Herb,
Boy, how to put this...The skill of the photographer is of upmost
importance in producing great images. His choice of equipment will
always be based on compromise. Cost, maneuverability, features,
negative size, etc. He will arrive at what make the most sense to use
for the given set of
This one time, at band camp,
Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The same photographer, given a bigger
negative, will continue to create great images, but now they will
carry more detail, tonality, able to be blown up larger or cropped
more, etc.
How big can we blow up images in 35mm MF
Hi,
Saturday, December 14, 2002, 2:59:58 AM, you wrote:
Unfortunately, they will argue it, and the person who can afford
the most out of pocket will usually win. Since photographers are
usually not terribly well off, they are supremely disadvantaged
when it comes to defending their
Hi,
surely it's not just a question of size, but also of the shape of the
rectangle. Shooting 6x6 is very different from shooting 6x9. I would
not be surprised if the preference that many people have for 6x7 or
6x4.5 over 35mm is strongly influenced, even if unconsciously, by the
difficulty of
Hi,
in Britain the beer 'Stella Artois' is sold with the tagline
'Reassuringly expensive', and Kronenbourg (I think) used to claim that
it was the most expensive beer in the world. An odd approach, but one
that seems to work for other products too. I was once involved in the
purchase of some
It depends on what you mean by 'good detail' I once enlarged a 35mm
negative, a portrait on Kodak Plus-X, to 40 x 48 on four 20 x 24 sheets;
held together on the wall of the darkroom with double-sided tape. I mounted
the four parts of the print separately and hung them close together. The
result
We've been through this before. Bigger is only better when the image is
considerably larger than the size of the film. For macro-photography there
is no advantage in using medium format unless the subject is large enough to
fill the field. In general the lenses made for 35 mm are better corrected
John wrote:
It is my firm hope that Pentax will make a good quality DSLR, with a full
range of lens covering the 35mm equivalents of 15 - 600mm, but also with the
possibility of using an adaptor to allow the use of existing K-mount lens,
so that the affordability of a useful system does not
Sorry for the OT folks,but this is for anyone who may have me
bookmarked
under [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The canoemail site is moving servers and will be down until Dec 13-14 so i am using my
main email for
the PDML. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
in Britain the beer 'Stella Artois' is sold with the tagline
'Reassuringly expensive', and Kronenbourg (I think) used to claim that
it was the most expensive beer in the world. An odd approach, but one
that seems to work for other products too. I was once involved
Two years ago,one of our national horse magazines called me and aske if i
had some pictures from a specific event.I did,sent them in and they called
back to say they were using 2 and will mail the check(they did)
I did mention that even though i knew the riders and they were under 16
years of
I've printed this shot a couple of ways. In 8x10 size it's 755 ppi.
Cropped tighter and printed at 11x14, it's 400 ppi. What kind of radius,
blur percentage, and opacity would you use on the 400ppi version to
achieve a general smoothing of skin tones?
Paul
Herb Chong wrote:
Message text
Thanks Bill. I'll try that. I haven't gone that far with it, but this
sounds like fun.
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Paul Stenquist
Subject: Blur layer for portraits in PhotoShop
While we're thinking digital darkroom, how many PDMLers use a
Gaussian
blur layer
I blur a duplicate layer, erase the eyes lips, hair and, in part, the
eyebrows. Then I reduce the opacity until it yields a nice effect. I'm
going to try what Bill suggested above: blur the duplicate layer to the
extreme and work more with the opacity.
Paul
jcoyle wrote:
Paul: I've only used
Hi all and thanks to those who answered my quiry about
film and ttl
for my upcoming wedding(friends)shoot in January.
I did a test with RG200 and the SP with 280T at the family function last Saturday.I
used
the smc m 50 f
1.7(sorry Jeff i forgot to take the smc
- Original Message -
From: Treena
Subject: Re: Basic copyright
This is how it works at American newspapers. Oddly enough,
even though the
copyright lies with my publishers, our company allows us to
peddle copies of
our photos (produced on the clock) to those who may want them,
Scott brings up a point that puzzles me mightly, having invested in
a scanner and a low-end inkjet: Print longevity. Just visited
Wilhelm and they have an article about the new HP 5550 ($149, 6 ink,
8x10 no bleed): Wilhelm claims this thing, on HP premium paper and
behind glass, is good for
- Original Message -
From: David Brooks
Subject: Re: Basic copyright
Two years ago,one of our national horse magazines called me
and aske if i
had some pictures from a specific event.I did,sent them in and
they called
back to say they were using 2 and will mail the check(they
did)
I
Hi,
Saturday, December 14, 2002, 10:49:54 AM, you wrote:
We've been through this before.
