Re: Superior Pentax
Hi Boris, on 27 Feb 03 you wrote in pentax.list: Darn, I've responded to the wrong address. I meant to be private response. Not that there is any slip of tongue, but I simply meant it to be private. No problem - I also make this mistake regularly... ;-) Cheers, Heiko
Re: Superior Pentax
Hi Boris, on 09 Feb 03 you wrote in pentax.list: If you decide to sell it anyway, don't forget to give me a call, that is send an e-mail... If you are still interested in my 28-70/4.0 then you can have it. I've decided to sell it as I prefer my 28-105 Powerzoom. I have also a SMC FA 28-105/4-5.6 (without Powerzoom) and a SMC A 25-105/2.5 for sale. And a FB1+FC-1 Finder for the LX. You can see these items here: www.mycroft.de/sale.html I ask for 75,- Euro for the 28-70. I can accept money transfers to my bank account or Paypal. You will have to add a small fee for Paypal and the shipping costs (depending on where you are living ca. 30-40 Euro). Shipping two or three lenses won't be more expensive, so maybe you or a friend of yours can make use of one... Please tell me if you want the lens or not as I will put it on eBay otherwise. Regards, Heiko (Germany)
Re: Superior Pentax
There is only one version of Portra 800. The VC and NC options are for 160 and 400 only. There is also a C-41 BW Portra 400 BW. Portra (For PORTRA(it), comes in VC and NC. As a portrait film, it excels in skin tones. Caution: with VC, fair skinned women look best, average skin next and ruddy skin not as good. With a properly exposed negative, NC works best overall. I personally prefer the PORTRA negative film(s) as opposed to any others for portraits.
RE: Superior Pentax
-Original Message- From: Michael Cross [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 11:49 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Superior Pentax There is only one version of Portra 800. The VC and NC options are for 160 and 400 only. There is also a C-41 BW Portra 400 BW. As well as tungsten and UC (ultra color) versions. tv
Re: Superior Pentax
From: Heiko Hamann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I just want to tell you of an experience of success that I had on Friday. We were invited to a wedding last summer and our friends did ask me, if I could make some photos. I didn't feel like doing it, so I only took my MZ-5n with the SMC-FA 28-70/4 and the AF500FTZ and shot 4 or 5 rolls of film with the camera set to complete auto modes. They had also asked some other friends and so we came together last Friday and had a look at 40 (!) films containing 36 pictures each. Really cruel... From: Frits Wüthrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] So I think a better lab would have improved my photographs immense. Comparing camera's/lenses based on results of the prints from (different) labs is .. well ... not so straightforward, I would say. At my brother wedding I also took pictures with my Mz-5n and 28-70/4. I used Fuji Superia 100 and processed films in few labs. Each lab made different pictures in color, and in sharpnes (!!!). I've also took black and withe C-41 pictures and two labs made pictures without black and without white :-) But the final effect is not only in lab but in our lovely Pentax gear.In Practical Photography from April 1999 is first part of Huge lens test In this issue there were 20 standard zooms including SMC-FA 28-70/4. Lens tests is performed by TIPA (Technical Image Press Association). Tipa use Hasselblad's Ealing MTF equipment to permform the test. Only Contax and Leica is opticaly better but remember abaut $. Nikon, Canon, Minolta are far away. They describ optical performence of Pentax: Very little to complain about. Central detail ranges from very good to excellent. Edges at f/4 are fair to good and improve once the lens stopped down.. In summary: A very nice offering from Pentax mixing good handling with qualityu optics at a cheap price. Definitely one to consider. There is only one problem with this lens - distortion is high from -4.89% (barrel distortion) to +2.43% (picushion), even Pentax SMC-FA 35-80 f/4-5.6 (black old type) has lower distortion. I've noticed that 28-70/4 (now is discontinued in production) was made in Japan and also in Vietnam. My is Made in Vietnam and I don't like its plastic feeling. People also says that this zoom wide open is poor at 28mm. I've just bought on ebay.de SMC- FA 28/2.8 (like new condition in orginal box) for 150 Euro (still waiting for delivery). It will be interesting to compare this two lenses in action (zoom at 28mm).
