From: Juan J. Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My MX is black. I haven't tried any chrome MXs...
Apologies Juan, that was the impression I got.
So maybe the 9xx numbers are for black MXs and the 4xx are for
chrome ones?
If this holds true I wonder if this is the same with other bodies offered
... or rather, a question of batteries.
My new MX has no batteries in it, nor does my original MX. What
batteries does the MX use, likewise, the ME S.
The LX takes an SR44, but for some reason one of my LX has a VP76 in it
(which I ~think~ are the required batteries for the MX and ME S). The
Hi,
Don't know if anyone has done this yet (due to the lag between
the archives and real time) but here is a list of some
equivalent numbers for different button cell manufacturers.
SR44 = 357, 7, 541, RW42 (nominally 1.55V)
LR44 = B-LR44, A76, EPX76, RW82, KA76 (nominally 1.3V)
Sorry I don't
It appears that my system has been infected with a malicious worm virus
(W32magistr.39921@mm) sometime in the past few days. My anti-virus program
identified and repaired the damage to my machine, but apparently not in
time to prevent the worm from using my address book to propagate
itself.
My Black MX has a serial starting with 9
Paul
- Original Message -
From: Paul Ewins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 6:56 PM
Subject: Re: MX Variations
From: Juan J. Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My MX is black. I haven't tried any chrome MXs...
In a message dated 25/11/01 11:25:38 GMT Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perhaps it means:
1. Standard
2. Small
3. Super
Anybody really know? Just curious.
4. Sexy
Kind regards
Peter
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to
aimcompute wrote:
Time for a TEAPARTY!!!
To celebrate the end of this thread? Or is that too much to hope...
Bob
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at
A Metz 50MZ5 (but no module) Plus spare Nimh.
40-80
70-210 f4 A
kind regards from sunny Brighton
Peter
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at
Hi,
I have several A lenses and indeed they retract the mount-pin when set to
manual.
I picked up a 200 macro this weekend and noticed the different behavior.
But when I
came home it worked perfectly. BTW as you already mentioned, my 24-90 lens
does
not retract the pin aswell. Maybe the old
Hi,
I've read that it is possible to remove the tripod bracket on the 200
macro. I've
managed to rotate it, but not remove it. BTW. this is a truly awesome
lens, picked
it up this weekend together with an A* 300 f4.
Frank
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
Why would you want to remove it? Does it get in the way? Or do you just
want to know how to remove it just for the sake of knowing how to remove it?
Len
---
-Original Message-
From: Frank Wajer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 6:16 AM
To: pdml
Subject: how to
I have our Tournament of Champions to shoot(indoor)
this Sunday and will be using those open
finger gloves with the flap.Use them out side
for work too,very warm
Dave
Begin Original Message
From: Tom Rittenhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 20:58:00 -0500
To: [EMAIL
At 04:36 26-11-2001 -0500, you wrote:
From: Paul Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: SP MX Everyready case trade
Hi,
I'm trying to get a Spotmatic Everyready case in reasnoble condition. Is
there any one who would consider trading one for an MX everyready case.
Its for a friend of my fathers who
Paul J. wrote:
Its for a friend of my fathers who has had a SP since new and has worn the
ever ready case out.
Paul,
This is cool. Must be an interesting guy.
--Mike
P.S. The cases come up fairly often on eBay. You may have to keep checking
back.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss
Mark Cassino wrote:
The day I can't deal with something new, the day I lock into looking back
instead of looking forward, is the day you all should start spading dirt
over the box I've locked myself in.
Anyone who isn't looking into digital at this point is as likely to get
locked out as locked
Man... $13,000 for the one that plays 33 and 45 rpm, and $20,000 for the
one that plays 78s as well...
If I was rich, I'd totally have one of these. ;)
Actually, even the rich guys (and audiophiles are fools for forking over
their own money) don't tend to buy these. They don't sound that
I have been holding off on replying until I got home to look at my
MX. But I do have an Excel file on my computer with all serial numbers of
cameras and lenses.
I have a chrome MX. The serial number starts with a 9.
