Should have known, Cotty... kind of slow lately, sorry. :-)
LF
Cotty escreveu:
On 20/3/09, Luiz Felipe, discombobulated, unleashed:
On 20/3/09, Luiz Felipe, discombobulated, unleashed:
broken diaphragm lever
You're talking about the *ist Ds, right?
Actually, the broken diaphragm lever
hm... was under the idea you had no film cameras left...
LF
Godfrey DiGiorgi escreveu:
...
All my Minox subminiature cameras are in fine working order, and I have
a few hundred rolls of film in the freezer for them. Someday I'll make
some more Minox photographs.
Godfrey
--
PDML
Bruce, I switched brands - and formats often when I was working with
photography. Sold most of my cameras to buy different ones I needed or
offered some feature that would make my work easier. One camera - a
Sinar 4x5 was absolutely needed to make some photos I had interest.
Used Canon Fd,
Bob, here in BR a working Mx runs $100 to $150 with lens - that could be
usable. Repairing my 2nd Mx should almost reach that value, but I get a
camera good for some 5 years more - I don't take as many photos as I'd like.
Still can't put money in a second Mx unless it's the cheaper way to get
a
Joseph, the time to buy gear is the time I almost wish I'd live in the
US...
Being fair, I do miss gumbo, diving in the Keys and Disneyworld to some
extent. ;-)
LF
Joseph McAllister escreveu:
On Mar 20, 2009, at 09:36 , Bob Sullivan wrote:
The MX cameras are nice, but have suffered heavy
Trust me Doug, Canon is not that quick anyway. Not hearing the lens
makes some difference, and since so many have vouched for the speed I
accept the Canon top bodies are fast. Not the 500n, at least mine, nor
the Xti a friend is using and I borrow now and then, the moment they're
using the
Boris, I can and will sell the 500n after the DS comes home. But till
there (some 30 days or so, call me spoiled) I get to carry 2 systems
when I'm serious about photo. No big deal, just two bags and none big...
instead of one bag with one set of lenses and two cameras.
I intended to repair one
Folks, thanks a lot for the ideas - just finished reading, spent yet
another weekend without net, so my comments are coming all at once. I
will postpone decision for a while, and ask Pentax tech more questions.
Leaving film for digital is still in the future for me. Some of the
places I'll be
Thanks Christine - very good advice indeed, I wouldn't expect otherwise!
Thanks folks!!
LF
Christine Aguila escreveu:
Hi Luiz: I'm not really knowledgeable enough to give you good advice,
but I did want to pop in on this thread to wish you the best in your
next steps. It looks like lots of
Joseph, I don't have to use film. But the combo of a cheap (Mx) 35mm
camera with 10 rolls of Fuji is the cheap gear I'd like to carry when I
go far from the sea, into the wilderness.
Almost agree with your point on the Lx and the Pz1p. Only I'm still
thinking of the Lx as the more reliable
Bob, don't forget the destiny of out-of-work horses...
LF
Bob W escreveu:
They still make buggy whips too. I doubt anyone has any
illusion that
the horse drawn buggy is still alive as a transportation machine,
though. :-)
it is, actually. Most of the world's population do not live in
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Luiz Felipe luiz.fel...@techmit.com.br wrote:
Bob, don't forget the destiny of out-of-work horses...
That's a sticky subject.
--
Scott Loveless
Cigarette-free since December 14th, 2008
http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
I'll just keep them quiet for a while, Bong. Good idea about the Mx mix
- but I'd fix the Lx first, if possible. We'll see...
LF
Bong Manayon escreveu:
I have two MX as well which fits the description of yours: an ugly
looking one that works and a nice one that had defects. I took both
to a
On Mar 23, 2009, at 11:18 , Scott Loveless wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Luiz Felipe luiz.fel...@techmit.com.br
wrote:
Bob, don't forget the destiny of out-of-work horses...
That's a sticky subject.
While I'm tanning tomorrow I'll hide my remorse for the horse.
Joseph
On 23/3/09, Luiz Felipe, discombobulated, unleashed:
Should have known, Cotty... kind of slow lately, sorry. :-)
Usted es solamente tan lento como la muchacha que usted siente ;-
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
Lessee: flim cameras still in the cabinet that I can think of ...