Actually, I don't think we have. Besides, that hardly disqualifies any
subject. I don't remember any discussion on this list about how the
different ratios of the viewfinder frames affects composition.
Did Pentax have an APS camera at any point. I can't think of any. I
know they had this 110 SLR. Are there pics of this on the web
anywhere?
Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA 24450
(540) 458-8873
FAX: (540) 458-8878
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: Herb Chong
Subject: Re: Re[4]: A new DSLR standard emerging? (WAS: Re:
Nikon DX lenses: Is this what Pentax is up to?)
what does granularity and definition have to do with quality?
if sharpness
is your only measure of quality, why stop at medium format?
why
- Original Message -
From: David A. Mann
Subject: Re: The big picture: Photography iwith a larger than a
postage stamp negative.
I'd love to try 4x5 but its not economical for me in this
country. When
I worked out the dollars per square inch of film it was a lot
worse than
6x7
Oh, we've become so good at the ragin' DSLR debate that we can do that
on autopilot. The 200 M f4 is a nice lens and very cheap. Zooms have
their places but they just aren't enlargement sharp.
That looks like a distinct possibility (searched found on ebay).
Thanks -- I was sort of afraid no
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
As soon as I can see grain, I figure I have passed the format's maximum
quality
threshold.
William Robb
i periodically shoot ISO 400 BW pushed specifically for the grain. grain
is part of the art of preconceiving an image and making it happen. i
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I've printed this shot a couple of ways. In 8x10 size it's 755 ppi.
Cropped tighter and printed at 11x14, it's 400 ppi. What kind of radius,
blur percentage, and opacity would you use on the 400ppi version to
achieve a general smoothing of skin
Brother William wrote:
A 4x5 transperency is like looking through a window.
kind of a small window, eh? don't you really mean a
transparancy w/ that 8x10 Wisner?
That's what I think, Bill. 4x5 is too small for large format unless you're
enlarging. I think 5x7 is the smallest
William Robb asserted:
I hate bounce flash. It always seems to give people raccoon
eyes.
I like to bounce it off of walls instead of the ceiling, if I can.
Love that swivel head on the AF280T.
Worst raccoon eyes I get are from overhead fluorescent lights. Ick.
Hello everyone,
The amount of responses is overwhelming.
I will ask my friend to take some pictures of the equipment he has for sale
and I'll wait for some more offers.
I'll post the pictures as soon as they are available.
You can check my eBay feedback to see that I am a reliable seller: my id
I used my 280T at a wedding a couple of weeks ago. I use two Lumiquest
bounce devices, the original bouncer and the 80/20 bounce. The latter
allows 80% of the light to bounce off a ceiling and 20% goes off the small
bands white on the web of the bouncer. When I use the 80/20 I like to have
the
Better make that $10 per picture. Your time should be worth more than
$0.50. The guys that shoot pictures of customers posing with one of the
nude showgirls in strip clubs(titty bars)get $25 for a polaroid print.
If you tried to do it cheaper than that, you'd probably be found dead
somewhere. :-)
- Original Message -
From: Herb Chong
Subject: Re: A new DSLR standard emerging?
Wilhelm is the best we've got right now. UV is by far the most
important
factor in fading of dyes.
Wilhelm is about all we have right now.
I'm just not convinced of the validity of his testing
- Original Message -
From: Dr E D F Williams
Subject: Re: Blow ups
Some of the best prints I ever produced showed grain the size
of grape nuts.
Different strokes. I don't really like grain all that much.
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: Herb Chong
Subject: Re: Blow ups
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
As soon as I can see grain, I figure I have passed the
format's maximum
quality
threshold.