César Matamoros II
-Original Message-
From: Mike Johnston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 7:14 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Laser Turntable OT
Man... $13,000 for the one that plays 33 and 45 rpm, and $20,000 for the
one that plays 78s as well...
If I was rich, I'd
I not sure if it is cheaper than Minolta ADI, the (D) lenses and the Maxxum
7 film or Dimage 5 7 digital. The Maxxum 7 is cheaper than the MZ-S and if
the Maxxum 5 also does it it might be cheaper than the MZ-6.
Kent Gittings
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
I just tried some TMax through Adorama's pro-lab (NYC) and am extremely
pleased with the quality of the results: Clean negs and beautiful prints.
Regards,
/\/\ick...
++
||
__/) Mick Maguire |
| Email: [EMAIL
Nice try, Paul g. My black bodied MX is #4***
What is more interesting to me is that the only numbers that have
appeared for MX bodies are either in the 4*** series or the
9 series. Does anyone have an MX with numbers somewhere in
between?
Paul Ewins wrote:
So maybe the
can I proffer superfluous? ;o)
Seriously I think that the epithets given to most products these days are
purely designed by marketing to tap into consumer perceptions: like adding
GTI or GTE or X to a car name, it's not so much what it stands for (eg. GTI
was supposed to mean Grand Tourer
I would recommend www.batteries.com they list batteries by camera model, and
have a whole page on Pentax:
http://www.batteries.com/drilldown.asp?mfgdsc=Pentaxmfgcode=PENTname=Camer
agrpdsc=Cameragrp=CAMERASID=BA59FE846E0C481A88A43816EFA8E0B9type=modelf
iltercode=
They are great if you have a
Support
by Mick Maguire,
USA:
I like the subject - 19th century trains and bridges
have appeal. Massive beams, lots of rivets, built to
last. Definitely pre-electronic stuff. This shot is
effective in showing that.Good DOF and textures on the
anvil-shaped piece. The toning suits the subject.
I got beautiful results using Optima II on some fall foliage photos this
year. Very very nice colors. This is one of my favourite color print films.
Regards,
/\/\ick...
++
||
__/) Mick Maguire |
| Email: [EMAIL
Your BSing the point. There is no tolerance level for common focus. Common
focus means common focus period. While there is no standard there is a
precise definition which you can hold to a higher standard if you wish. And
you can test this easily. Point the camera lens at a bright star (3rd
I sure wouldn't buy one via mail order. At that price, if I wanted one, I'd
make sure I had a chance to listen to a few of my own records and I'd insist
on a trial period so I could make sure it satisfied me working in my own
environment. I guess you've actually listened to one, then? How
Just back from vacationing/apartment shopping in Paris and I've got a
question about the light meter in my k1000 and vivitar 28-90 f2.8 -3.5. I
was shooting available darkness using tmax 400 pushed to 1600, it was quite
dark (got there right at the start of Mass), but no matter what I metered
How do you do that?
Paris, Leonard wrote:
I need a turntable so I can
digitize all of my LP collection.
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/pow/enter.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/cameras/pentax_repair_shops.html
-
This message is
Well most digicams that state 3.34 MP are truly that size. However several
models of 2 companies in particular list their interpolated resolution as
the actual size of the camera and state the actual CCD array size in smaller
print.
Kent Gittings
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
Why did just about every other maker also stop making most pr all of their
manual bodies. Because they can't make enough from selling them to break
even. Hardly anybody buys new ones when there are plenty of used ones
around. Even though the last K1000 bodies were made in China they still cost
The meter in the K1000 is pretty poor. It doesn't react well in low
light, and sometimes needs a hit of bright light to get it working
properly.
A good spot meter, like the Pentax digital spotmeter, has a greater
range and is far more sensitive. It's perfect for those hard-to-meter
situations
I don't know how my comments were stripped off the original reply but I
didn't see them. Here it is again.
I sure wouldn't buy one via mail order. At that price, if I wanted one, I'd
make sure I had a chance to listen to a few of my own records and I'd insist
on a trial period so I could make
So I assume you have tried the manual focusing option on all these cameras
that have that option?