Olympus Pen EE, Pen S, Pen EE-S
Minox 35GT-E
Minox IIIS, B, C, EC, CLX
Rollei 35S, Rollei 35 Classic Platinum
BH/Canon Dial 35 II
Minolta 16, 16-II, 16-Ps
Contax Tix
Pentax 645
Kodak Brownie (1909 vintage)
I'm sure there are a
Lessee: flim cameras still in the cabinet that I can think of ...
Olympus Pen EE, Pen S, Pen EE-S
Minox 35GT-E
Minox IIIS, B, C, EC, CLX
Rollei 35S, Rollei 35 Classic Platinum
BH/Canon Dial 35 II
Minolta 16, 16-II, 16-Ps
Contax Tix
Pentax 645
Kodak Brownie (1909 vintage)
I'm sure
On Mar 23, 2009, at 3:41 PM, Bob W wrote:
They'd be the waterproof ones, I expect.
LOL!!
G
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
Well, just bought a *ist DS with the 18~55, and one of these days I'll
get to receive it... the price we pay for that lovely and cheap address
not too close to the sea ;-)
But the new (for me, at least) camera means my 35mm gear repair schedule
is on hold for some time, and maybe for good. I'm
On 20/3/09, Luiz Felipe, discombobulated, unleashed:
broken diaphragm lever
You're talking about the *ist Ds, right?
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Luiz Felipe wrote:
Well, just bought a *ist DS with the 18~55, and one of these days I'll
get to receive it... the price we pay for that lovely and cheap address
not too close to the sea ;-) [ ... ]
I'm watching BR ebay-like sites, and right now is the wrong time to sell
anything 35mm around
Actually, the broken diaphragm lever is in my #2 Mx camera, and the *ist
DS is the digital body recently purchased.
LF
Cotty escreveu:
On 20/3/09, Luiz Felipe, discombobulated, unleashed:
broken diaphragm lever
You're talking about the *ist Ds, right?
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
||
Well, I'd probably do that - buy another 35mm Pentax - the moment I sell
the Canon kit. Not before, since the $$ is not easy to come by lately.
:-/ And there is always a bigger brother (digital) to the DS... Well,
I'd better keep working, that's some cash to spend in gear, as soon as I
earn
I'd find it very hard to justify putting any money at all into 35mm
camera repairs. There's little or no point to it, at least for me.
Better to put that money into a second digital body, new or used, and
dump the lot of 35mm film gear for whatever can be gotten out of it.
Godfrey
--
I find no problem in repairing older 35mm gear.
His LX lasted nearly 30 years. I'd be surprised if any digital camera
available today would be operational half that long (other than museum
pieces that never got used).
If the repair doesn't cost too much and he can get another couple
decades of
On 20/3/09, Luiz Felipe, discombobulated, unleashed:
On 20/3/09, Luiz Felipe, discombobulated, unleashed:
broken diaphragm lever
You're talking about the *ist Ds, right?
Actually, the broken diaphragm lever is in my #2 Mx camera, and the *ist
DS is the digital body recently purchased.
LF
Luiz,
In sympathy...
I still have rolls of film in the PZ-1 and MZ-S from when I purchased
my first digital.
It was a *ist DS and 3+ years ago.
I didn't expect to, but I never looked back.
I still have film in the freezer, but digital is cheaper and most satisfying!
I wouldn't fix anything but the
I have two MX as well which fits the description of yours: an ugly
looking one that works and a nice one that had defects. I took both
to a shop and they made a hybrid good looking and working one; I still
have the ugly non-working one for parts. Of course, I still have a
collection of other
On Mar 20, 2009, at 00:13 , Luiz Felipe wrote:
I'm watching BR ebay-like sites, and right now is the wrong time to
sell
anything 35mm around here - Pentax in particular. Problem aggravated
by
the fact those cameras are not working and Pentax tech in BR is not so
near. I really don't know
On Mar 20, 2009, at 8:54 AM, Nick Wright wrote:
His LX lasted nearly 30 years. I'd be surprised if any digital camera
available today would be operational half that long (other than museum
pieces that never got used).
This is completely irrelevant to the question of whether to repair
old,
How can the life-expectancy of a piece of equipment be irrelevant to
its value?
I believe that a piece of equipment which will last 30 years is of
immensely superior value to something that will need to be replaced
every two or three years.
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi
- Original Message -
From: Nick Wright
Subject: Re: New gear, but now I have a decision to make...
How can the life-expectancy of a piece of equipment be irrelevant to
its value?
