On Dec 18, 2004, at 6:59 PM, Juan Buhler wrote:
Nothing to write home about, although they might work as part of a
series. Just wanted to post the first pics taken with my new zoom.
I quite like the first one, except maybe for the grey streak at left
which I find a little distracting. I like how
On 17/12/04, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed:
Even then, I was able to make the thing work by pushing the socket
back into position and whacking it a couple of times with a hard
object.
Funny, my wife says the same thing.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places,
On 17/12/04, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed:
Any, here's the question: Assuming that a rectangular hood is of the
appropriate size for a given lens, is there an advantage to using one of
the perfect hoods which is a tulip variety. He's a pic of a perfeckt
hood on the K24/2.8:
Shel,
On 18/12/04, Markus Maurer, discombobulated, unleashed:
I liked the portrait of Stefan and prefer it to the second one.
thanks
Thanks Markus
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
Worth even more than that I guess:
http://tinyurl.com/52xov
Don
-Original Message-
From: Collin R Brendemuehl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 4:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Was it really worth that much?
Hi all,
I decided to have a go at selling framed prints of some of my photos.
It's been a heckuva mad rush to get things set up before Xmas - this
past week has been especially hectic - but I've set up a stall in a
local craft shop. It's quite a good deal really, you hire your choice
of the
Hi,
Saturday, December 18, 2004, 1:41:06 AM, Graywolf wrote:
That is correct. People who do are never experts. Experts are people who talk
and write articles. Like me for instance.
No. That's an abuse of language, meaning precisely the opposite of the
true definition. An expert is a person
Hi,
Saturday, December 18, 2004, 2:50:00 AM, Peter wrote:
They were engineers not theorists.
I've never met a good engineer who wasn't also a theorist.
--
Cheers,
Bob
Graywolf wrote:
Interestingly enough chip sizes have gotten bigger and chip density has
increased to the point where Itel, etc. are ready to start producing
dual processors on a single chip. All of this stuff takes me back a few
years when they were predicting that IC's were near the end of
Sorry, I'm away untill January 12th
Your email has been forwarded to my web mail address and I will pick
these up from time to time. If its urgent please contact Joan Reed for
Chest Clinic stuff ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Sonya Johnston for lung
function stuff ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) or Pam or Martine for
Pemtax may not be the market leader in manufacturing professional lenses for
35mm photography.
But Pentax makes very good consumer lenses.
I just tested three consumer zoom lenses:
Pentax SMC-F 3.5-5.6/35-80mm
Tokina 2.8-4.3/28-70mm
Tamron 3.5-5.6/28-80mm Aspherical
The Pentax-F (for which I
I use my *ist D all the time with three Studio Pro lights. Did you wire
more than one of them to the PC terminal? Two should be set to slave.
Only one should be fired by the camera.
Paul
On Dec 18, 2004, at 12:48 AM, Steve Pearson wrote:
I rented a Speedotron 3 light kit. I took about 3
shots
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Joe Wilensky just pointed me towards the Sigma Perfect Hood for use on
the K24/2.8.
From which Sigma lens is it?
Kostas
I have a couple of questions about hoods:
- I believe the Takumar 24/3.5 hood vignettes on my K18/3.5. Perhaps I
am not careful enough to align it, but on the rare occasion I use
this lens I have seen vignetting. Any other options, seeing as one
can't easily source the one for the 18? A
Saturday, December 18, 2004, 6:45:32 AM, Michel wrote:
MCG Peter Smekal a crit :
Is that comparable to the Yashica T4super/t5?
Peter
MCG I don't know the Yashica, but the Espio Mini is small as the Olympus
MCG * * , and i's Pentax.
And is just a normal (albeit small) PS. The Ricoh is a lot
I've not observed vignetting using the 24/3.5 hood on my 18/3.5, but you
can certainly use the Takumar hood made for the 20/4.5 with no problems.