Kent Gittings
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Frantisek Vlcek
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2001 1:53 PM
To: Chris Brogden
Subject: Re: why
None of the pro medium zooms from any of the makers are even close to
macro. Personally I'd recommend the Sigma 70-200/2.8 EX. I shoot one in
Minolta and it's as good as the Minolta G lens which most people and
magazines rate better than the Pentax. You could save enough over the Pentax
to buy a
The sound card in my computer has an auxilliary audio input. There is
software available that will take that audio and save it to a wave file.
Then, you can convert it to a suitably high bit-rate MP3 and put over a
hundred songs on a CD-R. I want to do this to keep from playing my original
Fred wrote:
. I guess that I am as dubious as Mark is as to Pål's statement that
the FA* 200/4 Macro is sharper than the A* 200/4 Macro. If Pål is
correct, then the FA* lens must ~INDEED~ be truly incredible, since I
have found the A* 200/4 Macro to be the sharpest lens that I have ever
Bob Poe wrote:
Fast Forward by Albano Garcia and his soon to be
replaced LX. The distortion of this view from the
fisheye seems to me a perfect combination for this
subject. The blurred edges and soft gradations of
blue seem to highten the essence of this experience.
Thanks for the kind
Thanks Luis, I find the hot area a bit much too, it was a very bright sunny
day when I took this from under the bridge. In hindsight, perhaps I should
have waited for some more cloud. I agree about the wall too, fortunately
that is something easily corrected by a very slight rotation.
Regards,
Rob said:
I hope the 200/4FA* bokeh is better than the A*, I'm not all that
impressed with it.
Yes, it is better. In fact, what I really meant in my original post was
that the FA* has great bokeh. However, I do agree with you that the A* have
nice bokeh when used as a macro lens.
Pål
-
I use the Pentax 80-200 A and the Sigma 100-300 df
for my K1000 and they work quite well.
The 100-300 is a bit heavy though.
Dave
Begin Original Message
Hello Bill,
. What zoom lens do you suggest for my K1000 and KX.
Wondering
why pentax stopped making such cameras?
Regards
Fred wrote:
In fact, it has been my experience with a number of macro lenses (Pentax
M 50/4, A 50/2.8, F 50/2.8, A 100/4, A 100/2.8, and A* 200/4, as well as
the Ricoh 105/2.8, and the Vivitar Series 1 90/2.5 with 1:1 adapter,
105/2.5, and 90-180/4.5 Flat Field Zoom) that, IN GENERAL, macro
Wow, have I said how much I like people who tell other people what they can
talk about. I thought that I had...
--graywolf
-
The optimist's cup is half full,
The pessimist's is half empty,
The wise man enjoys his drink.
- Original Message
Hi,
with non IF I can calculate the change in field of view (FOV) when
changing focus.
I think the FOV is smaller as you focus closer.
I noticed that with my 24-90 lens the fov actually gets wider when
focussing closer. This
is an IF lens. The only explanation I have is that f gets smaller
This one came faster than the scientists suspected. I received the
warning from SpaceWeather just a few hours before it happened.
Unfotunately, I didn't read it until it was all over...
Well, one can't win them all. However, subscribing to the forecast
service from http://www.spaceweather.com
Swades wondered re: K1000 KX:
why pentax stopped making such cameras?
The K1000 had a very long run, and may still be manufactured in China
under a different name. Technology and the demands of marketing and
consumers often dictate new models. Frankly, I could never understand
the
As usual anybody can make up any statistics they like to further their own
agenda. And nobody is hiding it from you if you can find most of it out on
the Net. The true figure is closer to 48% or so. Remember when you buy some
foreign made product like a Pentax camera you are not buying against
William Robb wrote:
If you are looking for a 70ish to 200ish, the Pentax FA 80-200
f/2.8 is well rated, and fits your budget (BH $1299.95). There
doesn't seem to be a whole lot else out there in what I am
presuming to be your desired quality range (I expect you want
pro quality) that fits Pentax
Thanks Dave. What I'm looking for is a transparency mat graphic. In real
life, a black cardboard surrounder is attached to the front of the slide.
