From: Ken Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2008/11/24 Mon PM 05:38:39 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?]
Ford, and probably others, totally immerse the body shell, have for years,
in addition to using non metallic body panels (aluminum
From: David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2008/11/23 Sun AM 06:09:19 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
2008/11/23 Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 11/22/08, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 22, 2008, at 9:43 AM
.
Cheers
John Poirier
- Original Message -
From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 12:29 PM
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
Some have been asking for that for a long time. We may yet see a digital
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 08:23:11PM -0800, John Poirier wrote:
I wouldn't rule out the possibility of a digital Bessaflex. Cosina has
already demonstrated their cleverness in reworking basic bodies in
interesting ways.
[ . . . ]
The potential user base of classic lenses would be
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 4:59 PM, Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/23/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That would be Paul. The P key on my daughter's laptop apparently
requires extra effort
aul
You have to give that P your aul.
They should hammer that out them
/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: Joseph McAllister [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?]
In the late 70s Porsche started dipping all their cars in a galvanizing
solution while still a bare metal shell. Over the next ten years, all
other manufacturers started doing
On Nov 24, 2008, at 9:33 AM, David J Brooks wrote:
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 4:59 PM, Scott Loveless
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/23/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That would be Paul. The P key on my daughter's laptop
apparently requires extra effort
aul
You have to give
, November 24, 2008 12:25 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 08:23:11PM -0800, John Poirier wrote:
I wouldn't rule out the possibility of a digital Bessaflex. Cosina
has
already demonstrated their cleverness in reworking basic
PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 08:23:11PM -0800, John Poirier wrote:
I wouldn't rule out the possibility of a digital Bessaflex. Cosina
has
already demonstrated their cleverness in reworking basic bodies in
interesting ways
On Nov 24, 2008, at 11:47, JC OConnell wrote:
Not when there's no competition. Whoever puts out the
first M42 DSLR will have no competition, so that gives
them at least some leeway on pricing.
I would posit that they would NEVER have any competition! :-)
-Charles
--
Charles Robinson -
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
John Francis
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 12:25 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 08:23:11PM -0800, John Poirier wrote
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 11:08 PM, JC OConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eww... A FF fisheye on a tiny 4/3 sensor? Thats a semi
fisheye which is about as appealing to me as getting semi-laid.
I have a semi-fisheye (16mm Zenitar on my *istD).
I've never been semi-laid. Does it have something
Cosina seems to make a nice profit selling cameras like the Voigtlander
VSL43 http://www.mpex.com/browse.cfm/4,11241.htm. I doubt they make a
lot of after market lens sales on that body. In fact the only reason I
can see to buy on is if you have a supply of used K mount lenses and
don't
On Nov 24, 2008, at 2:42 PM, frank theriault wrote:
I have a semi-fisheye (16mm Zenitar on my *istD).
I've never been semi-laid. Does it have something to do with large
transport trucks?
;-)
It probably has more to do with fantasy rather than experience, as
most of these absurd posts
Semi laid...
It goes something like this.
A young wife is attempting to get an annulment from her Priest.
long pointless setup snipped
Priest: So you're telling me that you've been married for six months
and you two still haven't consummated?
Bride: Yes, father.
Priest: What in the
Note that's just a very slight variation of a camera they make for
certain other makers (The Nikon FM10 in particular). In fact it's just
a Ricoh KR-5sv with a different name silkscreened on the front and a
different top cap.
And they likely do make a decent amount off lens sales in K mount,
I doubt that they sell any CV SLII lenses to put on this little lump of
plastic. I expect that they might sell a few of these bodies as a
backup. That crappy little zoom and the camera body sell for $150.00 as
a kit. So if the body is any good the lens is really crappy, or vice
versa.
The body's decent for performance but cheaply built. The zoom is a
coke bottle I wouldn't pay $5 for. I used to own the Ricoh version of
this body (in fact, my KR-5sv was my first K mount body back in 2005).
-Adam
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:43 PM, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I doubt
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 1:09 AM, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Datsun 120Y
My very first car, in 1973, was a brand new Datsun 1200. Paid $2300
for it. I had enough cash left over(college student at the time) to
buy rust proofing or a stereo.
It rusted out in 4 1/4 years.:-)
Dave
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
David J Brooks
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 12:19 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 1:09 AM, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Datsun 120Y
My very first car, in 1973
There is a similar thread on the Cosina-Voightlander mailing list.
He wants to build a digital body with interchangeable lens mounts, with
the auto exposure apparatus intact.
