Mark wrote:
I think that full-frame CCDs and smaller ones may well coexist. Mike Johnston
recently mentioned professional wildlife photographers who don't want to
upgrade to the latest Canon D30 because it's CCD yields only 1.3x focal
length magnification. For most of us a full-frame CCD will
Mike wrote:
The only effort to standardize chip size that I'm aware of is being led by
Kodak, who are urging adoption of a 4/3rds-inch chip size. Small chip sizes,
far from being a dead end, will are what will be used in consumer cameras.
The market for these will be vast--actually, already
Rob
It also has a somewhat unnecessary Hold switch, AF button on the back
panel, and a push button to illuminate the display, not to mention the
databack! (Not that I don't like it, but the MZ3 is almost as simple as the
MX, and all the better for it!).
Regards
Jim
Rob wrote:
I have the 229 Pro and 029 heads, they are virtually the same in function but
the 029 is a little lighter and a little less rigid. The 029 also has no
vertical bubble level, less precise scales and less load capacity. I have
heads
with the rectangular plates (200PL) that clip in
jbrooks,
I'm surprised you would consider an illumination button unnecessary.
Or are you just listing buttons? Not only does it illuminate, but
through PF function can be made to turn on modeling mode on the new
flash and confirm wireless operation. Hardly an unnecessary button.
Bruce Dayton
- original message -
Mike Johnston wrote
A few years ago I decided to do a portfolio of my 100 Best 35mm
Prints. This is really pretty exciting and a lot of fun
--I'd recommend it!
I just had a similar experience - had to pick out 12 images for a landscape
workshop that I attended last
Thank you John, when I wrote my response I did not include any facts as I
felt that would have been inappropriate g.
Take two examples: FA28-70/4, and FA80-320/4.5-5.6 (I have these so can
speak with confidence).
When the 28-70 is set to 70, the iris is fully open giving f/4 (the opening
is
OK lets be pedantic:
I dont comment on your calculations, but we were not talking about a
2/3 CCD. we were discussing a 2/3 size CCD. I took this to mean 2/3
of the area rather than the individual dimensions. Wouldnt your
definition give a focal multplier of 6.3 - we were discussing focal
Well, I have a few minutes spare here, before I shoot off and film some
nonsense about Tolkien (bloody trolls and goblins...), so partially in
answer to Julie's request for enablement, here's how, after waiting over
20 years, I came by my first LX...
In the early eighties I was starting my
Nice story.
When I bought my first new camera in many years, it was an ME Super.
Even though there was an LX sitting right next to it, looking very
professional and cool, I opted for the MES. Why? Because I didn't know
what the LX was.
Moving ahead twenty years or so, I was in a fellow's
LeviL [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The
SE-20 has a circle in the middle but no microprisim. Do you
think that
would work? Or is it worth putting up with this at all? Is
it better to
use LX screens in the MX then MX screens?
I have a SE-20 (too bad it got dirty and I tried to clean it up
in
Mike.I started my horsey portfolio 2 years ago,put
it aside due toreal workduties and never went back to it.
I think this might kick start me again.
Thanks
Dave
Begin Original Message
From: Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A few years ago I decided to do a portfolio of my 100 Best
Bruce
I'm really only pointing out why the MZ-S could be seen as significantly
more complex than the MZ-3 (listing buttons I suppose!). The illumination
button is certainly necessary if you're using the camera in the dark, as I
did on Sunday at the local pantomime dress rehearsal. IMO the MZ-S
Hi Wendy.I'm trying to find my notes on the discussion.
Seems like Manfrotta was winning.Good luck in the search
mine is still on going.
I to am curious,what is 'agility' pictures.Do you do speed
dogs etc.??/
Dave
.
I sort of vaguely remember Dave asking about monopods for his horsey pics.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Re: pentax-discuss-digest V1 #1700
ooops, I meant RE: [2] Pentax
Regards
Jim
-
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
Paul Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does any one have any experience with the Manfrotto monopod
that has little
feet at the bottom?
http://www.manfrotto.com/products/index.html?doc_from=home
i assume the legs are removeable to use it as a normal
monopod?