Re: Superior Pentax
Does it? I'd sure like to see some examples you've done with Portra 800. Doug At 4:24 PM -08002/9/03, Matt Greene wrote, or at least typed: I have no idea of what film sped you were using. But Iimprovesilm inproves your chances over any other speeds. Nearly any camera/flash combination does well with ISO 800 because it allows a greater amount of ambient light to be exposed. Kodak Portra 800 excels at indoor flash pictures. Matt Greene -- Douglas Forrest Brewer Ashwood Lake Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.alphoto.com
Re: Superior Pentax
Heiko, If you decide to sell it anyway, don't forget to give me a call, that is send an e-mail... --- Boris Liberman www.geocities.com/dunno57 www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625
Re: Superior Pentax
On Sunday 09 February 2003 13:29, Heiko Hamann wrote: Comparing camera's/lenses based on results of the prints from (different) labs is .. well ... not so straightforward, I would say. Of course you are right. I didn't want to make an objective comparison but to tell you a nice anecdote of my last experience of success;-) As I said before - I wouldn't have thought that there might be any difference·between SLRs of different manufacturers at all in this case. Despite my critisism I liked your story! -- Frits Wüthrich Pentaxianado
Re: Superior Pentax
Hi, Heiko, I wouldn't discount the photographer being part of the equation. Even with auto-everything cameras, I wonder if maybe hand-holding with more stability could account for much of the difference in sharpness you noticed. regards, frank Heiko Hamann wrote: Hi, I just want to tell you of an experience of success that I had on Friday. We were invited to a wedding last summer and our friends did ask me, if I could make some photos. I didn't feel like doing it, so I only took my MZ-5n with the SMC-FA 28-70/4 and the AF500FTZ and shot 4 or 5 rolls of film with the camera set to complete auto modes. They had also asked some other friends and so we came together last Friday and had a look at 40 (!) films containing 36 pictures each. Really cruel... The experience of success was, that my pictures stick out regarding best sharpness, contrast and brilliance. The difference was significant! As I had used AF and matrix metering, this success cannot be attibuted to the photographer, but the camera system itself. The other pictures were taken with Canon SLRs (afair) which were equipped similar or even better. I wouldn't have thought that there might be any difference between SLRs of different manufacturers at all. But in this case I can clearly say: Pentax is superior! Cheers, Heiko -- The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: Superior Pentax
On Sun, 9 Feb 2003, Peter Smekal wrote: I had the same good experience with this combo in various situations. So much for the 5n Bummer! Bah, the viewfinder still bites.. :) -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
Re: Superior Pentax
Well, you can't always get everything you want. I am not a pro in photography, but I have used Pentax-cameras in my work as anthropologist. I have for instance used the 5n-combo (lense/flash) when shooting festival sceneries at night. I was very satisfied with the result. I am not sure if it had been better with a larger, brighter ... viewfinder. Maybe. Nowadays I favour the LX, in part because of the viewfinder. Skål! On Sun, 9 Feb 2003, Peter Smekal wrote: I had the same good experience with this combo in various situations. So much for the 5n Bummer! Bah, the viewfinder still bites.. :) -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio. Peter Smekal Uppsala, Sweden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Superior Pentax
On Sunday, Feb 9, 2003, at 12:53 Europe/Warsaw, Heiko Hamann wrote: The experience of success was, that my pictures stick out regarding best sharpness, contrast and brilliance. The difference was significant! As I had used AF and matrix metering, this success cannot be attibuted to the photographer, but the camera system itself. The other pictures were taken with Canon SLRs (afair) which were equipped similar or even better. I wouldn't have thought that there might be any difference between SLRs of different manufacturers at all. But in this case I can clearly say: Pentax is superior! I must admit, that it happened, that I was taking pictures head to head with my friend, who uses EOS-300. Canon tends to have awfull cooperation with flash in program mode - sync time is just set to standard sync (in this case 1/90) and it doesn't change with focal length or available light. Pentax' dynamic flash sync system allows you to go down as slow as 1/30 at 28 mm (1/60 at 50 mm, 1/90 at 90 mm and so on), thus allowing to expose background as much as it is possible, not blurring the picture. In Canon you would have to go to not-so-convenient manual mode, or AV (it meters available light only in this mode) - where you would desperately need to use tripod, to avoid image shake at slow sync times in this mode. So the difference was big, and pictures from my MZ-S looked much, much nicer... Regards Sylwek
Re: Superior Pentax