The Tak 105/2.8 hood should be fine on the 85/2.0. I use it on the M50/1.4
with no vignetting or problems.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Kostas
AFAIK, it's from a Sigma 24mm
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 12/18/2004 5:02:00 AM
Subject: Re: Lens Hood Question: Perfect v Rectangular
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Joe Wilensky just pointed me towards
Thanks ... the page has been mentioned earlier, Cotty.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 12/18/2004 12:53:55 AM
Subject: Re: Lens Hood Question: Perfect v Rectangular
On 17/12/04, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed:
Here it is again, the annual posting of this timeless Christmas story. It
is the story upon which the movie Smoke is based, and which appears at
the end of the movie, as told to William Hurt by Harvey Keitel. Many of
you have read this before, some have requested it be posted again, and, of
If it was a dutch master type, he would need one of those big hats and
dark coats.
That or a cigar...
Seriously, a very nice shot Fred, especially for just a trial. Makes
you look wise and serious, but you've got to lose the t-shirt to make
it all come together.
Regards, Bob S.
On Fri, 17 Dec
I bought my self a Pentax MX for two days ago, and I took some test photos
today. After a while the mirror jammed in locked-up position. This hasn't
happened when I tested the camera in room temperature. But the weather was a
little bit chilly (5 Celsius, 41,00 Fahrenheit) and windy today.
I
The Takumar 24/3.5 hood is a perfect fit for the M35/2. It obviously
won't provide optimum coverage, but it seems to be adequate, and it
looks great :-).
Paul
On Dec 18, 2004, at 8:27 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I've not observed vignetting using the 24/3.5 hood on my 18/3.5, but
you
can
Saturday, December 18, 2004, 2:51:48 PM, Paul wrote:
PS The Takumar 24/3.5 hood is a perfect fit for the M35/2. It obviously
PS won't provide optimum coverage, but it seems to be adequate, and it
PS looks great :-).
PS Paul
Hi Paul, for the M35/2, a perfect hood is the rectangular metal or
Are we talking about the same hood, Paul?
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 12/18/2004 5:53:22 AM
Subject: Re: Speaking of hoods
The Takumar 24/3.5 hood is a perfect fit for the M35/2. It obviously
won't provide optimum
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 05:38:38 -0800, Shel Belinkoff
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here it is again, the annual posting of this timeless Christmas story. It
is the story upon which the movie Smoke is based, and which appears at
the end of the movie, as told to William Hurt by Harvey Keitel. Many of
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 21:59:59 -0800, Juan Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Two images, taken with the A35-70/4 on the istD at f4, ISO 800:
http://www.jbuhler.com/blog/archives/0144.html
Nothing to write home about, although they might work as part of a
series. Just wanted to post the
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 14:49:04 +0100, Joakim Johansson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I bought my self a Pentax MX for two days ago, and I took some test photos
today. After a while the mirror jammed in locked-up position. This hasn't
happened when I tested the camera in room temperature. But the
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 09:30:11 -0500, frank theriault
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I bought an MX some years ago, and the mirror jammed up every 10
frames or so. Turned out that a CLA fixed it up real nice.
I'm thinking that maybe the cooler temps make the lubricant more
viscous, so it jams up
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 08:55:48 +, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 18/12/04, Markus Maurer, discombobulated, unleashed:
I liked the portrait of Stefan and prefer it to the second one.
thanks
Thanks Markus
I don't know. They're both pretty good. Different, but good. I
don't think
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 02:29:44 +0100, Markus Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Rob
my girlfriend makes clay figures and I will try to photograph each before
she sells them
to make a nice catalogue in A4 format for her as a present...
This is another try with the new Pentax 50mm A 2.8 macro
Indeed! Actually, for many cameras, a CLA should be considered a routine
maintenance item. Depending on the camera, how much you value it, and its
value, every couple of years or so may be a good rule of thumb.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PS: As an
and not only aesthetically...
best,
mishka
Aesthetically, the babe's much hotter, though (sorry, Stephan) vbg.
cheers,
frank
i suppose, people who do, do that without any kind of expertise (knowledge),
just picking some 2x4s and banging them together until... boom! a new IC
technology appears!
best,
mishka
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 20:41:06 -0500, Graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That is correct. People who do are never
they (square and tulip) are *strictly* equivalent, if designed properly.
if not, the one that is mis-designed worse will be worse.
mishka
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:42:09 +1000, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 17 Dec 2004 at 20:52, Andre Langevin wrote:
I would put it reverse. The
so do i. and can pronounce it too.
mishka
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 18:44:48 -0600, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Rob StuddertSubject: Re: OK, I gotta ask!