William Robb
i periodically shoot ISO 400 BW pushed specifically for the
The dog sled arrived today from icy Toronto Canada. On it was a letter from
Frank Therialt. In the letter was a money order which he says is from folks
on the list. So, THANKS, my friends, it will come in handy to say the least.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 8:26 AM
Subject: Re[6]: A new DSLR standard emerging? (WAS: Re: Nikon DX
lenses: Is this what Pentax is up to?)
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your
I think it will, eventually, because the next round of DSLRs from Canon,
Nikon, Pentax, et al will force them to cut the price. This is
definitely a game of one-up-manship. I was surprised to learn that on
one of the previous Kodak digitals (the 760, I think) you could insert a
PCMCIA WiFi card
Well, I think there are only 16-17 more years until the patent expires on
the Foveon technology. It is a technology that has yet to be proven. And
dust is more of a problem with it then with conventional 4 pixel technology,
as one speck of dust can knock out all three colors. I have not seen the
- Original Message -
From: Dr E D F Williams
Subject: Re: Re[8]: A new DSLR standard emerging? (WAS: Re:
Nikon DX lenses: Is this what Pentax is up to?)
The point I was replying to - missing here - is that a
larger format does not mean better quality - in one particular
case at
I am not needed for this, because the eventual name for this is Darwin.
BR
From: jcoyle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or how about doing 100k on the motorway, holding a folded newspaper on the
wheel with one hand _and_ a mobile phone jammed in the ear with the other?
Sighted near Brisbane two weeks ago.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
My only concern now is the ceremony will be in a larger
golf club type hall with taller
ceilings.Would i be
better to shot the flash at 90 for this or just off 90, and
use the plastic.(the last one
i did 2 years
-Original Message-
From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
David,
I still use 35mm also. I'm just finding it rarer than I expected.
Certainly AF usage is one issue. Most of the time, compact
size isn't
that critical. The two other issues are macro (DOF
problems) and long
- Original Message -
From: Mike Johnston
Subject: Re: The big picture: Photography iwith a larger than a
postagestamp negative.
That's what I think, Bill. 4x5 is too small for large format
unless you're
enlarging. I think 5x7 is the smallest contact-printing size
that makes
sense.
BTW, the 14n has been delayed
tv
-Original Message-
From: Len Paris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
I think it will, eventually, because the next round of
DSLRs from Canon,
Nikon, Pentax, et al will force them to cut the price. This is
definitely a game of one-up-manship. I was
Supposedly, each eye connects to a different part of your brain. One
side is your creative side and the other side is your analytical side.
This is really beyond my range of reliable knowledge but could be a
reasonable explanation.
Len
---
I switched. I used to focus with my right eye, but my
-Original Message-
From: tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
When bouncing, the angle should always be such that you hit the
subject. If you're 5 feet away from your subject and have a 10 foot
ceiling, the bounce will be more than 90. If he's 30 feet away, it
will be greater.
Let me
Dr E D F Williams wrote:
Bob,
I think you answered too quickly without fully getting the point. I didn't
say, or imply, that because this matter had been discussed before it should
not be again. You jumped to that conclusion. Furthermore, after re-reading
what I wrote, I think its
The idea that 35mm glass is sharper than glass for larger formats is a
relict from befor NC cad/cam production. Almost all current production is
ground to the same tolerances, thus they is no penalty to larger surfaces.
Most top quality lens have a resolution of around 72 lpm on film at normal
Delayed? They were originally saying Feb 2003, then they said maybe by
Christmas. What are they saying now?
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 11:54 AM
Subject:
Yes, both rolls were processed at the same lab. I had other rolls done at
the same time with no ill effects, and I've used the lab before.
Looking again, I see the spots on the Portra negs are actually three
dimensional: tiny raised craters on the negative's mask.
The one blemish on the Reala
They were saying Dec. 16th, now they're saying January 16th:
http://kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/cameras/dcsPro14n/qAn
dA.jhtml?id=0.3.6.30.5.8.3.12lc=en
--
Thomas Van Veen Photography
www.bigdayphoto.com
301-758-3085
-Original Message-
From: T Rittenhouse [mailto:[EMAIL
Hi Steve,
on 14 Dec 02 you wrote in pentax.list:
Did Pentax have an APS camera at any point.
