO 1600 and I applied moderate noise reduction, so the finished product isn't as sharp as it could be. As usual comments are welcome but may be totally ignored. -- Remember, it’s pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ?
- Original Message - From: Adam Maas Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ? High ISO noise performance is an area where most of the market has improved while adding MP. Since there are hard, physical, limits on how much light will hit a sensor site of theoretical max size for the resolution and sensor size, this improvement indicates that we haven't hit the actual physical limits of sensor design. We probably have hit the current max for current sensor production technology, but that's not to say that the production technology won't improve. This is starting to sound like a JCO hijacked thread. Adam, it's futile to argue with these toothless old republicans, they will never admit to their ignorance. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: GESO - What the ?
- Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: GESO - What the ? You crack me up. :-) You're one of the biggest softies I know. While Chihuahuas are not my first pick, Linda had a fairly good one when I met her, that changed my mind about the breed. They say a dog is much like it's master, which I just recognized with this new one, Bella (BTW), is her name. The dog is small like my wife. In the sense that the dog knows not that it's a pipsqueak, it's outgoing and tends to be outspoken, like my wife. When confronted with a frightening situation it cowers and shivers in fear, like my wife. When backed into a corner it becomes yappy and bears it's teeth, like my wife. One can't help but admire and be amazed at this little creature that possesses similar instincts and traits as a canine 10 or 20 times it's size. Another good thing is that it's messes are directly proportional. I saw a piece on Discovery Channel one night about a guy in Texas who attack trains Chihuahuas. He figures you need about a dozen of them, and that they are pretty unstoppable. The clip showed a guy in a full protection suit going into a house, and a few moments later falling backwards out of the house, covered by little fur covered Piranhas, literally taking chunks out of the suit. I've worn a protection suit against Rotties and German Shepherds. I know how hard they are, I've never had more than bruises from a particularly strong biter That clip changed my mind about those little guys. A couple that we know has 4 Chihuahuas. One is called a Teacup or Miniature, I don't recall which, but her fighting weight is less than two pounds. The also have a 75 pound GSD that lives in fear of the little girl, who routinely pounds on him. I think when you are that small, toughness is a survival trait. Bella looks like a pretty good example of the breed, but do watch the weight, I thought she looks a little thick in the pictures. Just don't let her drive the car. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Q re DA 16-45/4 on Film
- Original Message - From: Boris Liberman Subject: Re: Q re DA 16-45/4 on Film Which basically means that for the really wide angle I cannot get away with just one lens (16-45/4). I may have to have both this one and some other lens, such as 20-35/4 or my FAJ 18-35... The 18-35 was pretty horrible at the corners on film, but the coverage was there. I gave in (or up) on this issue and bought a few one size smaller wide angle lenses for the present sensor size cameras. If Pentax comes out with a full frame DSLR, my DA lenses will become redundant, along with my K10, and will get sold with the camera. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO -- Mel and Baileys
Not a bad shot for a toothless old republican... Regards, Bob S. On 10/15/07, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Speaking about neglected lenses. I've got a bunch of lenses I never seem to use here's one of them. 24mm makes for a nice medium wide AOV on APS-C sensors. I decided to leave this as an environmental portrait, though there were a number of crops that worked. http://www.mindspring.com/~happydogsoftware/PESO%20--%20melandbaileys.html Equipment: Pentax *ist-Ds/smc Pentax A 24mm f2.8 Notes: This was shot at ISO 1600 and I applied moderate noise reduction, so the finished product isn't as sharp as it could be. As usual comments are welcome but may be totally ignored. -- Remember, it's pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Signing Photo's
- Original Message - From: David J Brooks Subject: Signing Photo's For those that do sign their work, what pen(s) do you use. If I have to mark the print, I use a Staedler fine tipped permanent marker. http://staedtler.com/Lumocolor_permanent_universal_pen_gb.Staedtler?ActiveID=2316 William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO -- Mel and Baileys
I like this. The long foreground, the bit of newspaper. A great sense of place and mood. Paul -- Original message -- From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] Speaking about neglected lenses. I've got a bunch of lenses I never seem to use here's one of them. 24mm makes for a nice medium wide AOV on APS-C sensors. I decided to leave this as an environmental portrait, though there were a number of crops that worked. http://www.mindspring.com/~happydogsoftware/PESO%20--%20melandbaileys.html Equipment: Pentax *ist-Ds/smc Pentax A 24mm f2.8 Notes: This was shot at ISO 1600 and I applied moderate noise reduction, so the finished product isn't as sharp as it could be. As usual comments are welcome but may be totally ignored. -- Remember, its pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT - of interest to PDA users...
Cotty wrote: http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2201081/man-arrested-iphone That's just dumb I have an LG Chocolate phone/MP3 player. I turn off the phone service and listen to MP3s on airplanes all the time. Stupid Stupid people who can't think for themselves. -- Christian http://photography.skofteland.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Evening at the Lake
Nice. Peacefull Dave On 10/14/07, John Sessoms [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Bruce Dayton One of my older shots. Pentax PZ-1p, F 17-28/3.4-4.5 Fisheye http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/0048-21.htm What film? I like it very much - nicely saturated color. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ?
Sorry William but you seem to like baiting people. You offer nothing to the argument so go away. Adam seems to think I don't understand how it works. While I do. The math tells it all. He seems to think that you can improve hardware beyond physical laws. My point is that you can trick those laws but you can't get something for nothing. It's a legitimate argument. You on the other hand ofter betray your ignorance, and have complete disdain for people who don't agree with you. You often can't take a joke, or even realize one has been made.. You can't refrain from making political comments on the list then try to savage those who respond. To think I actually sort of liked you, I need to get my head examined. You and JCO should get a Condo together. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Adam Maas Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ? High ISO noise performance is an area where most of the market has improved while adding MP. Since there are hard, physical, limits on how much light will hit a sensor site of theoretical max size for the resolution and sensor size, this improvement indicates that we haven't hit the actual physical limits of sensor design. We probably have hit the current max for current sensor production technology, but that's not to say that the production technology won't improve. This is starting to sound like a JCO hijacked thread. Adam, it's futile to argue with these toothless old republicans, they will never admit to their ignorance. William Robb -- Remember, it’s pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO 2007 - 42e - GDG
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Ok, a last photo for the week ... another from this morning's walk in San Jose: http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/42e.htm Comments, critique, etc always appreciated. enjoy, Godfrey It's ok... for a bird... Nice grab, G! -- Christian http://photography.skofteland.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: GESO: SF Fleet Week Air Show (Blue Angels More)
John, It is a nice gallery. I went thru it the first time, but it's a little large for comments. I was impressed by the sharpness of the photos and the nearness. You have filled the frame admirably in many cases. I think especially of the shot with only parts of two passing jets. The helicopter shots are rather spectacular, especially when one is turned toward us. Overall, these are fine and close-up shots. Regards, Bob S. On 10/15/07, John Celio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did my post not make it to the general list? I've never seen something get no responses. Perhaps there were too many pics in the gallery? I kinda thought they were good... John -- http://www.neovenator.com http://www.cafepress.com/neovenatorphoto - Original Message - From: John Celio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PDML@pdml.net Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2007 4:42 PM Subject: GESO: SF Fleet Week Air Show (Blue Angels More) http://picasaweb.google.com/neopifex/AirShow2007?authkey=9Paapknvlfo There are 59 (!) photos in the gallery (I really need an editor...), so if you want to try a small handful first, try this link: http://www.neovenator.com/2007/10/big-gallery-of-air-show-photos-blue.html Those are a few of my favorites, though I had a hard time picking them out. The one I posted last week is part of the main gallery, though I haven't had time to try that de-blurring software on it yet. It took me long enough to get through all 321 (!) shots I took at the show! All photos were taken with the K500mm f4.5 at approx 1/2000, f8, ISO 400. John Celio -- http://www.neovenator.com http://www.cafepress.com/neovenatorphoto -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ?
PJ and Adam, The critical question I have for this sensor arguement is what portion the chip is actively engaged in light gathering. 75%, 85%, 95%? I think you guys are dancing around the issue without addressing it. We can all agree that no sensor can gather 110% of the light falling on it. So what is technology at today? Regards, Bob S. On 10/15/07, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry William but you seem to like baiting people. You offer nothing to the argument so go away. Adam seems to think I don't understand how it works. While I do. The math tells it all. He seems to think that you can improve hardware beyond physical laws. My point is that you can trick those laws but you can't get something for nothing. It's a legitimate argument. You on the other hand ofter betray your ignorance, and have complete disdain for people who don't agree with you. You often can't take a joke, or even realize one has been made.. You can't refrain from making political comments on the list then try to savage those who respond. To think I actually sort of liked you, I need to get my head examined. You and JCO should get a Condo together. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Adam Maas Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ? High ISO noise performance is an area where most of the market has improved while adding MP. Since there are hard, physical, limits on how much light will hit a sensor site of theoretical max size for the resolution and sensor size, this improvement indicates that we haven't hit the actual physical limits of sensor design. We probably have hit the current max for current sensor production technology, but that's not to say that the production technology won't improve. This is starting to sound like a JCO hijacked thread. Adam, it's futile to argue with these toothless old republicans, they will never admit to their ignorance. William Robb -- Remember, it's pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO -- Mel and Baileys
ROTFLMAO I agree. Cheers, David On 10/15/07, Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not a bad shot for a toothless old republican... Regards, Bob S. On 10/15/07, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Speaking about neglected lenses. I've got a bunch of lenses I never seem to use here's one of them. 24mm makes for a nice medium wide AOV on APS-C sensors. I decided to leave this as an environmental portrait, though there were a number of crops that worked. http://www.mindspring.com/~happydogsoftware/PESO%20--%20melandbaileys.html Equipment: Pentax *ist-Ds/smc Pentax A 24mm f2.8 Notes: This was shot at ISO 1600 and I applied moderate noise reduction, so the finished product isn't as sharp as it could be. As usual comments are welcome but may be totally ignored. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO -- Mel and Baileys
I think so too. But then, who ever said you needed teeth to be a photographer? ;-) G On Oct 15, 2007, at 7:27 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: Not a bad shot for a toothless old republican... Regards, Bob S. Speaking about neglected lenses. I've got a bunch of lenses I never seem to use here's one of them. 24mm makes for a nice medium wide AOV on APS-C sensors. I decided to leave this as an environmental portrait, though there were a number of crops that worked. http://www.mindspring.com/~happydogsoftware/PESO%20--% 20melandbaileys.html Equipment: Pentax *ist-Ds/smc Pentax A 24mm f2.8 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO 2007 - 42b - GDG
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Between reality and paper ... http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/42b.htm Comments, critique, red always appreciated. enjoy Godfrey Nice corset... I like the way it looks like a BW image with selective colorizing. -- Christian http://photography.skofteland.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ?