I believe that a piece of equipment which will last 30 years is of
immensely superior value to something
On Mar 20, 2009, at 12:58 PM, Nick Wright wrote:
How can the life-expectancy of a piece of equipment be irrelevant to
its value?
I believe that a piece of equipment which will last 30 years is of
immensely superior value to something that will need to be replaced
every two or three years.
On Mar 20, 2009, at 09:36 , Bob Sullivan wrote:
The MX cameras are nice, but have suffered heavy useage.
Repair will be more expensive than finding a low milage used copy.
He's right, Luiz. You can replace the MX if you must with a better one
for less than or equal to the cost of a repair.
Ah, excuse me, I thought we were talking about value not market value.
You're lucky with your cameras then. The last three years of my pro
career I went through five different camera bodies (two of them
professional model cameras).
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi
Now who's being ridiculous?
If film is dead then why did Kodak make Ektar (now in 120 too)? Why
did Fuji reintroduce Velvia?
Why did a company show a new $1,600 enlarger at PMA? Why is
Voigtlander still pumping out brand new rangefinders and lenses to go
with? Not to mention their new Bessa III
On Mar 20, 2009, at 12:58 , Nick Wright wrote:
How can the life-expectancy of a piece of equipment be irrelevant to
its value?
I believe that a piece of equipment which will last 30 years is of
immensely superior value to something that will need to be replaced
every two or three years.
On Mar 20, 2009, at 1:46 PM, Nick Wright wrote:
Ah, excuse me, I thought we were talking about value not market
value.
LOL
You're lucky with your cameras then. The last three years of my pro
career I went through five different camera bodies (two of them
professional model cameras).
I
On Mar 20, 2009, at 13:13 , William Robb wrote:
I have a Pentax 6x7 outfit. Body, 8 or 9 lenses, bellows,
viewfinders, lots of minor accessories.
It's lasted me almost 25 years now, and at it's present rate of use,
should last well into the 22nd century.
New purchase price was close to 20K
On Mar 20, 2009, at 2:23 PM, Joseph McAllister wrote:
Manufacturers of many items have jumped on the computer/software
model of constant upgrading and forced retirement through lack of
support because they have realized that it is much more profitable,
and users will always want the
'Twas a joke, sir. ]'-)
Although with regard to the volume of commercial, saleable work being
done today, film might as well be dead. A slightly different niche
is a niche with a tiny percentage of the sales volume in media,
chemistry and processing work compared to 8 years ago.
They
Okay, film is just on life support.
Seriously, film hasn't found a different niche. It's found a tiny
niche. Yes, it will continue to be used by hobbyists and some fine-art
photographers, but for most of us, it's history. So repairing and
clinging to film cameras can be both a waste of time
Maybe I'm more rough on my gear than I thought, I always thought I
babied it pretty well.
But then, I just don't have much luck with high technology items at all.
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi godd...@mac.com wrote:
On Mar 20, 2009, at 1:46 PM, Nick Wright wrote:
Ah,
Hamster wheel ... I like that.
You're both right though.
Manufacturers started doing it because they realized there was more
profit to be made. But consumers have bought into the lie they sell
hook, line and sinker.
I've wasted the last 10 years of my life chasing after that and I'm
really
Sorry! I thought you were being serious. I hate email.
I happen to believe that the horse and buggy is a completely
appropriate form of transportation, seriously. If I had enough land to
grow the food a horse would require I would have and use one in a
heartbeat.
Also if film were dead (or even
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi godd...@mac.com wrote:
I wouldn't blame just the manufacturers. The latest wave of camera users
seems to never be satisfied either, always wanting the latest new camera in
the hopes that it will turn some magic on and make their pictures glow.
Den 20. mars. 2009 kl. 22.54 skrev frank theriault:
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi godd...@mac.com
wrote:
I wouldn't blame just the manufacturers. The latest wave of camera
users
seems to never be satisfied either, always wanting the latest new
camera in
the hopes that
They still make buggy whips too. I doubt anyone has any
illusion that
the horse drawn buggy is still alive as a transportation machine,
though. :-)
it is, actually. Most of the world's population do not live in the countries
that we live in, but the horse-, donkey- or ass-drawn buggy
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote:
They still make buggy whips too. I doubt anyone has any
illusion that
the horse drawn buggy is still alive as a transportation machine,
though. :-)
it is, actually. Most of the world's population do not live in the
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Nick Wright nickwright1...@gmail.com wrote:
Sorry! I thought you were being serious. I hate email.