The slide is then placed behind a window in a black mat page that holds 1 -
X slides. There is a 'beveling' effect between the black slide
Peter Smekal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you for this answer, Gianfranco,
but why is it then still possible to set a seemingly right
combination of
shutter speed (let's say 10 s) and aperture (maybe 5.6) at the
zero point
thermometer scale in the viewfinder? That seems
contradictory to me.
Try here:
http://www.frontiernet.net/~willshak/film.html
aimcompute wrote:
Thanks Dave. What I'm looking for is a transparency mat graphic. In real
life, a black cardboard surrounder is attached to the front of the slide.
The slide is then placed behind a window in a black mat page that
Valentin Donisa wrote:
Hi gang,
Now I have some rolls of APX 400 exposed at EI 1600. The box gives the
development time in Refinal (9 minutes instead of 6 if exposed at
nominal EI 400), but there's no way I can get Refinal here. So, is
there any guru that could tell what the development
- Original Message -
From: Valentin Donisa
Subject: OT: Agfa APX 400 pushed at 1600
Hi gang,
Now I have some rolls of APX 400 exposed at EI 1600. The box
gives the
development time in Refinal (9 minutes instead of 6 if exposed
at
nominal EI 400), but there's no way I can get
Thanks Shel. That's kind of the idea.
I just found a plug-in for Photoshop that may allow me to do it easier than
I thought.
http://www.autofx.com/dreamsuite/effect_pages/35mmframe.html
Tom C.
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
Hey gang,
Well, I've finally gotten the results back from my lure coursing side
trip about a month ago. Unfortunatly some of the pics are still in my
camera (of course, these are the pics of MY whippet) . . .
. . . pics turned out REALLY nice . . . I took them with a off brand
screw
They make the same Thinsulate gloves for hunting that you can flip back each of
the first 3 fingers (thumb, index and middle) . . . I like these the best
because I can just flip one when I want to shoot, then replace it when I'm not
Bill
Tom Rittenhouse wrote:
Hey, guys, just wear a pair of
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 25/11/01 11:25:38 GMT Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perhaps it means:
1. Standard
2. Small
3. Super
Anybody really know? Just curious.
4. Sexy
5. Sassy
chris
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss
It is centerweighted but not heavily so: the sensitivity of the two metering cells is
concentrated in the middle of the frame in a horizontal number 8 pattern.
All the best!
Raimo
Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen
-Alkuperäinen viesti-
Hi to everybody from Sweden!
Here is another stupid(?) question from a newbie. The Pentax Z1-p manual
seriously warns you never to touch the shutter. Well, to my short experience
that is not always so easy. I think a couple of times I've actually touched
the shutter slightly with the end of the
Paul Ewins wrote:
So maybe the 9xx numbers are for black MXs and the 4xx are for
chrome ones?
S.n. of my chrome MX begins with 9, so... (?)
Peter
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
On Sunday, November 25, 2001, at 08:43 PM, Mark Cassino wrote:
IMO, it's great to have a new frontier to work with. I can't fathom
the mentality that dismisses something because it may be weaker on this
point or that (while stronger on that point or this...) If there's a
new tool to
It's a thinly disguised dollar sign!
Chris Brogden wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 25/11/01 11:25:38 GMT Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perhaps it means:
1. Standard
2. Small
3. Super
Anybody really know? Just curious.
On Monday, November 26, 2001, at 09:04 AM, Paris, Leonard wrote:
I sure wouldn't buy one via mail order. At that price, if I wanted
one, I'd
make sure I had a chance to listen to a few of my own records and I'd
insist
on a trial period so I could make sure it satisfied me working in my
is listed for sale on ebay at
http://cgi6.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewListedItemsuserid=david-tainclude=0since=-1sort=2rows=25
Primarily LX related. Everything was just posted.
Still have the two Z1P bodies and an assortment of AF lenses. Wish my eyes
worked well enough to continue to
Nicely put, Mark.
Bill Sullivan
- Original Message -
From: Mark Cassino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2001 5:43 PM
Subject: Re: what I think of current digital cameras
I'm pretty demanding about quality, and I'm very satisfied with the
quality
Bill:
My quarter's worth would be to say that it comes down to learning how your
flash works. When I carried an ME-Super and did a lot of party pictures, I
used a Vivitar flash (I think it was a Vivitar 3500) that I liked a lot
because it had 3 colored dots that you used to indicate the
I have several actually. I have a Sigma 90/2.8 in Minolta AF which is rated
4.2 by photodo. I have a manual Vivitar Series 1 105/2.5 which is rated
almost as sharp and has less distortion I think and I have a Tamron 90/2.5
which I stick an ES adapter on for my screwmount collection.