The active photosite area in the K10D sensor is around 20-30% of the chip area. There's a long ways to go before we get anywhere near a 100% efficient collector surface... G On Oct 15, 2007, at 7:55 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: The critical question I have for this sensor arguement is what portion the chip is actively engaged in light gathering. 75%, 85%, 95%? I think you guys are dancing around the issue without addressing it. We can all agree that no sensor can gather 110% of the light falling on it. So what is technology at today? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Signing Photo's
Dave - I sometimes use the the imprinter that's left over from when I had my studio, and hot stamp them w/gold leaf. A simpler and easier alternative is to create a brush in PhotoShop that includes your name and, if you want, the copyright symbol and year. You can resize it as needed if you want to adjust the signature size to the size of the print and set it for any color you want. This works in PS Elements as well as the full PS. Here's a tutorial on how to create it courtesy of David Ziser... http://tinyurl.com/259g5f http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=prkjv5bab.0.mwxlv5bab.h6v4qyn6.9872p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.digitalprotalk.com%2FDAZ+Media%2FLesson+2+-+Signature+Brush%2FSignature+Brush+Lesson.html -p David J Brooks wrote: For those that do sign their work, what pen(s) do you use. I notice a lot of my fellow equine photographers sign the sale print, some were that can be seen, but not to distractiong for the photo. To show Copyright notices as explained to me., Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ?
Sadly I can't tell you, and I doubt that Adam has any more than what's been released by Sony, which may not be much. My assumption has been that all of the available surface area is being used for capture. This obviously is not the case but it only makes me more pessimistic. Bob Sullivan wrote: PJ and Adam, The critical question I have for this sensor arguement is what portion the chip is actively engaged in light gathering. 75%, 85%, 95%? I think you guys are dancing around the issue without addressing it. We can all agree that no sensor can gather 110% of the light falling on it. So what is technology at today? Regards, Bob S. On 10/15/07, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry William but you seem to like baiting people. You offer nothing to the argument so go away. Adam seems to think I don't understand how it works. While I do. The math tells it all. He seems to think that you can improve hardware beyond physical laws. My point is that you can trick those laws but you can't get something for nothing. It's a legitimate argument. You on the other hand ofter betray your ignorance, and have complete disdain for people who don't agree with you. You often can't take a joke, or even realize one has been made.. You can't refrain from making political comments on the list then try to savage those who respond. To think I actually sort of liked you, I need to get my head examined. You and JCO should get a Condo together. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Adam Maas Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ? High ISO noise performance is an area where most of the market has improved while adding MP. Since there are hard, physical, limits on how much light will hit a sensor site of theoretical max size for the resolution and sensor size, this improvement indicates that we haven't hit the actual physical limits of sensor design. We probably have hit the current max for current sensor production technology, but that's not to say that the production technology won't improve. This is starting to sound like a JCO hijacked thread. Adam, it's futile to argue with these toothless old republicans, they will never admit to their ignorance. William Robb -- Remember, it's pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Remember, it’s pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: GESO - Country Mouse in the City
Tom C wrote: The country mouse went back downtown this afternoon after work. Got dark, got turned around, got lost, frightening people, got scared, found the car finally. http://photo.net/photodb/presentation.tcl?presentation_id=358339 Tom C. nice collection. Really like Window Dressing Go back and take pictures of mountains. I hate you. -- Christian http://photography.skofteland.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ?
The thing is Peter you and Adam, from my point of view, are both arguing the same thing. You say for better noise performance you need a bigger sensor site (and eventually a larger sensor). We all agree with this. Adam's saying the sensor manufacturers are improving their techniques to increase the sensor site size within the limits of the APS-C form factor. You're both going around and around stating the same thing, getting your noses out of joint turning the discussion into a pissing match. Cheers, Dave On 10/15/07, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry William but you seem to like baiting people. You offer nothing to the argument so go away. Adam seems to think I don't understand how it works. While I do. The math tells it all. He seems to think that you can improve hardware beyond physical laws. My point is that you can trick those laws but you can't get something for nothing. It's a legitimate argument. You on the other hand ofter betray your ignorance, and have complete disdain for people who don't agree with you. You often can't take a joke, or even realize one has been made.. You can't refrain from making political comments on the list then try to savage those who respond. To think I actually sort of liked you, I need to get my head examined. You and JCO should get a Condo together. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Adam Maas Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ? High ISO noise performance is an area where most of the market has improved while adding MP. Since there are hard, physical, limits on how much light will hit a sensor site of theoretical max size for the resolution and sensor size, this improvement indicates that we haven't hit the actual physical limits of sensor design. We probably have hit the current max for current sensor production technology, but that's not to say that the production technology won't improve. This is starting to sound like a JCO hijacked thread. Adam, it's futile to argue with these toothless old republicans, they will never admit to their ignorance. William Robb -- Remember, it's pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: GESO: SF Fleet Week Air Show (Blue Angels More)
That's a lot of photos to look at and comment on, john. I just ran it as a slideshow ... many good photos in there. Edit, edit, edit! Show *only* the best! No more than eight at a time if you want comments is my experience. G On Oct 14, 2007, at 10:51 PM, John Celio wrote: Did my post not make it to the general list? I've never seen something get no responses. Perhaps there were too many pics in the gallery? I kinda thought they were good... From: John Celio [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: GESO: SF Fleet Week Air Show (Blue Angels More) http://picasaweb.google.com/neopifex/AirShow2007?authkey=9Paapknvlfo There are 59 (!) photos in the gallery (I really need an editor...), so if you want to try a small handful first, try this link: http://www.neovenator.com/2007/10/big-gallery-of-air-show-photos- blue.html Those are a few of my favorites, though I had a hard time picking them out. The one I posted last week is part of the main gallery, though I haven't had time to try that de-blurring software on it yet. It took me long enough to get through all 321 (!) shots I took at the show! All photos were taken with the K500mm f4.5 at approx 1/2000, f8, ISO 400. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: GESO - Downtown I
Tom C wrote: A few shots from a short detour in downtown Dallas after work. Lot's of good architecture. Very little captured here. Not my normal stuff of course. http://photo.net/photodb/presentation.tcl?presentation_id=358322 Another nice group of shots. Go away. -- Christian http://photography.skofteland.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO:Magnolia Gardens
Thanks for taking the time to comment Paul. sorry, I didn't reply earlier, my internet has been acting up :) rg2 On 10/13/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good one. The reflection framed by the hanging moss makes it a memorable scene. Nicely done. I'll look forward to seeing your Velvia pics. Paul On Oct 13, 2007, at 10:36 AM, Rebekah wrote: Well, I finally made it out to the gardens at the Magnolia Plantation. I can't say enough about the place - everywhere I looked there was a beautiful scene, animal, or flower to photograph, and the weather turned out to be perfect - first foggy, then sunny with everything covered in dew, and then it showered lightly for ten minutes, and the sun came out again and everything was covered in rain drops. Most of my shots were taken on Velvia, so it may be quite some time before I'm able to show any of them here. However, I did shoot one roll of regular color film, and this picture is my favorite from that roll. http://picasaweb.google.com/rg2pdml/PESO/photo?authkey=W1C- i05p28o#5120829586467132594 That was 400 speed film and a 15-30mm lens. I straightened this picture out a bit; it seems the bridge I was standing on wasn't quite level or else I had my tripod improperly set up. Interestingly, as a side note, this film is actually some generic film I grabbed at a sale at Walgreens going for 99 cents a roll. I shot it mostly out of curiousity, but I can't say the results were horrible. Thanks everyone for looking! And come with me next time, I'll probably be going again next Sunday :) rg2 -- the subject of a photograph is far less important than its composition -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- the subject of a photograph is far less important than its composition -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ?
Well yes it was a pissing match. But I'm not mad a Adam because he wouldn't back down. In fact I learned a few things from him. I just don't agree that they're the whole reason for the high ISO improvements. WW has managed to piss me off enough that he's back in my Kill file with Dobo, Rubinstine(sp), (just in case they ever raise their heads again, and a couple of others who shall remain nameless, because I can't refrain from arguing with them, not because they're bad people). William is mostly just nasty, and revels in it. David Savage wrote: The thing is Peter you and Adam, from my point of view, are both arguing the same thing. You say for better noise performance you need a bigger sensor site (and eventually a larger sensor). We all agree with this. Adam's saying the sensor manufacturers are improving their techniques to increase the sensor site size within the limits of the APS-C form factor. You're both going around and around stating the same thing, getting your noses out of joint turning the discussion into a pissing match. Cheers, Dave On 10/15/07, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry William but you seem to like baiting people. You offer nothing to the argument so go away. Adam seems to think I don't understand how it works. While I do. The math tells it all. He seems to think that you can improve hardware beyond physical laws. My point is that you can trick those laws but you can't get something for nothing. It's a legitimate argument. You on the other hand ofter betray your ignorance, and have complete disdain for people who don't agree with you. You often can't take a joke, or even realize one has been made.. You can't refrain from making political comments on the list then try to savage those who respond. To think I actually sort of liked you, I need to get my head examined. You and JCO should get a Condo together. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Adam Maas Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ? High ISO noise performance is an area where most of the market has improved while adding MP. Since there are hard, physical, limits on how much light will hit a sensor site of theoretical max size for the resolution and sensor size, this improvement indicates that we haven't hit the actual physical limits of sensor design. We probably have hit the current max for current sensor production technology, but that's not to say that the production technology won't improve. This is starting to sound like a JCO hijacked thread. Adam, it's futile to argue with these toothless old republicans, they will never admit to their ignorance. William Robb -- Remember, it's pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Remember, it’s pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ?