I happen to believe that the horse and buggy is a completely
appropriate form of transportation, seriously. If I had enough land to
grow the food a horse would
- Original Message -
From: Nick Wright
Subject: Film is dead (was: Re: New gear, but now I have a decision to
make...)
Film is no more dead than painting is dead. It's just found a slightly
different niche than it once had.
Slightly different, and much, much smaller.
William
- Original Message -
From: Nick Wright
Subject: Re: Film is dead (was: Re: New gear, but now I have a decision to
make...)
Also if film were dead (or even on life support), there would not be
two one hour minilabs in a town with under 10,000 population.
I think you'll find, if
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Nick Wright nickwright1...@gmail.com wrote:
Sorry! I thought you were being serious. I hate email.
We are serious. This is the PDML.
:-)
dave
--
Equine Photography
www.caughtinmotion.com
http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/
Ontario Canada
--
PDML
Granted, I know that's true. I recently worked at one of them for a short bit.
But the fact remains that the film machine is a seperate machine from
the printer and could easily be done away with but they don't. So
obviously there's enough of a demand to do it.
But then again, we might be
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 7:09 PM, William Robb war...@gmail.com wrote:
- Original Message - From: Nick Wright
Subject: Re: Film is dead (was: Re: New gear, but now I have a decision to
make...)
Also if film were dead (or even on life support), there would not be
two one hour
- Original Message -
From: Nick Wright
Subject: Re: Film is dead (was: Re: New gear, but now I have a decision to
make...)
Granted, I know that's true. I recently worked at one of them for a short
bit.
But the fact remains that the film machine is a seperate machine from
the
On Mar 20, 2009, at 17:00, DagT wrote:
The manufactorers needs to make us believe we need new things, so
that is what all the commercials tell uncertain amateurs. Book and
workshop advertisements don´t have a chance.
You've seen Pentax commercials?
-Charles
--
Charles Robinson -
Well, you raise an interesting point. Many talk of jumping ship, but
not too many actually do. What happens is you have to differentiate
between a justifiable need and a want. When you look at your current
investment in a system, then you really start to figure out the real
needs. There can be
Hi Luiz: I'm not really knowledgeable enough to give you good advice, but I
did want to pop in on this thread to wish you the best in your next steps.
It looks like lots of folks have already given you some good advice. Big
cheers, Christine
- Original Message -
From: Luiz Felipe
Bruce Dayton wrote:
Many talk of jumping ship, but
not too many actually do. What happens is you have to differentiate
between a justifiable need and a want.
I'd love, in some ways, to jump ship to Canon for their (reputedly)
better high-speed-action performance. [Frankly I haven't done the
Doug,
I feel your pain - to some extent. Whenever I took photos at a
running/triathlon race I was always wary of the buffer on the Pentax
camera in use. Fortunately, this not often the case when I shoot.
I am currently trying to shoot in RAW and this is something that I have
to keep in mind
On Mar 20, 2009, at 19:46 , Cesar Matamoros II wrote:
I am thinking of attending a car show tomorrow and this may come
into play since you have to shoot the car in question while no one
is around it...
Except the models in their high fashion garb stylistically showing
you where the door
Joseph,
Relax. This car show does not have any models attending :-(
I do recall one car show where they had one 'floating' model in all my
years of attending shows.
César
Panama City, Florida
Joseph McAllister wrote:
On Mar 20, 2009, at 19:46 , Cesar Matamoros II wrote:
I am thinking of
Cesar Matamoros II wrote:
I am thinking of attending a car show tomorrow and this may come into
play since you have to shoot the car in question while no one is around
it...
At car shows, the problem is managing the scene. At car races, however,
the problem is managing the shutter. :-)
Luiz, unless you like to collect gear (which is totally honorable thing
to do, but a hobby onto itself) IMO I'd do the following:
Choose one (just one) film body and have it repaired if it is not too
much money to spend. Who knows, may be one day you'd want to run a film
or two through.
César,
You are going to the wrong auto -shows! :-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXPxCF3qOtkfeature=related
On Mar 20, 2009, at 20:14 , Cesar Matamoros II wrote:
Joseph,
Relax. This car show does not have any models attending :-(
I do recall one car show where they had one 'floating'
66 matches
Mail list logo