On Sunday, Feb 9, 2003, at 14:05 Europe/Warsaw, Boris Liberman wrote: Heiko, you've done a terrible thing. Now I want to buy 28-70/4 even more than ever so that I can replace my Sigma 28-135/3.8-5.6 IF AF Macro... Hi Boris, I don't think you will gain much by switching from this Sigma to 28-70/4 - my wife has this Pentax, and it doesn't seem to be better then my EX-Sigma. If you can afford, go for new 28-105/3.2-4.5 - that's a really nice lens, for relatively small money! Regards Sylwek
Re: Superior Pentax
Frits, I was also thinking of better films. Perhaps theirs were shot on a poor film for the event. I recently had a friend assist me with a wedding. He shot a Canon Rebel with Canon zoom (consumer grade), used one of my AF360FGZ flashes in Auto mode on it and used film that I provided him. I had all the processing done at my lab. The results are not significantly different than those shot with my MZ-S and primes. More difference in composition, DOF control, timing, etc. than anything. I really would be suprised if that combination was so superior to other makers offerings. Skill of photographer, choice of film and choice of lab can have a profound effect upon the results. Not wanting to bash the ZX-5n or 28-70/4, but I just can't seen them as being so clearly better. I suspect other factors. Bruce Sunday, February 9, 2003, 5:07:01 AM, you wrote: FW Could it be you used a better lab? FW No intention to take down the 5n at all, or you, but I scanned a lot of my FW stuff lately done with various (Pentax) camer's, including my PZ-1, and found FW that what I got on the prints, was in a lot of cases very poor compared with FW the results of the scan. So I think a better lab would have improved my FW photographs immense. Comparing camera's/lenses based on results of the prints FW from (different) labs is .. well ... not so straightforward, I would say. FW Frits FW On Sunday 09 February 2003 11:53, Heiko Hamann wrote: Hi, I just want to tell you of an experience of success that I had on Friday. We were invited to a wedding last summer and our friends did ask me, if I could make some photos. I didn't feel like doing it, so I only took my MZ-5n with the SMC-FA 28-70/4 and the AF500FTZ and shot 4 or 5 rolls of film with the camera set to complete auto modes. They had also asked some other friends and so we came together last Friday and had a look at 40 (!) films containing 36 pictures each. Really cruel... The experience of success was, that my pictures stick out regarding best sharpness, contrast and brilliance. The difference was significant! As I had used AF and matrix metering, this success cannot be attibuted to the photographer, but the camera system itself. The other pictures were taken with Canon SLRs (afair) which were equipped similar or even better. I wouldn't have thought that there might be any difference between SLRs of different manufacturers at all. But in this case I can clearly say: Pentax is superior! Cheers, Heiko
Re: Superior Pentax
--- Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sunday, Feb 9, 2003, at 12:53 Europe/Warsaw, Heiko Hamann wrote: The experience of success was, that my pictures stick out regarding best sharpness, contrast and brilliance. The difference was significant! As I had used AF and matrix metering, this success cannot be attibuted to the photographer, but the camera system itself. The other pictures were taken with Canon SLRs (afair) which were equipped similar or even better. I wouldn't have thought that there might be any difference between SLRs of different manufacturers at all. But in this case I can clearly say: Pentax is superior! I must admit, that it happened, that I was taking pictures head to head with my friend, who uses EOS-300. Canon tends to have awfull cooperation with flash in program mode - sync time is just set to standard sync (in this case 1/90) and it doesn't change with focal length or available light. Pentax' dynamic flash sync system allows you to go down as slow as 1/30 at 28 mm (1/60 at 50 mm, 1/90 at 90 mm and so on), thus allowing to expose background as much as it is possible, not blurring the picture. In Canon you would have to go to not-so-convenient manual mode, or AV (it meters available light only in this mode) - where you would desperately need to use tripod, to avoid image shake at slow sync times in this mode. So the difference was big, and pictures from my MZ-S looked much, much nicer... Regards Sylwek I have no idea of what film sped you were using. But Iimprovesilm inproves your chances over any other speeds. Nearly any camera/flash combination does well with ISO 800 because it allows a greater amount of ambient light to be exposed. Kodak Portra 800 excels at indoor flash pictures. I get it done with YAHOO! DSL! = Matt Greene I get it done with YAHOO! DSL!
Re: Superior Pentax
Congratulations... to Pentax! :-) Now you have a definite reason NOT to get the MZ-S... I think Heiko should do more tests to make sure his MZ-5n was not as good as he thought then. ;-) regards, Alan Chan _ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: Superior Pentax
On Sun, 9 Feb 2003, Matt Greene wrote: Kodak Portra 800 excels at indoor flash pictures. Any idea how it handles skin tones? chris
Re: Superior Pentax
I am very satisfied with the skintones of Portra 800. Chris Brogden wrote: On Sun, 9 Feb 2003, Matt Greene wrote: Kodak Portra 800 excels at indoor flash pictures. Any idea how it handles skin tones? chris