I'm not sure. Frankly, Sony and Canon (Manufacturers of the Sensors being discussed) haven't published these numbers where I can find them. All they seem willing to say is that they've improved that number. You are right, without hard numbers on this, we simply can't tell how close to the theoretical max we are. -Adam Bob Sullivan wrote: PJ and Adam, The critical question I have for this sensor arguement is what portion the chip is actively engaged in light gathering. 75%, 85%, 95%? I think you guys are dancing around the issue without addressing it. We can all agree that no sensor can gather 110% of the light falling on it. So what is technology at today? Regards, Bob S. On 10/15/07, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry William but you seem to like baiting people. You offer nothing to the argument so go away. Adam seems to think I don't understand how it works. While I do. The math tells it all. He seems to think that you can improve hardware beyond physical laws. My point is that you can trick those laws but you can't get something for nothing. It's a legitimate argument. You on the other hand ofter betray your ignorance, and have complete disdain for people who don't agree with you. You often can't take a joke, or even realize one has been made.. You can't refrain from making political comments on the list then try to savage those who respond. To think I actually sort of liked you, I need to get my head examined. You and JCO should get a Condo together. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Adam Maas Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ? High ISO noise performance is an area where most of the market has improved while adding MP. Since there are hard, physical, limits on how much light will hit a sensor site of theoretical max size for the resolution and sensor size, this improvement indicates that we haven't hit the actual physical limits of sensor design. We probably have hit the current max for current sensor production technology, but that's not to say that the production technology won't improve. This is starting to sound like a JCO hijacked thread. Adam, it's futile to argue with these toothless old republicans, they will never admit to their ignorance. William Robb -- Remember, it's pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ?
I think we did get a bit intemerate, but I'm not mad at Peter either. WW did go over the top (The irony is I suspect my politics are a lot closer to Peter's than William's) -Adam P. J. Alling wrote: Well yes it was a pissing match. But I'm not mad a Adam because he wouldn't back down. In fact I learned a few things from him. I just don't agree that they're the whole reason for the high ISO improvements. WW has managed to piss me off enough that he's back in my Kill file with Dobo, Rubinstine(sp), (just in case they ever raise their heads again, and a couple of others who shall remain nameless, because I can't refrain from arguing with them, not because they're bad people). William is mostly just nasty, and revels in it. David Savage wrote: The thing is Peter you and Adam, from my point of view, are both arguing the same thing. You say for better noise performance you need a bigger sensor site (and eventually a larger sensor). We all agree with this. Adam's saying the sensor manufacturers are improving their techniques to increase the sensor site size within the limits of the APS-C form factor. You're both going around and around stating the same thing, getting your noses out of joint turning the discussion into a pissing match. Cheers, Dave On 10/15/07, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry William but you seem to like baiting people. You offer nothing to the argument so go away. Adam seems to think I don't understand how it works. While I do. The math tells it all. He seems to think that you can improve hardware beyond physical laws. My point is that you can trick those laws but you can't get something for nothing. It's a legitimate argument. You on the other hand ofter betray your ignorance, and have complete disdain for people who don't agree with you. You often can't take a joke, or even realize one has been made.. You can't refrain from making political comments on the list then try to savage those who respond. To think I actually sort of liked you, I need to get my head examined. You and JCO should get a Condo together. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Adam Maas Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ? High ISO noise performance is an area where most of the market has improved while adding MP. Since there are hard, physical, limits on how much light will hit a sensor site of theoretical max size for the resolution and sensor size, this improvement indicates that we haven't hit the actual physical limits of sensor design. We probably have hit the current max for current sensor production technology, but that's not to say that the production technology won't improve. This is starting to sound like a JCO hijacked thread. Adam, it's futile to argue with these toothless old republicans, they will never admit to their ignorance. William Robb -- Remember, it's pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ?
All I'm saying is that we haven't hit the limits of the laws yet, not that we can go beyond them. And that's amply demonstrated by the fact that fill factor has been improved(Which gets us closer to theoretical max performance). I susepct the current crop of sensors are near max performance for their processes, but the new crop of sensors indicate there are improvements to be had at the process level. And to William - I'd probably be a Republican if I was an American, it's a more comfortable party to a small-l libertarian like me. -Adam P. J. Alling wrote: Sorry William but you seem to like baiting people. You offer nothing to the argument so go away. Adam seems to think I don't understand how it works. While I do. The math tells it all. He seems to think that you can improve hardware beyond physical laws. My point is that you can trick those laws but you can't get something for nothing. It's a legitimate argument. You on the other hand ofter betray your ignorance, and have complete disdain for people who don't agree with you. You often can't take a joke, or even realize one has been made.. You can't refrain from making political comments on the list then try to savage those who respond. To think I actually sort of liked you, I need to get my head examined. You and JCO should get a Condo together. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Adam Maas Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ? High ISO noise performance is an area where most of the market has improved while adding MP. Since there are hard, physical, limits on how much light will hit a sensor site of theoretical max size for the resolution and sensor size, this improvement indicates that we haven't hit the actual physical limits of sensor design. We probably have hit the current max for current sensor production technology, but that's not to say that the production technology won't improve. This is starting to sound like a JCO hijacked thread. Adam, it's futile to argue with these toothless old republicans, they will never admit to their ignorance. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Slightly OT: Right clicked images find there way home
It works with firefox and internet explorer for sure. It doesn't work with Opera, and other browsers that ignore this type of tag. William Robb On 10/13/07, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That works in IE but not Mozilla, (and it leads, on my machine at least to undesirable side effects). William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: David J Brooks Subject: Re: Slightly OT: Right clicked images find there way home Main page or the sub pages Bill. Some times i feel like changing my water mark from David J Brooks 2007 to something like, If you see this any were other than www.caughtinmotion.com please call XXX XXX so i can charge appropriately. Dave, drop this line into the head of any web page. body oncontextmenu=return false; That will do it as best as you can. Here is a simple HTML: --code starts below this line-- !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN html head meta http-equiv=content-type content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 body oncontextmenu=return false; titleA Picture/title /head body bgcolor=black pfont color=blackI suck!!/font/p center pimg src=shim1.gif width=1 height=1/p pimg src=nytimes.jpg/p pimg src=shim1.gif width=1 height=16/p /center /body /html -code ends above this line- Note where I located the line mentioned. Now go here and try to save the picture using either right click or keyboard shorcuts. http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/temp/nytimes.html This will stop the casual web browser. As has been mentioned before, nothing can stop the serious people who are intent on grabbing your content no matter what. William Robb -- Remember, it's pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Q re DA 16-45/4 on Film
You see, Bill, I have printed large a certain crop from the F 17-28 FE *on film* that was rather soft towards the (even cropped) corners. The aperture was 5.6 or may be even 8.0. The F 17-28 FE is somewhat unpredictable in that respect. I haven't really tried FAJ 18-35 on film, but I don't hold my hopes too high - after all it is kinda kit lens. Ideally I would have to sell both FE 17-28 and FAJ 18-35 and buy FA 20/2.8 which I find rather good idea to have done anyway. Unfortunately, either the price is horrendous or it is not there. Yet of course FA 20/2.8 will not be too wide on cropped body. It is however may be logical to assume that even the mighty film limited lenses might have problems on full frame DSLR should such a beast come to being. I understand what you and Godfrey's saying - the lenses and the bodies must fit together in the technological sense. I am yet undecided... I am seeing plenty of very good pictures from DA 16-45 but I am still a bit reluctant to commit myself to the DA lens(es). Cheers! On 10/15/07, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Boris Liberman Subject: Re: Q re DA 16-45/4 on Film Which basically means that for the really wide angle I cannot get away with just one lens (16-45/4). I may have to have both this one and some other lens, such as 20-35/4 or my FAJ 18-35... The 18-35 was pretty horrible at the corners on film, but the coverage was there. I gave in (or up) on this issue and bought a few one size smaller wide angle lenses for the present sensor size cameras. If Pentax comes out with a full frame DSLR, my DA lenses will become redundant, along with my K10, and will get sold with the camera. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: GESO: SF Fleet Week Air Show (Blue Angels More)
It's just bad timing. We've had a large run of PESO's GESO's recently. Interesting shot's. Makes me think it might be a good idea to go check out the Red Bull Air Race that hits town next month. Cheers, Dave On 10/15/07, John Celio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did my post not make it to the general list? I've never seen something get no responses. Perhaps there were too many pics in the gallery? I kinda thought they were good... John -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Slightly OT: Right clicked images find there way home
Nonsense. You can never have too many Dave's. Right, Dave, Dave Dave? Cheers, Dave On 10/14/07, graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I felt there were too many Daves involved. David J Brooks wrote: Mr Brooks?? What i di now. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Another cycling injury :(