So what's the correct pronunciation for Scheimpflug?
Pop Quiz:
Who knows what it is
No. The D-FA 50mm Macro is 1:1 AFAIK so it is NOT the same optic as FA
Macro 50mm.
Thibouille
Alan Chan wrote:
--- William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good news. It tells me that Pentax is at least thinking in terms of
full frame digital.
Or they just borrowed the FA optics and
Hi Paul,
I had all three plugged into the power pack, and I
thought I had 2 set up as slaves. This was my first
time using these lights, so I'm not completely sure.
A local repair shop (Pentax authorized) tells me that
there is an internal fuse that has probably blown.
I'll send it in to
FA 50 f 2.8 macro is also 1:1.Both FA and D-FA have 8 elements in 7
groups, but this doesn't mean they're identical. There may be different
sorts of optical glass used, for example.
Optical formulas of 100mm macros are also the same (9 elements in 8 groups).
Well, seems that I have to borrow
niche product means a selling price easily twice that of the mainstream.
digital cameras are profitable only in very high volumes or very high
prices.
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: Frantisek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004
the limiting factor in processors and the limiting factor in imaging sensors
are two completely different things. right now, processors are limited by
power density while imaging sensors are limited by thermal noise and the
number of incoming photons.
Herb
- Original Message -
All the talk about 'safe' flashes to use on the D got
me a little concerned.
The last thing I want to do is damage the poor thing. :-(
I took some measurements from various units that I use.
Here are the sync pin voltages I measured from
various flash units:
Pentax 200T4.65
Hi Markus,
First, I know nothing about flash, so I wouldn't presume to suggest
anything in that realm, or the realm of studio or other types of artificial
light. Now, my opinion about flash is that it hoovers LOL and is
completely inappropriate for these photos unless you really know what
you're
Here are the isolators I'm refering to:
http://www.adorama.com/WNSSPC.html
http://www.adorama.com/WNSSHSHS.html
Don
-Original Message-
From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 9:32 AM
To: PDML
Subject: safe Flash Sync Voltages
All the
Alright, my bad.
So yes, I think a real test is obviously needed...
Thibouille
Margus Mnnik wrote:
FA 50 f 2.8 macro is also 1:1.Both FA and D-FA have 8 elements in 7
groups, but this doesn't mean they're identical. There may be different
sorts of optical glass used, for example.
I use my Pentax AF 400T and my Studio Pro mono lights on the *ist D
constantly. I must have more than 1000 firings without incident.
Paul
On Dec 18, 2004, at 10:49 AM, Don Sanderson wrote:
Here are the isolators I'm refering to:
http://www.adorama.com/WNSSPC.html
Just ordered a Kata Elements Cover from B and H.
Anyone have any experience of them?
http://tinyurl.com/5s6my
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
Anyone have any experience of the Australian Aquatec covers?
They seem to be expensive...
http://www.sportsshooter.com/funpix_view.html?id=2744
http://www.aquatech.com.au/products/sportshields/sportshields.htm
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
Definitive video about 'chimping'. It's a hoot.
warning : 38 MB QT clip...
http://www.sportsshooter.com/special_feature/chimping/index.html
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
Thanks Frank!
/Joakim
I bought an MX some years ago, and the mirror jammed up every 10
frames or so. Turned out that a CLA fixed it up real nice.
I'm thinking that maybe the cooler temps make the lubricant more
viscous, so it jams up the shutter/mirror mechanism easier than at
room
Now that's not very nice :-(
--
Birdbr... e, Christian
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Don Sanderson wrote on 12/17/2004, 6:51 PM:
Christian?