Too be honest
Howdy all,
I have read several posts that referred to street photography and I'm
still not clear on what was meant by that term. Last spring when I was
in Jacksonville, Florida on a business trip and spent the evening time
off with my trusty ME Super, I made the following photograph;
Shel wrote:
The K1000 had a very long run, and may still be manufactured in China
under a different name. Technology and the demands of marketing and
consumers often dictate new models. Frankly, I could never understand
the fascination around the K1000. Sure, it was built well, but it had
Thanks to Otis Wright and Jim Apilado for informative answers to my question
last week
Francis Elers
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org
Report to all interested:
The 800 seemed to do well at the performance, but the results show Kevin and the
others who suggested 1600 speed film were right - very dark images and I've been
re-reading my Photoshop books and corresponding on the Photoshop list to try to get
them looking
I'll let Shel field this one!
Maris
- Original Message -
From: Robert Payne [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: List-Pentax (E-mail) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 2:55 PM
Subject: Street Photography ?
| Howdy all,
| I have read several posts that referred to street photography
This is the WORST sort of mental masturbation, but this is what my all-time
perfect camera would be like:
It would be built by Pentax to the same high standards as the Spotmatics
(with the same kind of cosmetic durability--more old Spotties look better
for longer than any other kind of old
From Tom Rittenhouse:
You are aware that at f16you could have set the camera for 7 feet
and everything from about 5' to 12' would have been acceptably in
focus at 50mm? Set for 10 feet everything from about 7' to about
25' would have been ok. Set to 28mm and 10' there is problably
nothing
Kent G. wrote:
And when you pay a tax for some kind of service you either get or
potentially get for free if you use it counts against the total tax
percentage because you are receiving the equivalent of a cash payment you
would have had to pay for out of your own pocket prior to most of the
Hi,
That's good. I'd say it counts as street photography. There is a street
photography mailing list which you can get to through www.topica.com,
iirc. I subscribed for a while but not for long because I thought most
of the discussions were, frankly, self-indulgent pretentious crap. Oh,
and if
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001, Mike Johnston wrote:
[...]
That's it. That's my perfect camera. Anything I left out?
Well, how many megapixels?
:-)
--
---
Juan J. Buhler | Sr. FX Animator @ PDI | Photos at http://www.jbuhler.com
I think a couple of times I've actually touched
the shutter slightly with the end of the film (that often seems to have its
own life). How dangerous is that? How can you check if the shutter still
works properly?
Don't sweat it too much. The shutter is more sturdy than the manual
makes you
Our group will travel to San Francisco, California this Christmas. Can
someone point me out places good for pictures ?
Thanks
Andy
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users'
Maris V. Lidaka, Sr. wrote:
Report to all interested:
The 800 seemed to do well at the performance, but the results show Kevin and the
others who suggested 1600 speed film were right - very dark images and I've been
re-reading my Photoshop books and corresponding on the Photoshop list to
The golden gate bridge, alcatraz, and street cars?
Duh...
Just kidding
JCO
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Andy Vu
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 5:39 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: San Francisco trip
Our group will travel
In a message dated 11/26/2001 4:21:46 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is the WORST sort of mental masturbation, but this is what my all-
time
perfect camera would be like:
It would be built by Pentax to the same high standards as the Spotmatics
(with
Comments interspersed with Mike's text, below:
Mike Johnston wrote:
I second that. Except the K1000 was a CHEAPENED Spotmatic that was literally
expected to last a year and a half or two years until the release of the M
cameras. But consumers wouldn't let it die.
Sounds like the Ford
Sunday, November 25, 2001, 11:34:38 PM, Amita wrote:
AG I have to go to Adorama tomorrow to get my 120
AG film developed. Might there be a chance that they
AG could fix the light meter in my Yashicamat?