Looking at the bright side, I now have 3 months of Saturday mornings to devote to all those projects I had no time for! Congratulations! Those 3 months will pass quickly enough. Just make sure you are scrupulous about whatever physio exercises they ask you to do. I expect you'll lose a lot of strength in the left arm. I'm now at the point where I've just started going to the gym to lift some weights to regain the strength in mine. It's quite surprising how very weak it is compared to before - I have gym cards from about 15 years ago, so I know what I was lifting then, and what I'm not lifting now! -- Bob -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Mann Sent: 13 October 2007 08:12 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: OT: Another cycling injury :( This time around I've done it properly. Fell hard while riding home from the trails and broke my left collarbone. I tried riding/walking it off while muttering a mixture of encouragement and obscenity to myself (didn't know it was actually broken at the time) but had to abandon that plan about halfway home as the discomfort wore me down. Despite having landed on my cellphone hard enough to crack the plastic over the screen, I was able to call the Mrs for a lift to the after-hours medical centre. They pushed me straight to the front of the queue, taking me through before we'd even started filling in the paperwork! They took care of me amazingly well and eventually sent me home with a sling and a stack of good painkillers. We then headed straight to the supermarket for a good dose of sympathy chocolate. So right at the start of the f--king season I have 3 months off the bikes. Serves me right for being silly I suppose (launching a little too hard off a speed hump), but I haven't even had a chance to ride in my new full-face helmet yet :( For a few dollars I obtained a copy of my X-Rays so I might throw some coal into my old 8x10 transparency scanner and post some gruesome pics later. So far I've learned that sitting in a sunbeam reading on the couch is really nice, and showering is really not nice. Not sure how I'm going to sleep - probably badly as I always sleep on my side. The cellphone-shaped bruise on my leg is also annoying me a bit whenever I try to crouch down. Oh and there's also the one-handed typing thing. It could have turned out worse as I very nearly crashed straight into a van coming in the opposite direction. The driver stopped and made sure I was OK before carrying on. I haven't taken a close look at the bike but I know the front wheel has a slight (fixable) kink. Looking at the bright side, I now have 3 months of Saturday mornings to devote to all those projects I had no time for! - Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO -- Mel and Baileys
nice! I love the long foreground as well rg2 On 10/15/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think so too. But then, who ever said you needed teeth to be a photographer? ;-) G On Oct 15, 2007, at 7:27 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: Not a bad shot for a toothless old republican... Regards, Bob S. Speaking about neglected lenses. I've got a bunch of lenses I never seem to use here's one of them. 24mm makes for a nice medium wide AOV on APS-C sensors. I decided to leave this as an environmental portrait, though there were a number of crops that worked. http://www.mindspring.com/~happydogsoftware/PESO%20--% 20melandbaileys.html Equipment: Pentax *ist-Ds/smc Pentax A 24mm f2.8 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- the subject of a photograph is far less important than its composition -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Q re DA 16-45/4 on Film
On 10/15/07, Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am yet undecided... I am seeing plenty of very good pictures from DA 16-45 but I am still a bit reluctant to commit myself to the DA lens(es). I think you'll find quite a few people here were initially of the same mind, but the lack of a FF wide angle, that's actually wide on a digital body, was a deciding factor to relent. As much as I would like a digital FF body, I seriously doubt we'll see one soon ( within the next 12 months), even if/when we do, APS-C format will be the consumer DSLR option. As for the decision to make the DA lens plunge, my favorite enablement mantra goes, He who dies with the most moneyis still dead. I chant this to myself every time I review my credit card statement after a purchase. It always cheers me up ;-) Cheers, Dave Cheers, Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Slightly OT: Right clicked images find there way home
This will stop the casual web browser. As has been mentioned before, nothing can stop the serious people who are intent on grabbing your content no matter what. You know, I tried that out of curiosity, and although I couldn't right-click, the little box that offers me the options to save, print or email popped up in the upper left hand corner of the image. I'm using internet explorer right now, just an FYI for you ;) rg2 On 10/15/07, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nonsense. You can never have too many Dave's. Right, Dave, Dave Dave? Cheers, Dave On 10/14/07, graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I felt there were too many Daves involved. David J Brooks wrote: Mr Brooks?? What i di now. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- the subject of a photograph is far less important than its composition -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Glorious Gourd
The timing looks about right, but for me, the eyes of the left two girls just don't work. They are showing interest in either the gourd or you. An 'almost' shot for me -- Best regards, Bruce Sunday, October 14, 2007, 5:10:03 PM, you wrote: PS Another shot with the K 135/2.5 at the farmer's market this afternoon. PS http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6529425size=lg -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Another cycling injury :(
Nice
--
Bob
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David Mann
Sent: 13 October 2007 10:01
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Another cycling injury :(
The X-ray sheet was too big for my scanner as it obscured the
calibration area. I wasn't willing to cut it up, so I put it on my
light box and set up the K10D on a tripod.
Enjoy :)
http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/temp/xray.html
- Dave
On Oct 13, 2007, at 8:12 PM, David Mann wrote:
{blah}
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
above and follow the directions.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
Re: Q re DA 16-45/4 on Film
On 10/15/07, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As much as I would like a digital FF body, I seriously doubt we'll see one soon ( within the next 12 months), even if/when we do, APS-C format will be the consumer DSLR option. This is valid argument. However, I cannot spend both time and effort, *and* the money each time there is a change of format that requires all my lenses and bodies to be replaced. In fact, given the mount compatibility of Pentax, it is only natural to try to stick to those lenses that are proven and do work. As for the decision to make the DA lens plunge, my favorite enablement mantra goes, He who dies with the most moneyis still dead. I chant this to myself every time I review my credit card statement after a purchase. It always cheers me up ;-) Well, no ;-). I tend to plan carefully and to spend money with a certain degree of reluctance or greediness if you will. For example, I'd have to sell certain lenses in order to buy either FA 20/2.8 or some other lens. It is unfortunate, that DA 18-250 (according to Tamron 18-250 reviews, including that on www.photozone.de) has rather serious distortion on the wide end. But life is never easy, is it? -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Another cycling injury :(
You tried to walk that off??? My god man do you think you're Indiana Jones? they're a tough breed, these antipodeans. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Glorious Gourd
It generates a detached feeling for me, and as such doesn't draw me in hold my interest. Cheers, Dave On 10/15/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Another shot with the K 135/2.5 at the farmer's market this afternoon. http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6529425size=lg -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Another cycling injury :(
You tried to walk that off??? My god man do you think you're Indiana Jones? A mix of shock and adrenaline, I suspect. Oh, and not knowing it was broken. Ignorance = bliss. I finally found my street map... I walked about 2.6km (1.6 miles) before I was picked up. At first I'd actually tried to get on the bike and ride home but that only lasted a few dozen feet before I realised I was in no condition to ride. I walked quite a distance after breaking my wrist. I knew it was broken, and I needed to go to casualty, but I didn't know where casualty was in that town, and didn't want to leave my bike bags while I cadged a lift off someone. Luckily I found the fire station and was able to leave everything safely locked up and get some first aid while they fetched the paramedic. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Slightly OT: Right clicked images find there way home
- Original Message - From: Rebekah Subject: Re: Slightly OT: Right clicked images find there way home This will stop the casual web browser. As has been mentioned before, nothing can stop the serious people who are intent on grabbing your content no matter what. You know, I tried that out of curiosity, and although I couldn't right-click, the little box that offers me the options to save, print or email popped up in the upper left hand corner of the image. I'm using internet explorer right now, just an FYI for you ;) HAR!!!. Not surprising really. I suppose the biggest victim of intellectual property theft has little interest in protecting the intellectual property of others. I don't get that option when I use IE, but I also don't use IE enough to know it's ins and outs. The main point, which this reafirms, is that if it's posted on the web, it is, effectively, public domain. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Signing Photo's
I know. Jack --- David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 10/15/07, Jack Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If not matted, fine tip Sharpie. Not the most archival stable choice. Cheers, Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. http://sims.yahoo.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Q re DA 16-45/4 on Film
On Oct 15, 2007, at 9:25 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: This is valid argument. However, I cannot spend both time and effort, *and* the money each time there is a change of format that requires all my lenses and bodies to be replaced. In fact, given the mount compatibility of Pentax, it is only natural to try to stick to those lenses that are proven and do work. There is no reason to upgrade every time technology changes. To do so is absurd, unless there is either significant advantage from which you will garner income or simply have a lot of discretionary income to burn on luxuries. If you have a camera and buy a very good lens well matched to it that produces the results you want, you can use that setup until it stops working entirely, bypassing generations of new equipment at no cost. If you want an ultrawide lens for the DSLR bodies, buy a DA series lens. They're the best, if not only, choices available that make sense. It's that simple. The DA12-24, DA14, DA16-45, DA*16-50, and DA21 Limited are all excellent wide lenses available now that work brilliantly on the DSLR bodies. Lenses 20mm and shorter that were made for 35mm SLRs in days gone by may or may not perform as well, and beyond that they're just as expensive as any of these choices. If and when some better body comes available and *if* it includes a larger format sensor that cannot work with the lens you have, evaluate then whether or not the improvements it offers warrant the expense of buying it and a new lens as needed. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT - of interest to PDA users...
