Hi!
You did a very fine job, Boz. Being a programmer myself, I had no
problem navigating your old site, but the new design is indeed more
clear and easier to browse through...
Well, I won't be arguing about the rarity ratings... Count me out :).
Nicely done!
---
Boris Liberman
On Wednesday, January 15, 2003, at 12:47 AM, Foto Syb wrote:
I consider buying a Pentax 100-300 FA lens, the new silver one,
f4.7-5.8. But since there has been lots of critics on the 4.5-5.6
lens, I thought I should ask your opinion on the newer lens.
You can have a look at the
Hi Steve,
What it means is that the body if fooled into thinking your are shooting
wide open. Prior to exposure, you move the lever on the lens from auto to
manual, then meter and shoot. I often find the metering is often more
accurate using the SM lenses in this manner.
Bob Rapp
-
http://groups.msn.com/APMembersGallery/transformations.msnw?action=ShowP
hotoPhotoID=11458
I've given enough of them lately, it was time I got one.
Don't know how long I can hold onto it these days,
but it'll be good to have.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemcategory=15247item=1950587056
rd=1
Oooh, nice one, Collin! I'm sure you know all those old Linhofs were
Not an experienced photographer here, but I think one could:
1. Focus on the kids' faces.
2. Use shallow depth of field that blurs out the puce.
True, but my overarching point is that you can't get away from the colors
that are there in the world, unless the colors are what you are choosing
On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, Amita Guha wrote:
Hey everyone, I've been taking a little break from the list, getting
some other stuff done, but I'm back now, ready to talk Pentax. :)
TalkPentax?
Can't have any of that here, better start a thread about Macs versus
firearms photographed in colour and
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1950790884category=15247
Just look that cloth! The ruffled edge will come undone in no time.
Can't those Germans produce anything durable! :)
CRB
Bojidar Dimitrov wrote:
Hi Alan,
Guess what, I press KMP Main Menu and the old home page came up
(once only). Press KMP Main Menu again and 2 navigation bars come
up. :o
Thanks for pointing that out, (I hope) I've fixed the problem...
Cheers,
Boz
Long as we're pointing...
On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, Foto Syb wrote:
I like the operating of this camera, the two round knobs, I am very content
about the photo's I've made. I am not interested in those pre-programmed
'convenience settings' like on the MZ50. Do you know if there is an upgrade
of this MZ-5n camera, with the
No, it's not just bad bokeh. Actually the bokeh isn't that bad.
Thanks for the specimen shot. As for the distinction you make
between swirlies and bokeh, I'm not sure that I agree with the
distinction (or, to be more specific, the necessity for such a
distinction). To me, swirlies still
On Wednesday, January 15, 2003, at 04:35 PM, gfen wrote:
In the States, instead of being the MZ-xx, its the ZX-xx (except for
teh
MZ-S which is always MZ-S, and the MZ-6 which is the ZX-L in the USA,
but
the ZX-6 in Canada...you know, there's no need to present a unified
line
to teh world,
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Maybe this is because I never received the tool with the Pentax
adapter I have, but I always put the adapter on the lens first,
instead of trying to bayonet it into the camera body. Of course, the
lens then comes out by itself, leaving the
Spiratone never made anything. They just sold things.
All the best!
Raimo
Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
-Alkuperäinen viesti-
Lähettäjä: Paul Franklin Stregevsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Vastaanottaja: 'Pentax-Discuss' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Päivä: 15.
After MZ-5n there can only be a MZ-S or another 5n (3).
Servus, Alin
Foto wrote:
FS I like the operating of this camera, the two round knobs, I am very content
FS about the photo's I've made. I am not interested in those pre-programmed
FS 'convenience settings' like on the MZ50. Do you
There is much debate as to the evolutionary origins of color perception
in humans. A commonly held theory is that color vision allowed humans
to find fruit, and improving nutrition always has a strong evolutionary
pressure. (Most think the subtle reliance on judging skins tones for
signs of
tom wrote:
FYI, you don't actually have to have running water in the room.
From: David Brooks
I have a little space in the basement but have not yet fiqured out
were to build a small 4x6' room near water.