Yes and they still have: The Efina PS cameras are APS. E.g.:
http://www.pentaxusa.com/products/cameras/
camera_overview.cfm?productID=10165
Regards, Heiko
Thanks all.
I forgot i bought the Lumiquest pocket bounce last April for the band
photo's.That provided a nice lighting effect.I'll put that in the bag.If i
use the 280T in TTL and the Super Program on flash sync 125,the camera/
flash combo should still fiqure out the proper length of
Forgot to ask this.
I know grips can be bought at finer camera stores everyweregbut the pc cords etc
are they available or are these an ebay item now.
Dave
I bought the Sumpak Basic
Grip that allows me to place the 280T on it. It is connected to the
A 1:1 35mm macro shot enlarged 8x is a 8:1 photo. IOW, the object is 8x life
size. A 1:1 8x10 is still 1:1. Now a 1:8 35mm and a 1:1 8x10 would be about
the same image but the 8x10 shot should be sharper looking, and have a far
smoother tonality.
Ciao,
Graywolf
Is it possible to do macro work with a 4x5? What lens and extension
would be needed?
Dan Scott
They look more like processing problems to me.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: Timothy Sherburne [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax Discussion List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 11:35 PM
Subject: Re: Lowest prices on film?
Both eyes hook into the part of the brain that has been setup for
interpretation of those particular electrical impulses, whereever it
may be. They do not selectively hook up to a so-called creative side
NOR an analytical side.
keith whaley
Len Paris wrote:
Supposedly, each eye connects to a
Timothy Sherburne wrote:
Yes, both rolls were processed at the same lab. I had other rolls done at
the same time with no ill effects, and I've used the lab before.
Looking again, I see the spots on the Portra negs are actually three
dimensional: tiny raised craters on the negative's
The Sunpak Basic Grip comes with a 4 or 5 inch coiled sync cable that
connects to the grip and the PC connector on th camera. If you purchase the
Pentax grip you have to use the more expensive synch cables designed for it
and the cameras.
Jim A.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL
Discount Saturdays.
Today ---
#1 100-sheet boxes of Agfa Brovia 8x10 RC paper, $5 per box
#2 50-sheet boxes of Ilford MGW 11x14 FB paper, $15 per box
#3 Lots of Fuji film. NPL (tungsten, 120, iso160) $1 per roll
These are what I remember. Will pick up something for you if you call me.
My
Now that is absolutely wrong Bill,
The image size and amount of detail will be the same - but probably better
in the case of 35 mm because the optics are usually better corrected. You
can't make a 1:1 image of an object half an inch wide any better on a piece
of film the size of a football field.
Not true.
Dr E D F Williams
http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams
Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery
Updated: March 30, 2002
- Original Message -
From: T Rittenhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 7:18 PM
Subject: Re: 35mm vs 8x10 macro
When bouncing, the angle should always be such that you hit the
subject. If you're 5 feet away from your subject and have a 10 foot
ceiling, the bounce will be more than 90. If he's 30 feet away, it
will be greater.
Let me clarify this...generally, you adjust the flash so it aims at a
Dr E D F Williams wrote:
Now that is absolutely wrong Bill,
You can't make a 1:1 image of an object half an inch wide any
better on a piece of film the size of a football field. We are
talking about an object that will fit your film at 1:1 - in
other words something that is less than an
Everybody relax. Pentax USA says the new Pentax DLSR, will of course, take
the existing K mount lenses for sure.
Robert James
Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While we're thinking digital darkroom, how many PDMLers use a Gaussian
blur layer for portraits? I've just started working with this, and I'm
wondering if others would like to share their numbers. On 150 megabyte
files I've been doing the blur layer at 8
Bob Walkden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
surely it's not just a question of size, but also of the shape of the
rectangle. Shooting 6x6 is very different from shooting 6x9. I would
not be surprised if the preference that many people have for 6x7 or
6x4.5 over 35mm is strongly influenced, even if
Sorry, I don't understand the new math grin, my old math gives the answers
I wrote.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: Dr E D F Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 1:28 PM
Subject: Re: 35mm vs
I should think the front fill light of the Metz would help with raccoon
eyes, though. Doesn't it?