David, While you are right about the interference reason, the second statement, I believe, is not accurate. I am not sure how long ago you have flown, but the trend I see is that those phone are removed from the modern aircrafts. As a matter of fact, none of the aircrafts I've flown this year (over 40 flights on American, Continental, Delta, Finnair, Frontier, Southwest, S7, Estonian Air) had built-in phones. Igor Sun Oct 14 11:31:48 EDT 2007 David Savage wrote: What? Terrorists? Airliners are concerned about the possibility of radio/navigation equipment interference, hence the shielding reference. That's why every seat on most modern aircraft have built in payphones. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Q re DA 16-45/4 on Film
- Original Message - From: Boris Liberman Subject: Re: Q re DA 16-45/4 on Film You see, Bill, I have printed large a certain crop from the F 17-28 FE *on film* that was rather soft towards the (even cropped) corners. The aperture was 5.6 or may be even 8.0. The F 17-28 FE is somewhat unpredictable in that respect. I haven't really tried FAJ 18-35 on film, but I don't hold my hopes too high - after all it is kinda kit lens. Ideally I would have to sell both FE 17-28 and FAJ 18-35 and buy FA 20/2.8 which I find rather good idea to have done anyway. Unfortunately, either the price is horrendous or it is not there. Yet of course FA 20/2.8 will not be too wide on cropped body. It is however may be logical to assume that even the mighty film limited lenses might have problems on full frame DSLR should such a beast come to being. I understand what you and Godfrey's saying - the lenses and the bodies must fit together in the technological sense. I am yet undecided... I am seeing plenty of very good pictures from DA 16-45 but I am still a bit reluctant to commit myself to the DA lens(es). Something to consider is that even if a full frame K-DSLR camera becomes available, the current 10mp camera is more than capable of producing excellent pictures in most any situation, and most likely, a full fram camera would be a pretty expensive horse to put into your stable. I understand your reticence about geting a one size smaller lens, I went through it myself, but unfortunately, the wide angle options are just not there (from Pentax) in full frame lenses. I bought an A15/3.5 a couple of years ago. It was obscenely expensive, and is no better, and perhaps worse, than the much cheaper to buy DA14/2.8 on the DSLR. Perhaps because I have shot multiple formats for so many years, I am willing to treat the DSLR cameras as a new format, with the need to buy a few pieces of glass for it, even though it has a K-mount. I bought the Pentax 6x7 prior to buying into Pentax 35mm, and even though I could mount 6x7 lenses to 35mm, I bought several K-mount lenses, even focal lengths that were very close to my 6x7 lenses. It just seemed to make sense to do it that way. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Glorious Gourd
Thanks for looking. I don't believe they saw me, but I could be wrong. Paul -- Original message -- From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] The timing looks about right, but for me, the eyes of the left two girls just don't work. They are showing interest in either the gourd or you. An 'almost' shot for me -- Best regards, Bruce Sunday, October 14, 2007, 5:10:03 PM, you wrote: PS Another shot with the K 135/2.5 at the farmer's market this afternoon. PS http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6529425size=lg -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Q re DA 16-45/4 on Film
On Oct 15, 2007, at 10:13 AM, William Robb wrote: Perhaps because I have shot multiple formats for so many years, I am willing to treat the DSLR cameras as a new format, with the need to buy a few pieces of glass for it, even though it has a K-mount. It is a new format compared to a 35mm film SLR. No need to treat anything... The fact that it can also use K mount lenses designed for a larger format is an advantage, but the DSLRs are indeed not 35mm film SLRs. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Glorious Gourd
I'm not sure what you mean, but I appreciate the comments. Thanks for looking. Paul -- Original message -- From: David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] It generates a detached feeling for me, and as such doesn't draw me in hold my interest. Cheers, Dave On 10/15/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Another shot with the K 135/2.5 at the farmer's market this afternoon. http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6529425size=lg -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Q re DA 16-45/4 on Film
Well put, Godders. Paul -- Original message -- From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Oct 15, 2007, at 9:25 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: This is valid argument. However, I cannot spend both time and effort, *and* the money each time there is a change of format that requires all my lenses and bodies to be replaced. In fact, given the mount compatibility of Pentax, it is only natural to try to stick to those lenses that are proven and do work. There is no reason to upgrade every time technology changes. To do so is absurd, unless there is either significant advantage from which you will garner income or simply have a lot of discretionary income to burn on luxuries. If you have a camera and buy a very good lens well matched to it that produces the results you want, you can use that setup until it stops working entirely, bypassing generations of new equipment at no cost. If you want an ultrawide lens for the DSLR bodies, buy a DA series lens. They're the best, if not only, choices available that make sense. It's that simple. The DA12-24, DA14, DA16-45, DA*16-50, and DA21 Limited are all excellent wide lenses available now that work brilliantly on the DSLR bodies. Lenses 20mm and shorter that were made for 35mm SLRs in days gone by may or may not perform as well, and beyond that they're just as expensive as any of these choices. If and when some better body comes available and *if* it includes a larger format sensor that cannot work with the lens you have, evaluate then whether or not the improvements it offers warrant the expense of buying it and a new lens as needed. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ?
That's 2.3 stops to 100%. On Mon, 15 Oct 2007, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: The active photosite area in the K10D sensor is around 20-30% of the chip area. There's a long ways to go before we get anywhere near a 100% efficient collector surface... G On Oct 15, 2007, at 7:55 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: The critical question I have for this sensor arguement is what portion the chip is actively engaged in light gathering. 75%, 85%, 95%? I think you guys are dancing around the issue without addressing it. We can all agree that no sensor can gather 110% of the light falling on it. So what is technology at today? -- * * Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA * * Electrical Engineering* * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University * * -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ?
From: Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED] I thought that the photosites were not color sensitive, i.e. they are BW with a Bayer filter pattern in front, so they all would light up equally with temp, no? Yes, and there is some noise all over; however, the sensor is receiving photons through the front of the sensor. The sensor plane is at the back of the camera, the heat generating electronics is in front of and to the side of the sensor. I discovered this when taking black frames to subtract from my astro photos. Nevertheless, the math is the math is the math. What I saw iswhat I saw. Do it for yourself. You'll see. Regards, Bob... Art is not a reflection of reality. it is the reality of a reflection. -Jean Luc Godard -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ?
Yes. But ultimately, eventually, it's sensor size, whether they're chemical or electronic photon catchers, that determines maximum obtainable image quality. Having a camera whose physical size is pefect for the hand and can/could accommodate a full frame but has an APS sized sensor really feels like a cheat to me and hat disgusts me. Screw Nikon, Canon and the rest. There are limits to how efficient you can make a sensor, any sensor. There is a reason, and or me, valid, why I will NOT purchase a lens that will not fill a full frame - and that be 24x36mm or there abouts. When I get the time, I'll derive the maximum performance limits (but never actually achievable) for both APS and full frame sensors. Regards, Bob... Art is not a reflection of reality. it is the reality of a reflection. -Jean Luc Godard - Original Message - From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bob Blakely wrote: From my point of view... Only so many photons are captured by a sensor element (pixel, if you will) of a given size and that to a certain efficiency. There is an upper limit. Further, everything that has a temperature generates noise in proportion to that temperature. There is a lower limit. The upper limit can only be expanded by increasing the element size to capture more photons per element. Maintaining the effective resolution then means increasing the overall sensor size (to full frame?) The lower limit can only be pushed further down by operating the sensor at a lower temperature. Currently, the K10D shows noise beginning on the side where most of the hotter the electronics is located. Red pixels light up first, then green, then blue. Noise temperature can be further reduced by active cooling. I suspect that this is not likely to happen with digital cameras any time soon, sensors for astrophotography and other scientific purposes excepted. Everybody knows this, and ultimately the larger sensors will prevail. When this happens, lenses with APS size image circles will become as useless, practically speaking, as 8 tracks. Have you noticed that the upper ISO limits for digital sensors and film are about the same, 1600 and sometimes 3200? Tere is a reason for this and ultimately it is the physics of noise that produce thes limits. Noise power, N = k*T*B*Nf, where: k = Boltzmann's constant; T = Absolute temperature; B = Noise Bandwidth of the sensor or film; Nf = Noise figure, a measure of sensor efficiency. Bottom line... there are rules and nature enforces them. So... where's my effecient full frame sensor? Regards, Bob... In the Nikon D3. Improvements in fill factor (reducing the wasted space between sensor sites) have significantly increased sensor performance by increasing the effective area of the sensor sites by a fair margin. The current crop oof 10/12MP APS-C sensors are capable of ISO6400 with quality superior to the old ones at 1600-3200, and can match a 5D at 1600-3200. The D3, which is unique in being a low-density sensor with the new sensor tech, is capable of natve ISO 6400 (the cropped bodies achieve it in Boost) and boost up to ISO 25,600. From the posted samples 6400 on the D3 looks as good as 1600 on the similar-density 5D did, with similar amounts of detail. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT - of interest to PDA users...
It's nothing to do with the age of the aircraft, and everything to do with choices made by the aircraft operator. Just what is provided in the way of services at each seat depends on what the operator specifies, but just about every aircraft being flown today could provide payphone service if the operator so desired; the cabins are all wired, and there is rack-mountable equipment that can easily handle a few hundred phone handsets. My guess is that it simply wasn't being used, and the space taken up by the handset could be used to provide other options (such as a seatback TV screen) that were more desirable to the end user. Nowadays, as some have noted, you can get a phone integrated into the hand-held controller for the seatback entertainment system, but that's still an expensive option, and one that could well be made obsolete in a year or two by services such as in-flight WiFi or even allowing use of cellphones during flight, both of which are being tested by a few operators today. On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 01:11:45PM -0400, Igor Roshchin wrote: David, While you are right about the interference reason, the second statement, I believe, is not accurate. I am not sure how long ago you have flown, but the trend I see is that those phone are removed from the modern aircrafts. As a matter of fact, none of the aircrafts I've flown this year (over 40 flights on American, Continental, Delta, Finnair, Frontier, Southwest, S7, Estonian Air) had built-in phones. Igor Sun Oct 14 11:31:48 EDT 2007 David Savage wrote: What? Terrorists? Airliners are concerned about the possibility of radio/navigation equipment interference, hence the shielding reference. That's why every seat on most modern aircraft have built in payphones. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ?