I also am getting one for xmas
What, it doesn't include that portrait of the Hasey smashed on the
pavement? G
Norm
William Robb wrote:
As much as a portfolio is ever finished.
I have 2 that I use on the rare occasion that someone expresses
an interest in paying me to shoot something. One is a mix of
black and white
Pål Audun Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark wrote:
I think that full-frame CCDs and smaller ones may well coexist. Mike Johnston
recently mentioned professional wildlife photographers who don't want to
upgrade to the latest Canon D30 because it's CCD yields only 1.3x focal
length
Juan,
Find one at a swap meet for $10-12.
Regards, Bob S.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1304270415
According to the description, the worst things are the screen and the foam.
I wanted to try an LX screen on an MX anyway, and for $67 it
The problem in metropolitan areas like WDC is that if you leave an opening
over one car length or more between you and the guy in front somebody will
move into that space.
One of the exercises taught at the Bondurant school is where you approach a
set of lights at 60 MPH, your light changes to
I think the issue is more of a concern that Pentax will not move fast
enough and will miss an opportunity. I for one would be happy to just hear
a statement form Pentax about what they intend to do.
Your analogy to computers is a little off the mark. Computers offered new
functionality
James, did you mean
after focusing and *before* winding on the film?
If so I know some cameras of that vintage would leave the mirror in the up
position until you advanced to the next frame (I have a 50's Wray that does
this).
Regards,
/\/\ick...
++
|
After going through various mails on this topic, do I conclude that k1000 and
KX type of manual cameras are used by very less number camera users? So camera
companies are not able to break even with reasonable cost of the cameras.
Looks like , most of the camera users switched to Autofocus
On Friday, December 7, 2001, at 09:21 AM, Matamoros, Cesar A. wrote:
Your post caught me by surprise in the 67 being smaller.
Hm, it doesn't seem that big now.
It really isn't a large camera, especially considering the size of the
negative. The 67 has a bad rep for being beastly
Thanks Paul,
I wondered if that was the case.
James
- Original Message -
From: Paul M. Provencher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 6:21 AM
Subject: RE: Pentax S1a Question
The camera needs a good Clean, Lube, and Adjust. The mirror should not
Kent suggested:
Well that is correct except at the widest setting. If you have a 28-80/4-5.6 lens
and set the aperture manually at F4 and zoom from 28 to 80mm you will end up at
F5.6 even if the ring says F4. This is because at the widest setting the aperture
ring is not involved in the
Ed,
One case is when going vertical with battery grip. The same DOF lever
is on the battery grip. The conventional one is a harder stretch when
vertical. Horizontally I would have to agree that it is probably no
better, just different.
Bruce Dayton
Friday, December 07, 2001, 4:44:58 AM,
That is why constant aperture zooms generally cost more than variable ones.
Kent Gittings
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Christopher Lillja
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 2:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Variable zoom
Dave B. wrote:
Mike.I started my horsey portfolio 2 years ago,put
it aside due toreal workduties and never went back to it.
I think this might kick start me again.
My friend A. D. Coleman likes to use the term reify--it means to make
real. His idea is that a portfolio can't be vaporware, or
Sorry, can someone e-mail me the site where there's info about the MZ-6?
Somehow I missed it.
TIA,
--Mike
-
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
Cesar M. wrote:
I will not give in to medium format! I will not give in to medium format!
I will not give in to medium format! ...
Sounds like another lost soul is in need of enabling, Gang.
Squad, mobilize!
--Mike, Enabler Emeritus
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.
Aboslutely! That's the spirit.
You will not give in to medium format. Medium format is not going to get
you! You will not give in to medium format. You'll teach medium format a
thing or two! You will not give in to medium format. You'll kick medium
format's butt! You will not give in to
- Original Message -
From: Albano
Subject: RE: My LX Story - A Guide to Self-Enablement
Great story, Cotty!
I agree 100%. I still remember the first time I grabbed my LX.
This is the
sweetest camera of the world.
And I also came from MX (and from K1000 before). I then sold
the MX,
pentax-discuss-digest at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Like when a person wants to turn right or pass somebody on the right at a
stop situation and they have a gap as much as 1 foot wider than their car
but they have so little conception of the location of the corners of their
vehicle that they
Ahh ... interchangeable bodies g
William Robb wrote:
I now have 3 of them, and would qite
happily grab up a couple more, so that
each of my favourite lenses could have
its own LX body.