It would give you the chance to use just about any old lens, regardless
of brand on the same camera.
See:
David J Brooks wrote:
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 1:09 AM, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Datsun 120Y
Imagine how fast it would have happened if you hadn't paid extra for the
rust-proofing...
My very first car, in 1973, was a brand new Datsun 1200. Paid $2300
for it. I had
From: Ken Waller
If I had money, I wouldn't be driving at all. I'd have someone else behind
the wheel, so I could have my hands free for the camera.
Given the right road car, driving can be one of life's pleasures
photography surely is another with the right subject light.
Kenneth
My first car, in 1966 was a 1957 Ford Fairlane 500 with a 312 V8. It was rusty,
and ran very rough. I paid $50 for it. I got it to run well by relacing the
distributor which had a worn bushing and wouldn't hold dwell. But it had bad
steering parts and kind of dragged one front weel.
[...]
For fun driving, I have an MGB in the basement awaiting the time and
money for me to rebuild it again. It's not the MGB's failure
this time.
A few years ago, I had some work to do around the house and needed to
park the MG out on the street for one night. Never had done
that
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 03:09:19PM +0900, David Savage wrote:
2008/11/23 Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 11/22/08, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 22, 2008, at 9:43 AM, Joseph McAllister wrote:
... Me too an Aston Martin. ;-)
You guys are pikers...
for the most part today.
JC O'Connell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
David J Brooks
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 12:19 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008
Great story, Paul. :-) Cheers, Christine
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 1:46 PM
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
My first car, in 1966 was a 1957 Ford Fairlane 500 with a 312 V8
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
David J Brooks
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 12:19 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 1:09 AM, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Datsun 120Y
My very first
On Nov 23, 2008, at 12:18 , Bob W wrote:
[...]
I had an MG B Roadster for a few years, but ended up giving it away
after it
rotted from spending too much time parked outdoors. To bring it up to
standard would have cost more than it would have been worth, and
given the
nature of the
Hmmm. To get t-boned by a trolley I think you have to be in the wrong place at
the wrong time! :-)
aul
-- Original message --
From: Joseph McAllister [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Nov 23, 2008, at 12:18 , Bob W wrote:
[...]
I had an MG B Roadster for a few years,
That would be Paul. The P key on my daughter's laptop apparently requires
extra effort
aul
-- OriginaTTl message --
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hmmm. To get t-boned by a trolley I think you have to be in the wrong place
at
the wrong time! :-)
aul
I'm not saying nuthin'.
Joseph McAllister
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Nov 23, 2008, at 13:54 , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hmmm. To get t-boned by a trolley I think you have to be in the
wrong place at the wrong time! :-)
aul
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On Guam cars rust so bad and so quickly that we commonly called cars
biodegradable :-)
Walt
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 3:39 PM, Paul Sorenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Define recent. Come to Wisconsin and I'll show you plenty of rusty
cars...
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On 11/23/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That would be Paul. The P key on my daughter's laptop apparently requires
extra effort
aul
You have to give that P your aul.
--
Scott Loveless
New Cumberland, Pennsylvania, USA
http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/
--
PDML
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Paul Sorenson
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 3:39 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?]
Define recent. Come to Wisconsin and I'll show you plenty of rusty
cars...
-p
JC OConnell wrote:
Yup, I am old enough to remember rust. In the bad
: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?]
Define recent. Come to Wisconsin and I'll show you plenty of rusty
cars...
-p
JC OConnell wrote:
Yup, I am old enough to remember rust. In the bad ole days rust was
common on car bodies. But, when was the last time you saw any recent
car with ANY
From: Bob W
But, that was the night 4 high school students decided to go on a
rampage smashing cars. [...]
Insurance?
Didn't pay a dime.
I did a themed photo last year for Country Roads and found
out there
are none where I live any more; had to drive 90 miles to get
far enough
- Original Message -
From: Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 11/23/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That would be Paul. The P key on my daughter's laptop apparently
requires extra effort
aul
You have to give that P your aul.
lol, good one, Scott.
--
PDML
In the late 70s Porsche started dipping all their cars in a
galvanizing solution while still a bare metal shell. Over the next ten
years, all other manufacturers started doing the same thing, though
some only dip the bottom foot or so. It's the wheel wells and rocker
panels that take the
Most automotive manufacturers started employing galvanizing or zinc
coating in the seventies, although the Japanese were a bit late in
implementing it. In truth, the first application of this technology
for rust proofing was on farm implements. I know of no auto
manufacturer that employs
I was referring to the plastic sheets that are in the wheel wells, to
keep the spray off the back of the headlights, out of the engine
compartment, and from going back into the sills, Take a look. It's no
longer a big opening that leaves the entire fender's underside exposed.