-Original Message-
From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: Don Sanderson
Subject: RE: DA
My friend has used his Nikon D100 several times with my Pentax 2P hotshoe
adapter to trigger my Courtenay studio flashes with no problems. Of course,
I have to turn the room lights on so it can see to focus, unlike the MZ-S,
which does fine with the modeling lights.
Pat White
Hi Jens
I made some good photos with the Tokina 28-70mm SD 3.5-4.5 on the SFXn ,
maybe this is not the same
formula as the Tokina you mentioned?
I like the Pentax A Zoom 4.0 35-70mm too because it can focus much closer
than the Tokina with 0.7m
and has a constant aperture of 4. I liked the
I wouldn't worry about 7-8 volts on the flash terminal. Now 70-80
volts, I'd worry about. :-)
-Mat
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 09:49:11 -0600, Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here are the isolators I'm refering to:
http://www.adorama.com/WNSSPC.html
http://www.adorama.com/WNSSHSHS.html
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
The Tak 105/2.8 hood should be fine on the 85/2.0. I use it on the M50/1.4
with no vignetting or problems.
Excellent! I will try it on the FA50/1.7 as well then!
Thanks Shel.
Kostas (thanks for Auggie Wren's story as well; I am a fan)
carries around a bucketful of leeches,
Leeches are making a medical comeback seems they
can be pretty useful afterall.
Jerry in Houston
OMG, there was a remake of even THAT film? There is
a reason to hate
hollywood - whenever there is a good film, they ruin
it by making a
remake ;-)
Yeah, Blues Brothers 2000, I think it was called. It
was horrible (as
one would expect). I didn't see it, I'm going from
reviews.
YES
I guess a Tak 55mm 1.8 hood should be fine for any 50mm?
Unfortunately the K version has 2mm thread instead of 49mm for the Tak
version. I didn't pay attention enough so I got a 52mm hood..
---
Thibouille
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
The Tak
Thanks Dave and Frank. Yes, I agree about your comments on the second
image, although for some reason I liked it when I took it. Goes to
show how hard it is to edit your work soon after shooting.
Now I think this pic of the same guy is better:
http://www.jbuhler.com/blog/archives/0145.html
Hi Shel
indeed does a darker background add a lot sometimes.
I tried some other shots with a dark grey piece of marble
like this eatable piece of art -- we call it Grittibanz in Swiss German
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2968241
but will do it again with the
lightning methods Rob
Hi Shel
sorry for the error, but the photo is 282KB, nothing for slow dial up
connections.
I forgot to resize the photo before uploading
I tried some other shots with a dark grey piece of marble
like this eatable piece of art -- we call it Grittibanz in Swiss
German
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Thibs wrote:
I guess a Tak 55mm 1.8 hood should be fine for any 50mm?
Unfortunately the K version has 2mm thread instead of 49mm for the Tak
version. I didn't pay attention enough so I got a 52mm hood..
Is it metal? Does it screw into the thread or is it the dodgy bayonet
The SMC-K 50mm F1.2 talk reminded me of a good Dante Stella article on the
subject of fast lenses at:
http://dantestella.com/technical/fast.html
After a lengthy discussion of technical issues related to transmission vs
aperture, Dante ends the article with the following quote:
But admit
I've been trying to find info on just what the sync
contact is actually rated for amp/volt wise.
When I contacted Olympus about my C5050 digital I
was told 'absolutely not to use' the Vivitar 285
without a flash isolator.
It wasn't due to the voltage in that case but the
surge current when fired.
I think you're probably right and it would be fine
on all the flashes I listed and the 400T.
For $50.00 however I'll get a lot of peace of mind.
I don't use the 285s on the shoe anyway so it's no
hassle to use the isolator.
Don
-Original Message-
From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 18. december 2004 12:46
Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Emne: Comsumer Zooms
Pemtax may not be the market leader in manufacturing professional lenses for
Some of my test shots are now published. The foucs point is at the battery
in the centre.
At 35mm Focal length: http://gallery37564.fotopic.net/p10009542.html
At 70mm Focal length: http://gallery37564.fotopic.net/p10009545.html
Is this a back focus problem (the Tamron lens). Or is this Tamron
I think this is a great invention.