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/xmas-story.html
-
I am building mine at present. I'm actually working on a web version first.
That way I don't need to disassemble the real thing to make the web version
later.
It is very cool to see even 20 of one's best images together, side by side.
Tom C.
- Original Message -
From: Mike Johnston
I think you are missing some info. The chip in the Dimage 7 is the same one
that is in the Nikon D-1x which is 5.24 MP and 23.7mm x 15.6mm. It's a
matter of semantics.
When you see a CCD array listed as 2/3 inch it doesn't refer to the actual
size but to the ratio when compared to a 35mm frame.
As far as I know you can't use a TC with a wide angle lens of 24mm. I think
about 50mm is the lower limit.
Kent Gittings
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Alan Chan
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:38 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
Grips are easy to imitate. Sure it doesn't say APS? Then it would be the old
name for Kenko.
Kent Gittings
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David Brooks
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 7:33 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: teleconverter
I felt the exact same way the first time I used my LX (which was only last
April or May). I came from an even darker side... Ricoh! What a
difference! What a camera! ;-)
Now I have an MX and realize what an awesome little jewel it is too. In my
humble opinion I think these are the best two
Cesar M. wrote:
I will not give in to medium format! I will not give in to
medium format!
I will not give in to medium format! ...
I didn't think I wanted to get involved with medium format
either. I was using a very good 35mm camera, with a very good
lens, and had my processing routine
Or a good used Tokina ATX I or II 100-300/4.
Kent Gittings
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Joseph Tainter
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 9:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Sigma 100-300 F/4
I do currently have a Ricoh 210-70
Moving ahead twenty years or so, I was in a fellow's house looking at a
couple of lenses, when said gentleman showed me his LX. I fired a few
frames and was hooked.
Now, a couple of years later, and with five LX under the belt, I can
honestly say ;-))
Nice one, Shel, you little winker,
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1045022576 A
good way to deal with the current flame wars in the list...
It's just another Pentax PS (as in point 'n' singe). g
Fred
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and
Answer is somewhere between slim and none.
Kent Gittings
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tiger Moses
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 11:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: K-mount question
I think I need to clarify, I was
I felt the exact same way the first time I used my LX (which was only last
April or May). I came from an even darker side... Ricoh! What a
difference! What a camera! ;-)
There ya go - they're winking at me again!
But this time, I know what they mean ;-)
Cotty
I don't believe in any monopods except very good heavy duty ones. I did a
couple of dog agility trials just because I stumbled across them. Found that
in most cases a zoom in the 80-200/2.8 range seemed to be fine. So even a
light monopod would support it but it would often interfere with panning
I have some Pentax lenses and bodies that don't see much use nowadays,
mainly because I have bought other Pentax bodies and lenses to replace
them, then I want to sell some to fund more Pentax equipment purchases
;-)
This is the first lot:
Pentax SFX AF SLR body (like new) + Pentax soft case for
I guess im a little unlucky. Hehe
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1306976483
Still searching though.
Chris
- Original Message -
From: Kent Gittings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:46 PM
Subject: RE: Sigma 100-300 F/4
24mm
50mm
1.4x
With these angles you get (a) groups, (b) individuals, and (c) close-ups.
These would be my picks for general-purpose work.
Right now, the primes I use are 35mm, 50mm, 100mm. I own but rarely use a 2x. It
just sits there. I'll keep the 35mm when I can afford a 24mm. It's
I have a 2-piece Tracks also I use for nature hikes as the little screw on
top can work good for anything up to and including an 80-200/2.8. Plus
removing the rubber foot to expose the spike at the bottom makes it a nice
emergency weapon.
Kent Gittings
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
Well-stated.
For those who might be interested, you can get many medium format folders for less
than $100US. Just a little more for a twin lens. (My son got a Rolleiflex 2.8C with
a few light marks on the taking lens for $175US! Nice camera. A Yashica-D runs about
$100US.)