Joseph
You're right. I've seen those. But they're not used in place of
galvanizing, but rather in addition to it.
Paul
On Nov 23, 2008, at 8:31 PM, Joseph McAllister wrote:
I was referring to the plastic sheets that are in the wheel wells,
to keep the spray off the back of the headlights, out of
Indeed they are.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of PN Stenquist
Sent: 22 November 2008 01:36
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
These are kind of pretty too:
http://photo.net/photodb/photo
Naturally. And since you're already wishing for the impossible why not also
ask for it to come supplied with a crack team of international whores
dressed in spangly catsuits to stroke your testicles every time you expose a
frame.
Of course I would want a FF M42 DSLR...
JC O'Connell
[EMAIL
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/22/08, John Celio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cut me some slack.
You do realize this is the PDML?
Mark!
--
Sandy Harris,
Quanzhou, Fujian, China
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Naturally. And since you're already wishing for the impossible why not also
ask for it to come supplied with a crack team of international whores
dressed in spangly catsuits to stroke your testicles every time you expose a
frame.
No way. Spangles are tacky.
--
On Nov 21, 2008, at 21:52 , P. J. Alling wrote:
drew wrote:
frank theriault wrote:
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're paying 80% of the money for the 20% quality increase you
get over the
competition. Once a certain level of quality is reached, the cost
From: John Celio
Advanced amateurs, pros and knowledgeable people make up a relatively
small portion of the actual market (two years ago I could have provided you
actual data on this, but I don't have access to that anymore). Leica and
the other brands that depend on that market segment have
From: Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Naturally. And since you're already wishing for the impossible why not also
ask for it to come supplied with a crack team of international whores
dressed in spangly catsuits to stroke your testicles every time you expose a
frame.
Of course I would want a FF M42
On Nov 22, 2008, at 9:43 AM, Joseph McAllister wrote:
... Me too an Aston Martin. ;-)
You guys are pikers...
1937 Cord 812 Phaeton.
Now you're talking!
Loved that gearbox sound...
But I settled for Porsches. :-)
Either a Citroën CV11 or a Bugatti Atalanta Electron SC35 Coupé for
On 11/22/08, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 22, 2008, at 9:43 AM, Joseph McAllister wrote:
... Me too an Aston Martin. ;-)
You guys are pikers...
1937 Cord 812 Phaeton.
Now you're talking!
Loved that gearbox sound...
But I settled for
://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: John Sessoms [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
From: frank theriault
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 5:32 PM, Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
This?
http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/bikes/road/madone/madone69pro
The mere mention of Citroen makes my wallet shudder. Head gaskets,
engine rebuilds, yuck.
I guess if I had to choose I might go for a classic, a Mercedes 540K,
but I have a connection, so it''s personal in some ways
Paul
On Nov 22, 2008, at 4:56 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Nov 22, 2008,
Old 'Troons like the CV11 were simple, beautifully made and reliable.
It's the complexity of the ID19 and later models that gave us all fits.
Love 'Troons ... always wanted one but it never happened.
One of my worst jobs as a mechanic was fitting a set of motor mounts
in a DS21, however.
G
2008/11/23 Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 11/22/08, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 22, 2008, at 9:43 AM, Joseph McAllister wrote:
... Me too an Aston Martin. ;-)
You guys are pikers...
1937 Cord 812 Phaeton.
Now you're talking!
Loved
] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
John Celio
Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 4:35 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: RE: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
Leica is an exception, but for good reason: their M system is used
primarily by professionals and wealthy amateurs who are more concerned
razor to sell blades.
JC O'Connell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
keith_w
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 4:33 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
JC OConnell wrote:
Huh? The whole
Joseph McAllister wrote:
John, I was in the Navy back in the 60s. When a new version of a lens or
camera came out and was listed in the catalog of new gear, we bought it.
It was my job, when the new stuff arrived, to sit on the loading dock at
the rear of the photolab and use a hammer and a
On Nov 21, 2008, at 1:32 AM, keith_w wrote:
Does anyone believe Leica's bodies and lenses justify their obscene
prices, from a manufacturing and assembly cost standpoint?
With no insight into manufacturing and assembly cost standpoint,
having used Leica lenses for thirty plus years ...
I want a job like that.