Would something like this be available with a device, that can shift + and -
? I know these (without the isolator) are necessary for some digital
cameras. I guess this is why my *ist D won't work with the studio strobe
outfit.
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I was watching the PBS show Frontline a couple of nights back, and during
the intro a video collage is played, in which a 9.8mm f/1.2 lens is shown.
Clearly it's a lens for a video camera or 16mm camera, or some such. That
got me thinking about the possibility of adapting such a focal length to
On Saturday 18 December 2004 12:11, Jerry in Houston wrote:
carries around a bucketful of leeches,
Leeches are making a medical comeback seems they
can be pretty useful afterall.
As I recall, the best medical use for leeches these days is in the
post-operative phase of surgery to
Changing polarity should just be a matter of making
a short adapter cord with the wires 'crossed over'.
Older cameras used physical contacts to close the
circuit so were not polarity dependent.
With newer cameras it depends on what device they use,
an SCR will be sensitive to polarity, a double
The Tokina is not the same lens, Markus. Perhaps the same formula.
Not an SD (whatever that means). It's quite nice, but not really outstanding
in any way.
I bought it because 35mm is not wide enough for me (for the *ist D). I
deposited my Tokina AT-X 2.6-2.8/28-70mm Pro II (brilliant optics BTW)
Hi Shel,
A 35mm movie camera lens has the widest coverage of those you mentioned, but it
still doesn't have a big enough image circle for an APS sized sensor. Unless
the lens was designed to cover more than the 35mm movie frame, you would have
vignetting in the corners.
Paul
I was watching
Let me know when you find a source for the isolator. I will look into it. I
just finished a shoot in my studio. I shot about 50 frames. Again no problems.
I should check the pin voltage on my monolights. I have no idea what it is.
I think you're probably right and it would be fine
on all the
Hey Jens, I'm confused (common), I don't see a 3.5-5.6/
35-80 in SMC or uncoated Pentax lenses. ;-/
Don
-Original Message-
From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 12:25 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Comsumer Zooms
The Tokina is not
In a message dated 12/18/2004 7:32:25 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
the limiting factor in processors and the limiting factor in imaging sensors
are two completely different things. right now, processors are limited by
power density while imaging sensors are limited by
Adorama has them, the links are below.
Don
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 12:32 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Isolators_Was- safe Flash Sync Voltages
Let me know when you find a source for the
In a message dated 12/17/2004 7:56:29 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Pop Quiz:
Who knows what it is without looking it up?
For the record, I do.
William Robb
For the record, I don't.
-frank
===
Me either. So I'll bite. What/who?
Marnie aka that Doe
But the experts who usually opine that something is impossible are pure
theorists.
Bob W wrote:
Hi,
Saturday, December 18, 2004, 2:50:00 AM, Peter wrote:
They were engineers not theorists.
I've never met a good engineer who wasn't also a theorist.
--
I can understand why mankind
In a message dated 12/17/2004 3:56:21 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2920209
[snip]
Comments are always welcome. Be brave! I'll still like it, no matter
what you say! Throw your worst at me! vbg
Seriously, thanks in advance
So PAWs have evolved to PESOs? Pictures every so often?
Hmmm, probably suits my style more. Not really a picture of the week type of
shooter.
Unless, of course, PESO means MORE than once a week?
Hehehehehe.
Marnie aka that Doe person
From the Pentax DPReview Forum:
The release notes do not mention istDS but I have just this minute downloaded
and tried it anyway. Joy oh joy oh joy - it is there!!!
I was disappointed to see that it did not mention the DS. Works like a charm!
http://download.adobe.com/...
In a message dated 12/17/2004 10:01:02 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
images, taken with the A35-70/4 on the istD at f4, ISO 800:
http://www.jbuhler.com/blog/archives/0144.html
Nothing to write home about, although they might work as part of a
series. Just wanted to
In a message dated 12/15/2004 5:02:16 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 23:16:29 -0800, Shel Belinkoff
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While driving I spotted this scene, and asked my friend, Ron, who was
driving, to stop the truck, and got out to make this
On 18/12/04, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed:
I was watching the PBS show Frontline a couple of nights back, and during
the intro a video collage is played, in which a 9.8mm f/1.2 lens is shown.