Compare this to
Hello Allan and Mike:
Before using the MZ-S for some time I thought more or less the same you
have written about the small magnification of the viewfinder. But in
fact it hasn't been a great annoyance, it is easy to use with manual
focus lenses and in fact it is better than the other viewfinders
I looked at the list again against what those items are going for now. Just
the 3 Rollei TLR cameras alone would go for around $6k combined. The Minolta
CLE which is actually a Leica CLE made for Minolta to sell in Japan is worth
around $2.5K. The single stroke M3s are worth about $1.7K each and
From astronomy I can tell you some differences. If the chip is smaller but
the pixel count is the same the pixels are then smaller and often can yield
finer detail if the choice of lenses is done correctly.
That's why some people in the industry don't like the preoccupation with
pixel count
Where did you get those figures? They seem quite high to me, although
I've not looked at the descriptions of all the items you mentioned.
Kent Gittings wrote:
I looked at the list again against what those items are going for now. Just
the 3 Rollei TLR cameras alone would go for around $6k
Bill,
Yes, the MZ-5 has a setting for 1/100, but even when I had it on that
setting the camera told me it was going to use 1/60. No matter what manual
shutter speed you've set on the camera, if it sees a charged flash then it
sets the shutter speed to the flash sync speed, which used to
Bob,
Thanks very much, the wallet card is quite illuminating!
As you say, the best thing is probably for me to get a manual from
Pentax USA.
Out of interest, on the buttons near the flash hotshoe, what does IF
and ML stand for? I'm assuming that ML is manual.
Richard.
home
The industry unfortunately has several ways to describe the same chip as I
see it. The only way to really read the chip size is to check and see what
they list the 35mm lens equivalent to be. I wasn't talking about 2/3 of an
inch but as in 2/3 of the 35mm format.
Now that I check the Minolta site
On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Aaron Reynolds wrote:
Uh oh, guys, someone help me...I've just been tempted by a used Fuji AF
645 point shoot! This money is earmarked for that Pentax 67 75mm f2.8
lens...oh n...
Quick, someone give me a good reason not to buy this thing. It's in
mint
Enabling at its finest. I don't have anything to add, just thought we should
all read this again. g
--Mike
William Robb wrote:
I didn't think I wanted to get involved with medium format
either. I was using a very good 35mm camera, with a very good
lens, and had my processing routine nailed
I have a SE-20 (too bad it got dirty and I tried to clean it up
in the wrong way) and it works (worked...) with no problem in
the MX (now I used some kind of oil to get it clear back - it
seems an SE-25 now... it works, though).
Cool. I will do that then. (I mean SE-20, not scratching it
Better wait till the auction has ended, it still has 4 days to go, so it
might reach that $300 after all.
Frits Wüthrich
Original Message
On 12-07-2001, 18:29:20, Kent Gittings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote regarding RE:
Sigma 100-300 F/4:
Hard to believe it's only at $65 as they usually go
I don't usually pass along jokes, but I thought this was hilarious.
http://www.newlabour.co.uk/penguin.htm
--Mike
-
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
Just a test to see if I've finally gotten rid of that pesky WINMAIL.DAT
attachment at the bottom of my e-mail postings
Please ignore.
Bill Peifer
Rochester, NY
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't
Chris wrote:
Fine. It shall wither thy crops and cause a tenth of thy kine to perish,
and hail shall fall about thee and canadian winters shall plagueth thee
until the end of thy days.
Malcolm-
This is about the Fuji and not about Paypal?
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.
I feel sorrow for the Penguin rather hilarious.
|
| Mike Johnston wrote:
|
| I don't usually pass along jokes, but I thought this was hilarious.
|
| http://www.newlabour.co.uk/penguin.htm
|
| --
| Shel Belinkoff
| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| -
| This message is from the Pentax-Discuss
In a message dated 12/7/01 2:16:56 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(SNIP)
So, the upshot of that ramble is: have several portfolios, edit
ferociously, get help from experienced photographers who don't care if
they upset you, get a thick skin, have a theme for each
Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't usually pass along jokes, but I thought this was hilarious.
http://www.newlabour.co.uk/penguin.htm
Funny indeed. Penguin #1 waddles past penguin #2. Penguin #2 sticks out
its left leg, causing the other one to trip over it and fall into the
water.