Having read this thread for a while now, I have a few random thoughts: 1. I have a 645 camera that fits fine in my hand. I never felt cheated that my 35 mm cameras couldn't take a larger format even the advantages of the larger format are obvious. The very definition of the 24x36 sensor as full frame is just because that's how big you can make a sensor that works with the legacy 35 mm lens designs. If for some reason a smaller film format had been dominant (APS-C, for example) this would be a really different discussion. 2. Of course a larger sensor is better with regard to noise. The important question is if the smaller sensor is good enough. If the price of FF sensors come WAY down, then of course Pentax will have to produce a camera using them. The question for Pentax is how expensive that high end camera could be and are they better off chasing the 645D market. Those prices have to come way down before this becomes much more than a professional camera issue. If there was a full frame K10D for $2000 USD I'm not sure how much market impact it would have. So for me, there is a big reason not to buy a FF DSLR now: COST. BTW, I just picked that number out of the air; I have no idea what the cheapest FF DSLR costs. Steve Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/15/2007 2:22 PM Yes. But ultimately, eventually, it's sensor size, whether they're chemical or electronic photon catchers, that determines maximum obtainable image quality. Having a camera whose physical size is pefect for the hand and can/could accommodate a full frame but has an APS sized sensor really feels like a cheat to me and hat disgusts me. Screw Nikon, Canon and the rest. There are limits to how efficient you can make a sensor, any sensor. There is a reason, and or me, valid, why I will NOT purchase a lens that will not fill a full frame - and that be 24x36mm or there abouts. When I get the time, I'll derive the maximum performance limits (but never actually achievable) for both APS and full frame sensors. Regards, Bob... Art is not a reflection of reality. it is the reality of a reflection. -Jean Luc Godard - Original Message - From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bob Blakely wrote: From my point of view... Only so many photons are captured by a sensor element (pixel, if you will) of a given size and that to a certain efficiency. There is an upper limit. Further, everything that has a temperature generates noise in proportion to that temperature. There is a lower limit. The upper limit can only be expanded by increasing the element size to capture more photons per element. Maintaining the effective resolution then means increasing the overall sensor size (to full frame?) The lower limit can only be pushed further down by operating the sensor at a lower temperature. Currently, the K10D shows noise beginning on the side where most of the hotter the electronics is located. Red pixels light up first, then green, then blue. Noise temperature can be further reduced by active cooling. I suspect that this is not likely to happen with digital cameras any time soon, sensors for astrophotography and other scientific purposes excepted. Everybody knows this, and ultimately the larger sensors will prevail. When this happens, lenses with APS size image circles will become as useless, practically speaking, as 8 tracks. Have you noticed that the upper ISO limits for digital sensors and film are about the same, 1600 and sometimes 3200? Tere is a reason for this and ultimately it is the physics of noise that produce thes limits. Noise power, N = k*T*B*Nf, where: k = Boltzmann's constant; T = Absolute temperature; B = Noise Bandwidth of the sensor or film; Nf = Noise figure, a measure of sensor efficiency. Bottom line... there are rules and nature enforces them. So... where's my effecient full frame sensor? Regards, Bob... In the Nikon D3. Improvements in fill factor (reducing the wasted space between sensor sites) have significantly increased sensor performance by increasing the effective area of the sensor sites by a fair margin. The current crop oof 10/12MP APS-C sensors are capable of ISO6400 with quality superior to the old ones at 1600-3200, and can match a 5D at 1600-3200. The D3, which is unique in being a low-density sensor with the new sensor tech, is capable of natve ISO 6400 (the cropped bodies achieve it in Boost) and boost up to ISO 25,600. From the posted samples 6400 on the D3 looks as good as 1600 on the similar-density 5D did, with similar amounts of detail. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. !SIG:4713afe7112742065032995! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ?
On Oct 15, 2007, at 11:42 AM, Steve Desjardins wrote: BTW, I just picked that number out of the air; I have no idea what the cheapest FF DSLR costs. Just FYI, this whole round of FF debate was predicated on a rumor that Canon would be releasing a 24x36 mm sensor body in the inexpensive ~$2000 MSRP range. Currently the least expensive 24x36mm sensor body is the Canon EOS 5D which BH Photo sells for $2300 sans lens. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: GESO: SF Fleet Week Air Show (Blue Angels More)
FWIW - I started to look @ them last night just decided there were too many - I'm on dial up. A few of your best would have gotten me to look @ them. Kenneth Waller http://tinyurl.com/272u2f - Original Message - From: John Celio [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: GESO: SF Fleet Week Air Show (Blue Angels More) Did my post not make it to the general list? I've never seen something get no responses. Perhaps there were too many pics in the gallery? I kinda thought they were good... John -- http://www.neovenator.com http://www.cafepress.com/neovenatorphoto - Original Message - From: John Celio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PDML@pdml.net Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2007 4:42 PM Subject: GESO: SF Fleet Week Air Show (Blue Angels More) http://picasaweb.google.com/neopifex/AirShow2007?authkey=9Paapknvlfo There are 59 (!) photos in the gallery (I really need an editor...), so if you want to try a small handful first, try this link: http://www.neovenator.com/2007/10/big-gallery-of-air-show-photos-blue.html Those are a few of my favorites, though I had a hard time picking them out. The one I posted last week is part of the main gallery, though I haven't had time to try that de-blurring software on it yet. It took me long enough to get through all 321 (!) shots I took at the show! All photos were taken with the K500mm f4.5 at approx 1/2000, f8, ISO 400. John Celio -- http://www.neovenator.com http://www.cafepress.com/neovenatorphoto -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Signing Photo's
Dave - I use a Sharpie Permanent Marker, ultra fine point, black. Kenneth Waller http://tinyurl.com/272u2f - Original Message - From: David J Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Signing Photo's For those that do sign their work, what pen(s) do you use. I notice a lot of my fellow equine photographers sign the sale print, some were that can be seen, but not to distractiong for the photo. To show Copyright notices as explained to me., Dave -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Lens Neglect
So if the red channel only is blowing out detail, what do you do? Underexpose? Don't you then loose all non-red detail? (never really used the RGB channel histograms before). dk On 10/15/07, Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Check the red channel of the histogram on the camera. I learned earlier this year, after shooting some cardinals, that even tho the overall histogram was within bounds, when I looked @ the red channel, I was blowing out red details. -- http://www.pbase.com/davekennedy Ottawa Valley, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Lens Neglect
For some reason, when i photograph red flowers, all i get is glob of red and no detail. Check the red channel of the histogram on the camera. I learned earlier this year, after shooting some cardinals, that even tho the overall histogram was within bounds, when I looked @ the red channel, I was blowing out red details. Kenneth Waller http://tinyurl.com/272u2f - Original Message - From: David J Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PESO: Lens Neglect Lovely shot Paul. For some reason, when i photograph red flowers, all i get is glob of red and no detail. You have a lot on this one. Dave On 10/14/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a superb lens that I don't use often enough: the K 135/2.5. Here's a K10D shot at f2.5/1.500th ISO 100. http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6528958 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Glorious Gourd
Great! I love the color in this one and the expressions are great :) rg2 On 10/15/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not sure what you mean, but I appreciate the comments. Thanks for looking. Paul -- Original message -- From: David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] It generates a detached feeling for me, and as such doesn't draw me in hold my interest. Cheers, Dave On 10/15/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Another shot with the K 135/2.5 at the farmer's market this afternoon. http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6529425size=lg -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- the subject of a photograph is far less important than its composition -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Glorious Gourd
Thanks Rebekah. Paul -- Original message -- From: Rebekah [EMAIL PROTECTED] Great! I love the color in this one and the expressions are great :) rg2 On 10/15/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not sure what you mean, but I appreciate the comments. Thanks for looking. Paul -- Original message -- From: David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] It generates a detached feeling for me, and as such doesn't draw me in hold my interest. Cheers, Dave On 10/15/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Another shot with the K 135/2.5 at the farmer's market this afternoon. http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6529425size=lg -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- the subject of a photograph is far less important than its composition -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ?
I don't feel cheated, but... well maybe. Recall that we were expecting a FF DSLR camera from Pentax, first one out the door. OK, that's water under the bridge, but the technology existed then (albeit likely implemented incorrectly) for a FF DSLR. Four - five years later things have changed. In my mind the reason for going less than FF was purely sales/marketing/profit driven. That's understandable, one must make a product to sell a product, sell a product to make a profit, make a profit to survive. Back to the main point. Since I seem to be getting excellent results from my non-digital-optimized lenses, I have no need or desire to buy an APS-sized lens when I fully expect Pentax to either produce a FF camera when the time comes, or throw in the towel if they don't. In either case, I'm not going to throw money away on a lens form factor I don't anticipate surviving, and if it does will likely be applicable to the bottom feeder cameras on the market. Tom C. From: Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yes. But ultimately, eventually, it's sensor size, whether they're chemical or electronic photon catchers, that determines maximum obtainable image quality. Having a camera whose physical size is pefect for the hand and can/could accommodate a full frame but has an APS sized sensor really feels like a cheat to me and hat disgusts me. Screw Nikon, Canon and the rest. There are limits to how efficient you can make a sensor, any sensor. There is a reason, and or me, valid, why I will NOT purchase a lens that will not fill a full frame - and that be 24x36mm or there abouts. When I get the time, I'll derive the maximum performance limits (but never actually achievable) for both APS and full frame sensors. Regards, Bob... Art is not a reflection of reality. it is the reality of a reflection. -Jean Luc Godard - Original Message - From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bob Blakely wrote: From my point of view... Only so many photons are captured by a sensor element (pixel, if you will) of a given size and that to a certain efficiency. There is an upper limit. Further, everything that has a temperature generates noise in proportion to that temperature. There is a lower limit. The upper limit can only be expanded by increasing the element size to capture more photons per element. Maintaining the effective resolution then means increasing the overall sensor size (to full frame?) The lower limit can only be pushed further down by operating the sensor at a lower temperature. Currently, the K10D shows noise beginning on the side where most of the hotter the electronics is located. Red pixels light up first, then green, then blue. Noise temperature can be further reduced by active cooling. I suspect that this is not likely to happen with digital cameras any time soon, sensors for astrophotography and other scientific purposes excepted. Everybody knows this, and ultimately the larger sensors will prevail. When this happens, lenses with APS size image circles will become as useless, practically speaking, as 8 tracks. Have you noticed that the upper ISO limits for digital sensors and film are about the same, 1600 and sometimes 3200? Tere is a reason for this and ultimately it is the physics of noise that produce thes limits. Noise power, N = k*T*B*Nf, where: k = Boltzmann's constant; T = Absolute temperature; B = Noise Bandwidth of the sensor or film; Nf = Noise figure, a measure of sensor efficiency. Bottom line... there are rules and nature enforces them. So... where's my effecient full frame sensor? Regards, Bob... In the Nikon D3. Improvements in fill factor (reducing the wasted space between sensor sites) have significantly increased sensor performance by increasing the effective area of the sensor sites by a fair margin. The current crop oof 10/12MP APS-C sensors are capable of ISO6400 with quality superior to the old ones at 1600-3200, and can match a 5D at 1600-3200. The D3, which is unique in being a low-density sensor with the new sensor tech, is capable of natve ISO 6400 (the cropped bodies achieve it in Boost) and boost up to ISO 25,600. From the posted samples 6400 on the D3 looks as good as 1600 on the similar-density 5D did, with similar amounts of detail. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA)?