Right- you just need a place to set the enlarger and
somewhere to
Thanks everyone for your help. I understand now how
to use the adapter. Now for the important question-is
it worth it? IOW, is it worth it to do this for one
lens (IE the Super Tak. 50mm, 1.4), or should I just
find an M 50mm, 1.4? Comments on image quality
differences?
Is it still easy to
I can help. She's using my term for this effect seen in the leaves
in the background: [snip] If there is an accepted term for the
effect, I don't know it.
Thanks, Dan. I guess swirlies fits as well as anything - g.
Fred
Or convert the bathroom into the darkroom, it works
:-)
--- Bill D. Casselberry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote: tom wrote:
FYI, you don't actually have to have running water
in the room.
From: David Brooks
I have a little space in the basement but have
not yet fiqured out
were to
Amita:
I was off the list for quite a while and missed the great event.
Congratulations and best wishes, etc.
Beautiful bride, by the way. :)
Best
Bob
Amita Guha wrote:
Hey everyone, I've been taking a little break from the list, getting
some other stuff done, but I'm back now, ready to
Hi Steve...
Aesthetics and mechanics aside, I'm not sure if an older Tak 50/1.4 would
have much advantage over a newer k-mount lens, especially in the coating
department. K, M and A series 50/1.4s are quite common and relatively
inexpensive. Some of the older Taks suffer from the yellow lens
Keith Whaley wrote:
[...]
Long as we're pointing...
With my 17 Mac and Netscape Communicator browser 4.79, the left hand vertical
window on your site's first screen is too long to fit [my] window.
If I collapse the three header bars on top of the basic window, I can
just read the last
Fred wrote:
No, it's not just bad bokeh. Actually the bokeh isn't that bad.
Thanks for the specimen shot. As for the distinction you make
between swirlies and bokeh, I'm not sure that I agree with the
distinction (or, to be more specific, the necessity for such a
distinction).
I
In a message dated 1/15/2003 9:15:07 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Method 1 is for there to be one aperture ring on the lens and you
either view at the aperture you want to shoot at, or you manually open
the lens up for viewing and stop it down for shooting.
Method 2
Paul,
For some reason my attempt to access that URL was memt with:
Forbidden
Remote Host: [66.51.218.51]
You do not have permission to access
http://medfmt.8k.com/third/table1.txt
Data files must be stored on the same site they are linked from.
Thank you for using FreeServers
Many of Pentax's first K-mount lenses (The SMC Pentax lenses) are
optically identical, I believe, to their S-M-C Takumar counterparts,
including the 50/1.4. From all reports, however, the K-mount 50/1.4
doesn't seem to yellow.
Joe
Thanks everyone for your help. I understand now how
to use
Thanks. Please try it again.
I've never, in years and years, had a full mailbox!
Must be my new DSL ISP, who just changed a number of servers...
If it happens again, I'll contact them.
How big IS your mail file?
keith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Paul Franklin Stregevsky wrote:
Ketil,
I tried to send
In a message dated 1/15/2003 12:58:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Thanks for the specimen shot. As for the distinction you make
between swirlies and bokeh, I'm not sure that I agree with the
distinction (or, to be more specific, the necessity for such a
distinction).
I don't know if this will be useful or not, but here are some scans of
Portra 400UC prints:
http://www.bigdayphoto.com/5866093/
The people pics are from the underexposed roll - ash and derek1
are definitely underexposed. I had an 8x8 made of Derek2, which is
pretty close to properly exposed.
On 14 Jan 2003 at 13:05, Lindamood, Mark wrote:
What a great lookin' new k-mount site! A tip o' the hat to Boz
Dimitrov!
http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/
Really WOW!!!
great job Dimitrov. The old site was great ... now it's superb ;-)
Ciao
Andreas
Joe Wilensky wrote:
Maybe this is because I never received the tool with the Pentax
adapter I have, but I always put the adapter on the lens first,
instead of trying to bayonet it into the camera body. Of course, the
lens then comes out by itself, leaving the adapter in the body, but
when
Hello to everyone,
I am new to pdml, but found it very usefull - many thanks to all of you
for doing such great job!
I am passionate birdwatcher, I love Pentax system and use my MZ5N body.
Now I look for proper lens for my bird-photography. I don't need longer than
300mm lens, so I consider
On Wednesday, January 15, 2003, at 10:39 PM, William Robb wrote:
Did ya miss me?