I have printed Cotty's e-mail out to show my wife, who loves the MX, and I
think its time to find out how much they change hands for now!
Dear Mrs Malcolm,
Come on - be a sport: it's only money! You can't take it with you when
you go! Let him have some fun, he's a hard-working guy (he better
The third version, the f/2.8-4.0, is the one I have and it is quite good lens. It
seems to be very under-rated too from what I've read on Bob Monahagn's website
(http://people.smu.edu/rmonagha/third/cult.html#steve). I suppose that is because of
the variable aperture perhaps. In any event,
A friend of mine needs to buy a 28mm Pentax-brand lens to give someone for
Christmas... he apparently promised her one, and now they're perversely
hard to find locally. It doesn't need to be anything fancy, as long as
it's a Pentax-brand manual focus one. Does anyone have an M or A series
one
- Original Message -
From: Malcolm Smith
Subject: RE: Pentax: Medium Format
Chris wrote:
Fine. It shall wither thy crops and cause a tenth of thy kine
to perish,
and hail shall fall about thee and canadian winters shall
plagueth thee
until the end of thy days.
Malcolm-
This
Delano Mireles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Specifically need to clean dust and lint out off the mirror and finder/prism
(?). I've been trying to blow it out and using lens cleaning tissues
wrapped around my finger and to no avail! This is getting a bit frustrating
- any tips or ideas would be
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: MZ-6 and idle speculation
I must say the MZ-6 looks pretty damned good. Anybody have any idea what
the
price will be? Will the MZ-3/5n have any advantages over the 6?
How about the metering mode selecting switch? You can switch
- Original Message -
From: Dan Scott
Subject: RE: which 2 lenses and a teleconverter make the best
combo?
Why? What happens?
Just for fun, I stuck the only teleconverter I had easily at
hand, which is a Takumar 2x onto the LX and put the A 24mm f/2.8
on. I could see no signs of
I have about 70 8x10 in a nice binder, but how
does one *KNOW* when it's complete and/or finished
The photos range from BIGFOOT (the truck) and brides
to cheerleaders and radio towers.
Robert
- --Mike
P.S. Just out of curiosity, how many people here have actual portfolios that
are
What's funny about it. I's a MPEG of a penguin flopping into the water, as
they usually do, with a crudely drawn cartoon penguin sticking his cartoon
leg out to make it almost look like he tripped the real penguin.
It also very OT
Mark Roberts wrote:
Try this:
On Friday, December 7, 2001, at 03:32 PM, Bill D. Casselberry wrote:
Ummm, it's a rangefinder rather than an SLR, so you don't
have that TTL precision view? On the other hand, that allows
for flash-sync at any shutter speed - ooops, sorry;^)
He was just here...the
Whoa! Some of us (alright me) need this sort of advice. For far too long
I've used my MX on 'this is how it is photos' as in the photos you take when
renovating a car, so that when you put it back together you remember where
each bit goes.
I am moving on into photos that friends comment on and
Mike writes:
I'm getting back to a really exciting project...
An exciting project yes, as in painful, horrible,
bad-for-your-self-confidence experience :-)
I'm selecting about 25 prints for a show I'll have in February in San
Francisco (more on that when I get the invitations) and it is an
FWIW, the cans of compressed air I've seen usually include a DO NOT USE ON
CAMERA MIRRORS warning, though I'm not sure why. Perhaps it's because the
propellant will sometimes escape, which is fantastically cold, or because
the air is vented with quite a bit of force.
I've never been bothered by
On Friday, December 7, 2001, at 03:57 PM, Chris Brogden wrote:
Yup, stick with a lens for a system you already have instead of
expanding
your arsenal by an entirely new film format in a light, portable and
high-quality unit. Definitely the lens. :)
Going from 125 to 250 is a one stop change, so if you want to shoot ISO 100
at f11, bump the shutter up to 1/250. If you think of the shutter and
aperture stops as interchangeable, you can just swap one for the other. So
for every stop you open up the aperture, set the shutter one stop
Daniel J. Matyola wrote:
It also very OT
Horrors! We can't have any of that. :)
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 http://pug.komkon.org .