Len
---
I hate bounce flash. It always seems to give people raccoon
eyes. However, you pretty much have to test it on a
situational basis. If the flash has enough power to give
enough light,
Hi,
What about old manual K lenses(K, M and A)?
Alek
[EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa:
Everybody relax. Pentax USA says the new Pentax DLSR, will of course, take
the existing K mount lenses for sure.
Robert James
--r-e-k-l-a-m-a-
Masz do pacenia prowizji bankowi ?
mBank -
Is there more than one Pentax bellows?
The MZS manual says that Auto Bellows A
cannot be used with this camera. There is
one on a local auction site for ZAR600 (about U$D60)
He also has a LX, 3 Finders and a 55mm f1.8 lens plus filter
for ZAR 1500 (about USD150)
Are both these worth the price???
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Just another Sandinavian report. Longish.
Lasse,
Good to see you are alive and well.
Thanks Bob!
Sorry to hear about your mother.
Thanks, that was a couple of years back now, but still... well, you
know.
Hope you can work out the income/employment
In a message dated 12/14/2002 1:31:58 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When bouncing, the angle should always be such that you hit the
subject. If you're 5 feet away from your subject and have a 10 foot
ceiling, the bounce will be more than 90. If he's 30 feet away, it
In fact Alek, I was serious. I would like to be able to use older
screw mount lenses on a DSLR!
Andre
But it is important for many of us to use old manual lenses on new
dslr. At least A lenses could be mounted and work like they do on
MZS and PZ1p for instance.
If not I think many people
What enlargements have you done? What quality?
Alek
Uytkownik Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa:
Pentax Optio 330 review
by Christian Skofteland
I'll start out by noting that I purchased this camera as a digital
replacement of my IQZoom 120 film camera. I still use the IQZoom but not
From: Paul Stenquist
Subject: Re: Just another Sandinavian report. Longish.
It's great to hear from Lasse. He was one of my favorite posters,
and I
miss his robust presence here.
Paul
Thanks a lot Paul.
Robust sounds good enough.
Now I will only have to figure out what it means...
Just
Graywolf,
Should be sharper looking and have a far smoother tonality - indeed. Why
should this be so?And how are you going to see this on an image an inch
square in the middle of a piece of film of 80 square inches? Better to cut
off 79 square inches, don't you think, so you can get it on your
atPentax is up to?)?=
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: onet.poczta
Hi, I agree with you.Using old lenses on new bodies would be enough.
Alek
Uytkownik Mike Ignatiev [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa:
I am, for one, would be glad to see the new lenses, as long as Pentax continues the
backward-compatibility
- Original Message -
From: Dan Scott
Subject: OT: Re: 35mm vs 8x10 macro
Is it possible to do macro work with a 4x5? What lens and
extension
would be needed?
Short focal length lenses in the 65mm to 90mm range will work
with most any 4x5.
William Robb
From: Dan Scott
Subject: Re: Just another Sandinavian report. Longish.
On Thursday, December 12, 2002, at 05:00 PM, Lasse Karlsson wrote:
Hi Lasse,
Nice to see you back again. Congratulations on all the good things
happening to you. And congratulations to the 17 year old's mother
for
Hi,
I own M35/2.8 and just wondered if K35/3.5 or 2.0 is much better to re-sell M version
and think about any other K or FA 35mm. Now I am waiting what Pentax does with
digital. maybe it would not pay to stick with him.
KSMC 135/2.5 is really very nice performer. I bought it like new in Vienna
From: Daniel J. Matyola
Subject: OT: For our friends in Sverige
Happy Santa Lucia Day!
Thanks. In fact your message arrived yesterday just as I was checking
my camera for some film in order to go down town and shoot a couple of
shots of this town's elected Lucia for this year.
Think I got a
- Original Message -
From: Len Paris
Subject: RE: Slight OT:Flash test for the wedding
I should think the front fill light of the Metz would help
with raccoon
eyes, though. Doesn't it?
Mine is the CT-2. The CT-4 is the one with the second flash
tube.