Had a computer meltdown on Friday. The symptom was a loss of RAM. The
result
was..
A brand new Intel motherboard, a P4 2.4 gig pentium, 512mb ddr ram, new
power supply, new hard drive and a new CD Rom. With
On Wednesday, January 15, 2003, at 09:35 AM, Keith Whaley wrote:
Long as we're pointing...
With my 17 Mac and Netscape Communicator 4.79, the left hand vertical
window on your site's first screen is too long to fit the window.
If I collapse the three header bars on top of the basic window, I
Thanks, the paper we gonna try out is called Kodak Endura Metallic, lasts a
100 years on display 200 in an album and its a RA4 colour print paper
Feroze
- Original Message -
From: Bruce Rubenstein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 9:40 PM
Subject:
Oh no, Waldemar, you've stumbled on the big secret between those
photographers among us with money and those of us who are broke half
the time ~ faster film!
Of course! I really didn't need that faster 135mm lens at all. 2.5 is
easily as good as 1.8, with slightly faster film...
What I _should_
Welcome to the list, Waldemar!
I am also an avid bird watcher. Currently, my longest lens is a 300/4 Sigma
AF APO Macro which I am very fond of. I was debating between this lens and
the SMC M 300/4 but decided on the Sigma for it's tripod collar (lots of
discussions have been on the topic of
On Wednesday, January 15, 2003, at 08:27 AM, Amita Guha wrote:
It's good to be back!
Amita
Hi Amita, good to have you back.
Dan Scott
Those are great! Looks like you had a beautiful wedding (and some great
ideas). :)
- Original Message -
From: Amita Guha [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 8:27 AM
Subject: I'm back...wedding pix...
Hey everyone, I've been taking a little break
1 stop is worth it to some, but I much prefer another
100mm so get a 400mm F5.6 instead :-)
--- Christian Skofteland
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Welcome to the
list, Waldemar!
I am also an avid bird watcher. Currently, my
longest lens is a 300/4 Sigma
AF APO Macro which I am very fond of.
I believe the adaptor should go on first.Thats the method i
use and so far,so goodg
Dave
Begin Original Message
From: Joe Wilensky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 09:29:44 -0500
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Re: Need help w/ how to use SM lenses on K mount bodies
Maybe
It's easiest to remove with the tool that comes with it, but can
be removed with a small flat bladed screwdriver if the tool isn't
handy.
I've had a lot of luck with just pinching the little flexible lever
between my thumbnail (pressing on the lever) and my index finger (on
the inside surface
My Vivitar Series One 28/1.9K and Pentax SMC 35/2K rival the SMC
f/3.5Ks (except, perhaps, in freedom from distortion) while giving
me a brighter view. Yet if I were starting over, I'd get the SMC
30/2.8K to simplify my choices. I sold my SMC 24/2.8K for this
reason. (I have a 20.)
I've done
Under the Bride's Eye View section are some photos I took, w/Pentax
gear of course...
It's good to be back!
Hi Amita--congratulations on your wedding! Looks like a great time.
--Mike
I have a Vivitar hood for it, but it`s too short.
I'm assuming that you mean some other Vivitar hood, right? I
don't think that there is a dedicated VS1 90/2.5 Macro hood...
Fred
BTW, have you tried the 90/2.5 with 1:1 adapter and a VS1 28/1.9
reversed on the front of it? They both have 58mm threads and work
very well together. I managed it with a 58mm male to 58mm male
coupler I found on ebay.
No, I haven't tried that one, Steve. (In fact, it has been quite a
few
Thanks for all the interesting material Fred.
Glad to help, Paul.
I'm a big fan of this lens.
I can understand why.
It's probably my most used 35mm lens, and it continues to amaze
me.
If I assume that you don't shoot macro all the time, then may I
assume that you use it for portraits,
Thank you, thank you! I never knew!!
I'm going to get a lot of pleasure out of this site g.
What do you think of that, Robert!
I may start with making up a catalog, and go from there.
keith whaley
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Robert Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Dumb Newbie Q #4
- Original Message -
From: W. Krasowski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Is one f-stop worth thousands of dollars?