Cheers,
Destructo Dave
2008/11/21 Joseph McAllister [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
It was my job, when the new stuff arrived, to sit on the loading dock at the
rear of the photolab and use a hammer and a straight slot screwdriver to
drive a hole through the cameras, and through
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 7:00 PM, JC OConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
you dont understand, the lenses create the market/need for the body,
you dont have to convince the person who would buy this camera to
buy it, they already would want it. At least anyone with extensive
experience with M42
I've an opinion on this too. (Full of 'em tonight! :-D
Does anyone believe Leica's bodies and lenses justify their
obscene prices, from
a manufacturing and assembly cost standpoint? Is there THAT
much labor in either
one?
You're paying 80% of the money for the 20% quality increase
More demand for Auto110 lens usage than M42?
Shirley,You cant be serious.
I am serious, and don't call me Shirley.
It actually has nothing to do with the lenses and everything to do with
size.
These days, consumers want small, smaller and smallest. Back in 2002,
when I started selling
The big problem with a 110-sized DSLR is that small sensors suck. End
of story.
Paul
On Nov 21, 2008, at 4:03 PM, John Celio wrote:
More demand for Auto110 lens usage than M42?
Shirley,You cant be serious.
I am serious, and don't call me Shirley.
It actually has nothing to do with the
But you could make a bloody small camera with a still much larger than
PS sensor. Unfortunately Oly/Panny have already gone there with Micro
4/3rds.
-Adam
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 4:18 PM, PN Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The big problem with a 110-sized DSLR is that small sensors suck. End
Ooh! I've got it! A Digital Auto 110 with a 4/3 sensor and
interchangeable mounts for 4/3, 110 and M42 lenses. And a little auto
actuator bar thingy for the M42 lenses so JCO will STFU.
On 11/21/08, Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But you could make a bloody small camera with a still much
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're paying 80% of the money for the 20% quality increase you get over the
competition. Once a certain level of quality is reached, the cost of making
it even better rises out of proportion to the cost of the baseline, so to
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
If you assume the M3's cost when new was roughly equivalent to the cost new
of an M8.2 today - £3,990 - then it has cost about £80 per year, £1.60 per
week or 23p per day. That's not much for such a nice object. It's a lot
frank theriault wrote:
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're paying 80% of the money for the 20% quality increase you get over the
competition. Once a certain level of quality is reached, the cost of making
it even better rises out of proportion to the cost of
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 10:39 AM, JC OConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Man, I would die for a basic M42 DSLR at this point.
After reading this whole thread, I have to ask: How soon are you
likely to die? In my opinion, one day building a digital camera from
close to scratch will no longer be
The big problem with a 110-sized DSLR is that small sensors suck. End
of story.
Consumers don't know that, nor do the vast majority of them care.
Besides, a 110-sized sensor would still be a lot bigger than the sensors
in normal digital PS cameras.
John
--
http://www.neovenator.com
If I had the money, I know what I'd be driving...
And that would be
An inquiring mind would like to know. ;+)
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
On Fri, Nov 21
On 11/21/08, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I read somewhere that if one took the money equivalent of an M3 in
1953 (the year it was introduced) and invested it into a very
conservative investment vehicle, that note would be worth many times
the cost of a used 1953 M3 (unless of
I'd rather use the M42 lenses for landfill than placate the incessant
noise.
But no, I was out shooting a little while ago, Pentax Fish-Eye-Takumar
17mm f/4 on M42-FourThirds adapter, and having a good time with it. I
don't need an aperture actuator or screw mount body ... either of
On Nov 21, 2008, at 2:03 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
You can pick up a functional M3 right now for well under $1000US. I'd
have to sell almost all my Pentax gear to get an M3 and a single 50mm
lens. And sometimes I think I just might do that.
An Epson R-D1 traded on Ebay this week for $1200
This?
http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/bikes/road/madone/madone69pro/
;-)
If I had the money, I know what I'd
be driving...
cheers,
frank
--
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 5:32 PM, Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This?
http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/bikes/road/madone/madone69pro/
Nah, more like this:
http://www.colnago.com/pistaENG.html
;-)
cheers,
frank
--
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
--
PDML
On 11/21/08, Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This?
http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/bikes/road/madone/madone69pro/
You don't need nine grand for that. You need fifty bucks for bolt cutters.
--
Scott Loveless
New Cumberland, Pennsylvania, USA
http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/
On 21/11/08, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed:
I'd rather use the M42 lenses for landfill than placate the incessant
noise.
I've been looking in this thread. Had to happen.
Mark!