Hi Kent,
How does the 250/3.5 perform? I'm interested in purchasing one
to mount on my 645 by adapter.
TIA
Gianfranco
Kent Gittings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I went the 6x6 route with a Kiev-60 and the factory DDR Aus
Jena 80/2.8 just
to experiment. Now I've added the Arsat 30/3.5 Fisheye,
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Malcolm Smith wrote:
Chris wrote:
Fine. It shall wither thy crops and cause a tenth of thy kine
to perish, and hail shall fall about thee and canadian winters
shall plagueth thee until the end of thy days.
This is about the Fuji and not about
Hi, Dan,
A very moving picture, a reminder of a horrendous event in your
country's history, to be sure.
A lot of peope (even in Canada) don't know that December 7 is also the
anniversary of another horrendous event, the Halifax Explosion. In 1917
a relief ship collided with a munitions ship in
LeviL [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where are you from?
Hi Levi,
I'm from Italy. I live in Ercolano, near Naples. I hope you've
heard of Ercolano and not of Pompeii only... I'm a - almost
starving - professional photographer (and a sociologist, too,
but that's another story...).
Have you ever been
I might be able to participate.
Maris
- Original Message -
From: Richard Seaman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 2:49 PM
Subject: greater Chicagoland PDMLers unite!
| Bob,
|
| I could be in for a greater Chicagoland photo shoot, if we can
This took place back in 1968. At the time I had a small photo studio in
San Francisco, in the Mission District, and had very little money.
Early one day I
photographed a couple of fish mongers in their shop window, setting out
their fish for display. They were standing in the window, holding a
On Fri, 07 Dec 2001 10:12:51 -0600, Mike Johnston wrote:
And that's when I was a PHOTOGRAPHER in D.C., did I mention that? Doing, um,
photography.
Close ups of bumpers with a bumper-mounted camera? ;-
I'm saving for a trip to the Bondurant Driving School for my 40th
birthday. The hard part
Yeah! The Empiricist strikes again...
Any chance of you sharing some shots taken with the combo?
Dan Scott
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Wm Robb wrote:
Just for fun, I stuck the only teleconverter I had easily at
hand, which is a Takumar 2x onto the LX and put the A 24mm f/2.8
on. I could see no signs of
Hi Kent,
On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:26:36 -0500, Kent Gittings wrote:
As far as I know you can't use a TC with a wide angle lens of 24mm. I think
about 50mm is the lower limit.
Several people have made comments like that on this thread, and it has
me asking Why? I've never tried it, but it
Perhaps the MZ-S has much better viewwfinder amoung the Pentax AF bodies,
but after I wasted my money on the MZ-M (0.77X which was too small already
and I made many out of focus pictures with it), I feel difficult to buy one
with 0.75X (even smaller).
regards,
Alan Chan
Hello Allan and Mike:
Tiger Moses wrote:
I think I need to clarify, I was wondering if there would be a chance we'd
have the opportunity to buy a non-Pentax brand Digital body with a K-AF2
mount on it?
Not the be rude, but don't hold your breath. If Pentax doesn't think there
is enough of a market to make it
Nice story Shel. Must have given you the warm fuzzies all over.
Was it a Pentax camera used? I think I want some Chinese
tonight, speaking of all that seafood ;)
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax List [EMAIL
pentax-discuss-digest at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
major snip
I expect I have mentioned this before, but I truly believe that
aspiring photo artists (and I think most on this group fit the
description in one way or another) owe it to their craft to use
medium format equipment.
I can work my
Aaron wrote:
Uh oh, guys, someone help me...I've just been tempted by a used Fuji AF
645 point shoot! This money is earmarked for that Pentax 67 75mm f2.8
lens...oh n...
Quick, someone give me a good reason not to buy this thing.
Because you need that 75mm to write the rest of
Yes, Steve ... that was a Pentax Moment
Steven Larson wrote:
Nice story Shel. Must have given you the warm fuzzies all over.
Was it a Pentax camera used? I think I want some Chinese
tonight, speaking of all that seafood ;)
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
1 - 100 of 141 matches
Mail list logo