Clearly it's a lens for a video camera or 16mm camera, or some such. That
got me thinking
It is metal, circular one with a 49mm thread.
of course I should have written the K version has 52mm thread and not
2mm. A 58mm cap (a very simple one, from my non SMC 28-80mm) does fit
on it pretty well so I can let the hood on the lens.
Thibouille
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
On
On 18/12/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed:
A 35mm movie camera lens has the widest coverage of those you mentioned,
but it still doesn't have a big enough image circle for an APS sized
sensor. Unless the lens was designed to cover more than the 35mm movie
frame, you would have
In a message dated 12/16/2004 2:09:23 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
More shots from my day at the beach last month:
http://www.skofteland.net/displayimage.php?album=1pos=11
http://www.skofteland.net/displayimage.php?album=1pos=10
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 06:53:49PM -0500, frank theriault wrote:
This is from the same Pirate Jenny concert (the group that my friend
Jennifer heads up) as the last two that I posted of this series:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2920209
I kind of hesitated posting this one,
Kostas Kavoussanakis, at T=1709.56 :
The Tak 105/2.8 hood should be fine on the 85/2.0. I use it on the M50/1.4
with no vignetting or problems.
Excellent! I will try it on the FA50/1.7 as well then!
I'm using Tak 28/3.5 on mine. It doesn't work very well as a hood but looks
s
In a message dated 12/15/2004 10:05:54 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Another from the bottom of the box
Me with my first movie camera, a 16mm Bolex ;-)) I made a couple
of short films (one reel) while I had it. The pic is awful ... of course,
being behind the movie
Un-mangled link
http://download.adobe.com/pub/adobe/photoshop/cameraraw/win/Camera_Raw_2_4_b
eta.zip
Powell
On Dec 18, 2004, at 4:39 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
First, I know nothing about flash, so I wouldn't presume to suggest
anything in that realm, or the realm of studio or other types of
artificial
light. Now, my opinion about flash is that it hoovers LOL and is
completely inappropriate for these
I thought some of you guys might want to know this :-)
Many years ago (1993, I believe), before I got a professional flash strobe
outfit, I made a flash outfit myself.
I bought four used Metz CT 45 camera flash units (I already had two). I
mounted these separately on an Osram Pilot.
This is a
So the *istDS's shakedown cruise continues. Went down to my local bar to get
some pictures of Welbilt (great indie-altrock band here in Northern
Virginia-- look out for 'em: http://www.welbiltmusic.com) at their regular
Wednesday show.
The results are on my livejournal:
OK, Don - I admit to being wrong. Here's what it says on the lens:
SMC Pentax-F 4-5.6 35-80mm.
Sorry
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 18. december 2004 19:37
Til: [EMAIL
I would have expected, that a pro style camera
like the *ist D would have a some kind of isolater built in?
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 18. december 2004 16:32
Til: PDML
My Normans have 200V and my old, old, old Vivitar 283 has 260V. Those kinds of
voltages you have to worry about.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
Idiot Proof == Expert Proof
---
Mat Maessen wrote:
I wouldn't worry about 7-8 volts on the flash terminal. Now
A., another expert. I didn't see it but it was horrible.
Well, I did see it, it wasn't bad, not up to the original, but not that bad. And
it was not a remake, it was a sequel.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
Idiot Proof == Expert Proof
---
frank
That's essentially what I use, although I was able to get a sheet of white
translucent plastic from TAP plastics, a small chain store that specializes
in ... ta da! plastic ;-)) I also sometimes use similar sheets to put over
the windows when the sun is low in the sky or too bright.
There's also
humm, isn't an APS sensor 16x24mm? A single frame 35mm is 18x24, so it should
cover fine. The problem really is that such lenses are very expensive, multi
thousand dollars. I forget what the 16mm frame is (10x14mm maybe) but it would
cover some of the smaller sensors. But the same applies they
1 - 100 of 191 matches
Mail list logo