William Robb
Len
---
I
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Just another Sandinavian report. Longish.
Out shooting some bands at a concert in late summer I was
more or less
picked up by this young woman who very much wanted to become a
model.
Well, she was nice and funny, and very persistent. (And she
said
our life??=
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: onet.poczta
I also would like to stay with Pentax, if comaptibility of new dslr and old manual
lenses will be ensured.
Why do not you like Canon?
Alek
Uytkownik Arnold Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa:
1.) I would never like to quit Pentax, as Pentax offers
Herb Chong wrote:
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have started getting mostly blue screens, fatal errors, access
violation and such.
(Very often including vxd at mcscan, win32 and at a unit?
0028... something, if this means anything to anybody.)
I have run virus scans,
Huh? The Pentax MF lenses are significantly weaker performers than almost any
35mm prime lens. Eg the FA645 75/2.8, which is an equal performer as the 80mm
Carl Zeiss for the Hasselblad, is worse than any K-mount prime I've ever used.
Of course theres no law saying that larger format lenses
In terms of resolution, the most that the human eye can resolve is 8 lp/mm
at a distance of 12 - 18 inches. This is the starting point for deriving
what is needed for the resolution of the individual pieces (film, lens,
etc. ) of the imaging system. The short answer is that with perfect
technique
- Original Message -
From: Mike Johnston
Subject: Tell her it's better than hookers and booze
I think I feel some enabling coming on...
Mike, you are going to get me divorced if you keep this up.
William Robb
What is it that you think you need, Bill?
I don't need
Hi Andre,
All the manual says is Note that Auto bellows A cannot be used with this
camera because it cannot be fitted to it.
Maybe the flash is too close to the mount I been to Boz's site, but I
still can't figure out
which one Pentax is talking about. How many bellows are there. I want the
--- Bill Sawyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Welcome back, Mark!!
Thanks for the welcome Bill, Bruce, and Tom. I've been
around off and on, mostly monitoring through the
archives. I sure wish Shel didn't leave.
Where are you these days?
I'm in San Antonio.
Stick around awhile, there's some
The rules in the USA are that for news/editorial use no release is
necessary. This has not stopped individuals from successfully suing when
their picture was used in a magazine (NY Times Magazine). Nothing that a
minor signs is binding, so a release would have to be signed by a
parent/guardian.
On Saturday, December 14, 2002, at 02:19 PM, Andre Langevin wrote:
Good price for an Auto-bellows A. I would also like to know why it
does not fit the latest Pentax body.
Might not be rotatable due to the handgrip.
Dan Scott
- Original Message -
From: Feroze Kistan
Subject: Re: auto bellows + LX
Hi Andre,
All the manual says is Note that Auto bellows A cannot be
used with this
camera because it cannot be fitted to it.
It looks like the MZ-S prism extends out past the lens mount.
I would bet that the
I liked Sal's shot even more:
http://www1.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=99083
BR
From: Len Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The future of event photography?
http://www1.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=516733
I've always been curious about this effect, which I first heard it called the
diffraction effect. I curious about the relative size of this. Suppose we had
film with grain too small to matter for any typical enlargement. Would the resolution
gained by the smaller circle of coverage for 35
See below...
Dr E D F Williams wrote:
Now that is absolutely wrong Bill,
The image size and amount of detail will be the same - but probably better
in the case of 35 mm because the optics are usually better corrected. You
can't make a 1:1 image of an object half an inch wide any better on
Let's see, with Polaroid film selling for about $9.00 per pack, he's getting
about $0.40 per picture, and that doesn't even cover the flashbulbs :-)
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Bruce Rubenstein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 4:10 PM
Subject:
My guess would be no. The tonality would be smoother with the larger
negative, something I've noticed between the 645 and 35mm.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 4:13 PM
Subject: Re: A new DSLR
Lasse Karlsson wrote:
From: Keith Whaley Subject: Re: Just another Sandinavian report.
Longish.
Lots and lots of rapt attention! ;^)
:-)
Lasse
(And it's svenska flicka (same prononciation).
Oooops! I can pronounce it okay, but missed out on the spelling...
Or
1 - 100 of 157 matches
Mail list logo