Well, that's you, and you were talking about you and that's good. I was talking about me. No one should assume that I'm implying that others should want what I want. FYI, I also own a 645NII with a 645 for backup as well as a 67II with a 67 for backup. I find the 35mm size to be just perfect for my hands. I also find the range of 35mm lenses to be better and more versatile, and I find the 35mm lenses to be easier to wield than the 645 lenses of equivalent angle of view. Further, I won't get the speed out of the MF lenses that I crave. Hell, the only time the 645s come out of hiding is when I'm cajoled into shooting someone's wedding (Gawd I hate those), and the only time the 67s come out is when I'm shooting scenics or I want to scare someone. To me the 35mm format, arising from the film size used in old time movies, has just the quality vs. versatility tradeoff that I prefer. It's almost as perfect as 90 feet between bases. From everything I've read, I'm not alone in this evaluation of the formats. I want the best quality I can get from Pentax in the 35mm body format. You, of course, are free to evaluate everything differently, after all, you're you. I'm a querky fella. I shoot only Pentax - and pentax glass or my Argus (C3) or my Speed Graphic cameras. Cost is not an issue. Regards, Bob... Art is not a reflection of reality. it is the reality of a reflection. -Jean Luc Godard - Original Message - From: Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED] Having read this thread for a while now, I have a few random thoughts: 1. I have a 645 camera that fits fine in my hand. I never felt cheated that my 35 mm cameras couldn't take a larger format even the advantages of the larger format are obvious. The very definition of the 24x36 sensor as full frame is just because that's how big you can make a sensor that works with the legacy 35 mm lens designs. If for some reason a smaller film format had been dominant (APS-C, for example) this would be a really different discussion. 2. Of course a larger sensor is better with regard to noise. The important question is if the smaller sensor is good enough. If the price of FF sensors come WAY down, then of course Pentax will have to produce a camera using them. The question for Pentax is how expensive that high end camera could be and are they better off chasing the 645D market. Those prices have to come way down before this becomes much more than a professional camera issue. If there was a full frame K10D for $2000 USD I'm not sure how much market impact it would have. So for me, there is a big reason not to buy a FF DSLR now: COST. BTW, I just picked that number out of the air; I have no idea what the cheapest FF DSLR costs. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Lens Neglect
So if the red channel only is blowing out detail, what do you do? Underexpose? I back down the overall exposure until the red channel is within bounds. Don't you then loose all non-red detail? No they become somewhat under exposed. In my cardinal images, It didn't take much correction to prevent red channel blow out, but yes doing this will potentially underexpose non red detail which you should be able to recover in post processing, whereas blown out red detail is gone if you don't bring it within bounds. Kenneth Waller http://tinyurl.com/272u2f - Original Message - From: Dave Kennedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PESO: Lens Neglect So if the red channel only is blowing out detail, what do you do? Underexpose? Don't you then loose all non-red detail? (never really used the RGB channel histograms before). dk On 10/15/07, Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Check the red channel of the histogram on the camera. I learned earlier this year, after shooting some cardinals, that even tho the overall histogram was within bounds, when I looked @ the red channel, I was blowing out red details. -- http://www.pbase.com/davekennedy Ottawa Valley, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA)?
Sure. We all buy what we buy based on our own needs, wants, finances, permission from the wife, etc. g Pentax has to consider it's entire market. Maybe they have enough RD money from Hoya to flirt with a $2K FF DSLR. I'd be glad to see it just for what it would represent. I also know that they feel a commitment to the 645D market which they may see as their entry into the pro market. If financial survival is a looming problem, that affects design decisions. If you're Canon, of course you make everything. I'm frankly amazed how long it's taken Nikon to get around to it. As I said, if the threat of going under is less pressing, maybe they'll consider a broader product line approach. And maybe some day if my wife agrees . . . vbg Steve Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/15/2007 3:34 PM Well, that's you, and you were talking about you and that's good. I was talking about me. No one should assume that I'm implying that others should want what I want. FYI, I also own a 645NII with a 645 for backup as well as a 67II with a 67 for backup. I find the 35mm size to be just perfect for my hands. I also find the range of 35mm lenses to be better and more versatile, and I find the 35mm lenses to be easier to wield than the 645 lenses of equivalent angle of view. Further, I won't get the speed out of the MF lenses that I crave. Hell, the only time the 645s come out of hiding is when I'm cajoled into shooting someone's wedding (Gawd I hate those), and the only time the 67s come out is when I'm shooting scenics or I want to scare someone. To me the 35mm format, arising from the film size used in old time movies, has just the quality vs. versatility tradeoff that I prefer. It's almost as perfect as 90 feet between bases. From everything I've read, I'm not alone in this evaluation of the formats. I want the best quality I can get from Pentax in the 35mm body format. You, of course, are free to evaluate everything differently, after all, you're you. I'm a querky fella. I shoot only Pentax - and pentax glass or my Argus (C3) or my Speed Graphic cameras. Cost is not an issue. Regards, Bob... Art is not a reflection of reality. it is the reality of a reflection. -Jean Luc Godard - Original Message - From: Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED] Having read this thread for a while now, I have a few random thoughts: 1. I have a 645 camera that fits fine in my hand. I never felt cheated that my 35 mm cameras couldn't take a larger format even the advantages of the larger format are obvious. The very definition of the 24x36 sensor as full frame is just because that's how big you can make a sensor that works with the legacy 35 mm lens designs. If for some reason a smaller film format had been dominant (APS-C, for example) this would be a really different discussion. 2. Of course a larger sensor is better with regard to noise. The important question is if the smaller sensor is good enough. If the price of FF sensors come WAY down, then of course Pentax will have to produce a camera using them. The question for Pentax is how expensive that high end camera could be and are they better off chasing the 645D market. Those prices have to come way down before this becomes much more than a professional camera issue. If there was a full frame K10D for $2000 USD I'm not sure how much market impact it would have. So for me, there is a big reason not to buy a FF DSLR now: COST. BTW, I just picked that number out of the air; I have no idea what the cheapest FF DSLR costs. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. !SIG:4713c21e60531052917818! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ?
I too was getting excellent results from my non-digital-optimized lenses. Only problem was, non of them were wide enough. I looked all over the place, but couldn't find a rectilinear lens wider than 15mm in the Pentax stable. Of course, once I bought one DA lens, it was easier to buy a second one, and then a third, etc. William Robb On 10/15/07, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't feel cheated, but... well maybe. Recall that we were expecting a FF DSLR camera from Pentax, first one out the door. OK, that's water under the bridge, but the technology existed then (albeit likely implemented incorrectly) for a FF DSLR. Four - five years later things have changed. In my mind the reason for going less than FF was purely sales/marketing/profit driven. That's understandable, one must make a product to sell a product, sell a product to make a profit, make a profit to survive. Back to the main point. Since I seem to be getting excellent results from my non-digital-optimized lenses, I have no need or desire to buy an APS-sized lens when I fully expect Pentax to either produce a FF camera when the time comes, or throw in the towel if they don't. In either case, I'm not going to throw money away on a lens form factor I don't anticipate surviving, and if it does will likely be applicable to the bottom feeder cameras on the market. Tom C. From: Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yes. But ultimately, eventually, it's sensor size, whether they're chemical or electronic photon catchers, that determines maximum obtainable image quality. Having a camera whose physical size is pefect for the hand and can/could accommodate a full frame but has an APS sized sensor really feels like a cheat to me and hat disgusts me. Screw Nikon, Canon and the rest. There are limits to how efficient you can make a sensor, any sensor. There is a reason, and or me, valid, why I will NOT purchase a lens that will not fill a full frame - and that be 24x36mm or there abouts. When I get the time, I'll derive the maximum performance limits (but never actually achievable) for both APS and full frame sensors. Regards, Bob... Art is not a reflection of reality. it is the reality of a reflection. -Jean Luc Godard - Original Message - From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bob Blakely wrote: From my point of view... Only so many photons are captured by a sensor element (pixel, if you will) of a given size and that to a certain efficiency. There is an upper limit. Further, everything that has a temperature generates noise in proportion to that temperature. There is a lower limit. The upper limit can only be expanded by increasing the element size to capture more photons per element. Maintaining the effective resolution then means increasing the overall sensor size (to full frame?) The lower limit can only be pushed further down by operating the sensor at a lower temperature. Currently, the K10D shows noise beginning on the side where most of the hotter the electronics is located. Red pixels light up first, then green, then blue. Noise temperature can be further reduced by active cooling. I suspect that this is not likely to happen with digital cameras any time soon, sensors for astrophotography and other scientific purposes excepted. Everybody knows this, and ultimately the larger sensors will prevail. When this happens, lenses with APS size image circles will become as useless, practically speaking, as 8 tracks. Have you noticed that the upper ISO limits for digital sensors and film are about the same, 1600 and sometimes 3200? Tere is a reason for this and ultimately it is the physics of noise that produce thes limits. Noise power, N = k*T*B*Nf, where: k = Boltzmann's constant; T = Absolute temperature; B = Noise Bandwidth of the sensor or film; Nf = Noise figure, a measure of sensor efficiency. Bottom line... there are rules and nature enforces them. So... where's my effecient full frame sensor? Regards, Bob... In the Nikon D3. Improvements in fill factor (reducing the wasted space between sensor sites) have significantly increased sensor performance by increasing the effective area of the sensor sites by a fair margin. The current crop oof 10/12MP APS-C sensors are capable of ISO6400 with quality superior to the old ones at 1600-3200, and can match a 5D at 1600-3200. The D3, which is unique in being a low-density sensor with the new sensor tech, is capable of natve ISO 6400 (the cropped bodies achieve it in Boost) and boost up to ISO 25,600. From the posted samples 6400 on the D3 looks as good as 1600 on the similar-density 5D did, with similar amounts of detail. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ?