Well, I don't know about Adorama, but I know few things about
Yashica(mats), they use
There goes the dream ... GDR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes of his dream canera:
That's it. That's my perfect camera.
Anything I left out?
And Ed replied:
Re: Anything left out? Yes - autofocus capability.
Sometimes my 67 year-old eyes need it.
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
It would be built by Pentax to the same high standards as the Spotmatics
(with the same kind of cosmetic durability--more old Spotties look better
[snip]
Finally, it would have only one new feature--a small button next to the
shutter button that would act a spotmeter and exposure lock in one, a
Better
go for a really good 80-200/2.8 and get another lens for macro.
You're the second person to say that. You guys make so much sense on that
question, answer this: what macro, what focal length?
Tokina AT-X 90mm 2.5 macro.
Cotty
___
frank theriault wrote:
Sounds like the Ford Mustang. Remember the Probe?
It was supposed to replace the Mustang...
Some things are so right they really can't be replaced - even if the
original Mustang was nothing more than a sporty-looking Falcon. Ford,
btw, just brought back the original
Oh, I should also mention that the Mini-Cooper is back, too. The MG's
been revitalized, and triumph motorcycles are once again racing on the
back roads. IOW, maybe the time is right for something like this.
frank theriault wrote:
Sounds like the Ford Mustang. Remember the Probe?
it was
In a message dated 11/26/2001 6:26:07 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That's it. That's my perfect camera. Anything I left out?
It would be digital.
;-)
Cotty
C'mon, Cotty - no one said the damn thing had to be practical :-)
Best regards,
Ed M.
-
[on LCD pseudo-slr viewfinders]
Monday, November 26, 2001, 3:51:09 PM, Kent wrote:
KG So I assume you have tried the manual focusing option on all these cameras
KG that have that option?
KG Kent Gittings
Of course not on all of them, but I tried Fuji 4900, 6900, Olympus
Camedia 2100. These three
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 13:16:23 +0100, you wrote:
I've read that it is possible to remove the tripod bracket on the 200
macro. I've
managed to rotate it, but not remove it. BTW. this is a truly awesome
lens, picked
it up this weekend together with an A* 300 f4.
On the A* 200/4 Macro, the right
Hi Robert,
It's funny how people can have such different ideas and interests,
all within the same overall realm of an art, and even within a much more
narrowly defined field. Recently, I began looking at what I like to
shoot, and decided that I really have been doing some street
photography
I used the ZX-5n on I think 125th second with auto f/stop setting - the lights changed
constantly (darker, lighter, different color) and it was actually modern dance and the
dancers moved quickly so it seemed the easiest way. The viewfinder indicated
sufficient light without flash but I'm
Alcatraz was not very photogenic. Chinatown is very colorful, and if you like
architecture there are some very nice buildings, both old and new, in San Francisco.
I took my kids there in August - I found my favorite shots were just showing the
steep, steep hills both looking up and down the
One again, my LX needs repair... This will be the 5th repair trip in the
last two years, so MTBF is just under 5 months.
This time is it is the mirror lock up function / self timer that is not
working. The mirror goes only half way up when the level reaches it's full
swing. The self timer,
The focal length gets shorter. An internal focusing lens is sort of a
limited zoom lens.
--graywolf
-
The optimist's cup is half full,
The pessimist's is half empty,
The wise man enjoys his drink.
- Original Message -
From: Frank Wajer
As in the Birdman?
Maris
- Original Message -
From: John F. DeLoach [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 6:41 PM
Subject: Re: San Francisco trip
| At 05:59 PM 11/26/2001 -0600, you wrote:
| Alcatraz was not very photogenic|
[snipped]
| Maris,
|
Best of luck in the new job!
Len
---
- Original Message -
From: Nick Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 8:08 PM
Subject: New Position (semi-OT)
Hello all,
Just wanted to let you all know that I got the photography
editor's
position at
Hi Mark,
I had my LX repaired at a non pentax repair shop, however the lady that
repaired it did used to work for Pentax. They did an excellent job. I did
have to take it back once as they forgot to replace the pad that the mirror
rests on.
During the service they also replaced the mirror
1 - 100 of 135 matches
Mail list logo