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
After reading this whole thread, I have to ask: How soon are you
likely to die?
Mark!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Cymen Vig
Sent: 21 November 2008 22:01
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet
Bob W wrote:
Keith Whaley wrote:
I've an opinion on this too. (Full of 'em tonight! :-D
Does anyone believe Leica's bodies and lenses justify their
obscene prices, from
a manufacturing and assembly cost standpoint? Is there THAT
much labor in either
one?
You're paying 80% of the money
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 09:59:10PM +, drew wrote:
frank theriault wrote:
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're paying 80% of the money for the 20% quality increase you get over the
competition. Once a certain level of quality is reached, the cost of making
[...]
Thanks to one and all for the insight and opinion. After all,
that's why we are
here, no?
and this is probably the best looking and most desirable camera I've ever
seen:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aperture64/2739236380/
Bob
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On Nov 21, 2008, at 3:33 PM, Bob W wrote:
and this is probably the best looking and most desirable camera I've
ever
seen:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aperture64/2739236380/
Lovely stuff. Some yutz will probably paint it with Krylon because it
looks icky and worn.
G
--
PDML
Scott Loveless wrote:
Ooh! I've got it! A Digital Auto 110 with a 4/3 sensor and
interchangeable mounts for 4/3, 110 and M42 lenses. And a little auto
actuator bar thingy for the M42 lenses so JCO will STFU.
Quote of the year contender, I'd say...
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
The pedals are missing. (I'll have to hide these posts from Debbie.
She's the bicycle fan)
frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/21/2008 5:39 PM
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 5:32 PM, Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
This?
http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/bikes/road/madone/madone69pro/
You can pick up a nice IIIf or IIIc for $400. Add a Summicron 50/2
Collapsible for another $400 or so, and you have a highly functional
and quite beautiful camera.
Paul
(who shot almost exclusively with his IIIf RD and Summicron for a year
or so-- a great experiende)
On Nov 21, 2008, at
These are kind of pretty too:
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2870904
On Nov 21, 2008, at 6:33 PM, Bob W wrote:
[...]
Thanks to one and all for the insight and opinion. After all,
that's why we are
here, no?
and this is probably the best looking and most desirable camera I've
From: JC OConnell
you dont understand, the lenses create the market/need for the body,
you dont have to convince the person who would buy this camera to
buy it, they already would want it. At least anyone with extensive
experience with M42 lenses would.
The camera manufacturers make their
From: Joseph McAllister
John, I was in the Navy back in the 60s. When a new version of a lens
or camera came out and was listed in the catalog of new gear, we
bought it.
It was my job, when the new stuff arrived, to sit on the loading dock
at the rear of the photolab and use a hammer and
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 5:03 AM, John Celio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
More demand for Auto110 lens usage than M42?
Shirley,You cant be serious.
I am serious, and don't call me Shirley.
Shirley, you jest.
It actually has nothing to do with the lenses and everything to do with
size.
These
From: Scott Loveless
Ooh! I've got it! A Digital Auto 110 with a 4/3 sensor and
interchangeable mounts for 4/3, 110 and M42 lenses. And a little auto
actuator bar thingy for the M42 lenses so JCO will STFU.
I don't know about that, but wouldn't it be awful easy to make a
full-frame sensor
From: frank theriault
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 5:32 PM, Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This?
http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/bikes/road/madone/madone69pro/
Nah, more like this:
http://www.colnago.com/pistaENG.html
$9,000 and it don't even come with pedals.
If I had money, I
On Nov 21, 2008, at 17:46 , John Sessoms wrote:
From: Joseph McAllister
John, I was in the Navy back in the 60s. When a new version of a
lens or camera came out and was listed in the catalog of new gear,
we bought it.
It was my job, when the new stuff arrived, to sit on the loading
dock
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Bob W
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 3:06 PM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: RE: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
I've an opinion on this too. (Full of 'em tonight! :-D
Does anyone believe Leica's bodies
Yeah, M42 lenses can do FF digital! (24x36mm).
JC O'Connell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
PN Stenquist
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 4:19 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet
: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're paying 80% of the money for the 20% quality increase you get
over the competition. Once a certain level of quality is reached, the
cost of making it even better rises out of proportion
Of course I would want a FF M42 DSLR...
JC O'Connell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Cymen Vig
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 5:01 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
On Wed, Nov
the differences in the finer things in
life pay/play the game.
JC O'Connell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
John Celio
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 5:01 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: RE: ANY M42 DSLR rumors
1 - 100 of 169 matches
Mail list logo