I was first motivated to buy DA lenses for the same reason. I had to have wide glass to shoot room and car interiors. The DA 16-45 was a partial solution, and it turned out to be an excellent all-around lens as well. The DA 12-24 has proven to be an even better lens and an optimum solution for interiors. Now, I'm feeling that lenses designed for the APS-C image circle will generally outperform the older full frame lenses, all else being equal. And I'm more concerned with getting the results I want and need right now, rather than what I might want to do if and when different hardware becomes available. Today's photo is always the most important one. Paul -- Original message -- From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] I too was getting excellent results from my non-digital-optimized lenses. Only problem was, non of them were wide enough. I looked all over the place, but couldn't find a rectilinear lens wider than 15mm in the Pentax stable. Of course, once I bought one DA lens, it was easier to buy a second one, and then a third, etc. William Robb On 10/15/07, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't feel cheated, but... well maybe. Recall that we were expecting a FF DSLR camera from Pentax, first one out the door. OK, that's water under the bridge, but the technology existed then (albeit likely implemented incorrectly) for a FF DSLR. Four - five years later things have changed. In my mind the reason for going less than FF was purely sales/marketing/profit driven. That's understandable, one must make a product to sell a product, sell a product to make a profit, make a profit to survive. Back to the main point. Since I seem to be getting excellent results from my non-digital-optimized lenses, I have no need or desire to buy an APS-sized lens when I fully expect Pentax to either produce a FF camera when the time comes, or throw in the towel if they don't. In either case, I'm not going to throw money away on a lens form factor I don't anticipate surviving, and if it does will likely be applicable to the bottom feeder cameras on the market. Tom C. From: Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yes. But ultimately, eventually, it's sensor size, whether they're chemical or electronic photon catchers, that determines maximum obtainable image quality. Having a camera whose physical size is pefect for the hand and can/could accommodate a full frame but has an APS sized sensor really feels like a cheat to me and hat disgusts me. Screw Nikon, Canon and the rest. There are limits to how efficient you can make a sensor, any sensor. There is a reason, and or me, valid, why I will NOT purchase a lens that will not fill a full frame - and that be 24x36mm or there abouts. When I get the time, I'll derive the maximum performance limits (but never actually achievable) for both APS and full frame sensors. Regards, Bob... Art is not a reflection of reality. it is the reality of a reflection. -Jean Luc Godard - Original Message - From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bob Blakely wrote: From my point of view... Only so many photons are captured by a sensor element (pixel, if you will) of a given size and that to a certain efficiency. There is an upper limit. Further, everything that has a temperature generates noise in proportion to that temperature. There is a lower limit. The upper limit can only be expanded by increasing the element size to capture more photons per element. Maintaining the effective resolution then means increasing the overall sensor size (to full frame?) The lower limit can only be pushed further down by operating the sensor at a lower temperature. Currently, the K10D shows noise beginning on the side where most of the hotter the electronics is located. Red pixels light up first, then green, then blue. Noise temperature can be further reduced by active cooling. I suspect that this is not likely to happen with digital cameras any time soon, sensors for astrophotography and other scientific purposes excepted. Everybody knows this, and ultimately the larger sensors will prevail. When this happens, lenses with APS size image circles will become as useless, practically speaking, as 8 tracks. Have you noticed that the upper ISO limits for digital sensors and film are about the same, 1600 and sometimes 3200? Tere is a reason for this and ultimately it is the physics of noise that produce thes limits. Noise power, N = k*T*B*Nf, where: k = Boltzmann's constant; T = Absolute temperature; B = Noise Bandwidth of the sensor or film; Nf = Noise figure, a measure of sensor efficiency. Bottom line... there are rules and nature enforces them.
Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ?
I understand. I've often wished for a wider lens, I just haven't been willing to pay for one. Tom C. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: anyone in the know (even under NDA) ? Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 20:10:50 + I was first motivated to buy DA lenses for the same reason. I had to have wide glass to shoot room and car interiors. The DA 16-45 was a partial solution, and it turned out to be an excellent all-around lens as well. The DA 12-24 has proven to be an even better lens and an optimum solution for interiors. Now, I'm feeling that lenses designed for the APS-C image circle will generally outperform the older full frame lenses, all else being equal. And I'm more concerned with getting the results I want and need right now, rather than what I might want to do if and when different hardware becomes available. Today's photo is always the most important one. Paul -- Original message -- From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] I too was getting excellent results from my non-digital-optimized lenses. Only problem was, non of them were wide enough. I looked all over the place, but couldn't find a rectilinear lens wider than 15mm in the Pentax stable. Of course, once I bought one DA lens, it was easier to buy a second one, and then a third, etc. William Robb On 10/15/07, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't feel cheated, but... well maybe. Recall that we were expecting a FF DSLR camera from Pentax, first one out the door. OK, that's water under the bridge, but the technology existed then (albeit likely implemented incorrectly) for a FF DSLR. Four - five years later things have changed. In my mind the reason for going less than FF was purely sales/marketing/profit driven. That's understandable, one must make a product to sell a product, sell a product to make a profit, make a profit to survive. Back to the main point. Since I seem to be getting excellent results from my non-digital-optimized lenses, I have no need or desire to buy an APS-sized lens when I fully expect Pentax to either produce a FF camera when the time comes, or throw in the towel if they don't. In either case, I'm not going to throw money away on a lens form factor I don't anticipate surviving, and if it does will likely be applicable to the bottom feeder cameras on the market. Tom C. From: Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yes. But ultimately, eventually, it's sensor size, whether they're chemical or electronic photon catchers, that determines maximum obtainable image quality. Having a camera whose physical size is pefect for the hand and can/could accommodate a full frame but has an APS sized sensor really feels like a cheat to me and hat disgusts me. Screw Nikon, Canon and the rest. There are limits to how efficient you can make a sensor, any sensor. There is a reason, and or me, valid, why I will NOT purchase a lens that will not fill a full frame - and that be 24x36mm or there abouts. When I get the time, I'll derive the maximum performance limits (but never actually achievable) for both APS and full frame sensors. Regards, Bob... Art is not a reflection of reality. it is the reality of a reflection. -Jean Luc Godard - Original Message - From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bob Blakely wrote: From my point of view... Only so many photons are captured by a sensor element (pixel, if you will) of a given size and that to a certain efficiency. There is an upper limit. Further, everything that has a temperature generates noise in proportion to that temperature. There is a lower limit. The upper limit can only be expanded by increasing the element size to capture more photons per element. Maintaining the effective resolution then means increasing the overall sensor size (to full frame?) The lower limit can only be pushed further down by operating the sensor at a lower temperature. Currently, the K10D shows noise beginning on the side where most of the hotter the electronics is located. Red pixels light up first, then green, then blue. Noise temperature can be further reduced by active cooling. I suspect that this is not likely to happen with digital cameras any time soon, sensors for astrophotography and other scientific purposes excepted. Everybody knows this, and ultimately the larger sensors will prevail. When this happens, lenses with APS size image circles will become as useless, practically speaking, as 8 tracks. Have you noticed that the upper ISO limits for
Re: PESO: Lens Neglect
Humm. Never thought to look at just the one channel. I'll go back and see what some of them look like. Dave On 10/15/07, Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So if the red channel only is blowing out detail, what do you do? Underexpose? I back down the overall exposure until the red channel is within bounds. Don't you then loose all non-red detail? No they become somewhat under exposed. In my cardinal images, It didn't take much correction to prevent red channel blow out, but yes doing this will potentially underexpose non red detail which you should be able to recover in post processing, whereas blown out red detail is gone if you don't bring it within bounds. Kenneth Waller http://tinyurl.com/272u2f - Original Message - From: Dave Kennedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PESO: Lens Neglect So if the red channel only is blowing out detail, what do you do? Underexpose? Don't you then loose all non-red detail? (never really used the RGB channel histograms before). dk On 10/15/07, Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Check the red channel of the histogram on the camera. I learned earlier this year, after shooting some cardinals, that even tho the overall histogram was within bounds, when I looked @ the red channel, I was blowing out red details. -- http://www.pbase.com/davekennedy Ottawa Valley, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