Hello to everyone,
Hello Waldek:) It's nice to meet another PDML-er from Poland. Where are you
from?:) Let me invite you to http://www.pentax.osw.pl (unless, of course,
you
Brendan wrote:
1 stop is worth it to some, but I much prefer another
100mm so get a 400mm F5.6 instead :-)
I have a Pentax K 400mm f5.6 which I may be enticed out
of - ... if anyone wants to make a reasonable offer
off-list at email below
Learned how to cook a few new dishes, learned the intricacies of vacuum
cleaners, and a few things about dusting and tudying.
It was really quite awful.
Wheatfield,
Hmm, that typo could be tidying or studying. Personally tidying seems
like it would be more awful (you should see my living room.
On Wednesday 15 January 2003 16:24, W. Krasowski wrote:
The 300/4 SMC-M does not normally have a tripod collar.
http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/primes/extreme-tele/M300f4.html
Did you get an aftermarket custom one? If so, I'm interested in the
details.
I am sorry, for
Hi;
I think you somewhat answered one of your own questions. The faster lens is
great IF you need the extra speed. If you don't you can save a lot of money.
You may want to look for an A lens in manual focus as I think, but am not
sure, that the MZ-5 loses a number of metering functions without
Nice link Wendy but I, for one, still don't know what the hell it is...
Cory
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 4:30 PM
Subject: Re: Chimney pots
From: Robert Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Dumb Newbie Q #4 --
Fred,
I did the exact opposite. I kept the fisheye zoom 17-28 (zoomed in it
is near a 20mm), sold the FA 20, kept the FA *24, sold the FA 28, and
kept the FA 35.
The ones I sold were due to lack of use and this nasty habit called
P67.
Bruce
Tuesday, January 14, 2003, 11:09:08 PM, you
Thanks for the link, Wendy. Interesting.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Robert Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Dumb Newbie Q #4 -- When/how do you take your shots?
I hate to reveal my ignorance but what is a chimney pot?
http://www.thechimneypotshop.com/
W.
---
Wendy Beard
Mosaid
Keith:
Fascinating. I must have had a few at some point since I once had a
house with three fireplaces and chimneys and never had a bird fly in or
a flood during a rain squall. (I assume they use these things in the US
as well.)
Bob
Keith Whaley wrote:
Thank you, thank you! I never knew!!
Did you read the post I sent?
I did my best amateur description of one, and what they're for.
Dumb question, I guess, because if you had, you'd already know, right?
QUOTE
Almost every English/British house has a fireplace or a furnace or
both, and at the very top of [most of] the chimney[s],
On Wednesday 15 January 2003 14:44, Brendan wrote:
1 stop is worth it to some, but I much prefer another
100mm so get a 400mm F5.6 instead :-)
For birds, I TOTALLY agree However, 400mm lenses were out of my budget.
My next purchase will be a 2x or 1.4x Sigma matched TC. I'll lose the
That info (that I forgot to include first time) was in my second
post... g 832 X 624.
Dan Scott wrote:
On Wednesday, January 15, 2003, at 09:35 AM, Keith Whaley wrote:
Long as we're pointing...
With my 17 Mac and Netscape Communicator 4.79, the left hand vertical
window on your
The film advance on mine just went haywire (going off when it feels like it,
advancing a whole roll, or just spinning its wheels). I'm going to order the
ZX-L today as a replacement, because it has some features I want. I really
don't blame the ZX-5n. I've put it through almost 5 years of
Thats what i would like to do,SO has other ideasg
I'm workin' on it though.
Dave
Begin Original Message
From: Brendan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 12:23:27 -0500 (EST)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: darkroom simplicities
Or convert the bathroom into the darkroom, it
Robert Harris wrote:
Keith:
Fascinating. I must have had a few at some point since I once had a
house with three fireplaces and chimneys and never had a bird fly in or
a flood during a rain squall. (I assume they use these things in the US
as well.)
Bob
Fact is, neither have I,
Hi,
Wednesday, January 15, 2003, 9:48:13 PM, you wrote:
Almost every Enblish/British house has a fireplace or a furnace or
both, and at the very top of the chimney, there's a tile or metal tube
coming out of the center of the chimney, and it's capped with some
sort of device (a pot?) to keep
I have a Pentax K 400mm f5.6 which I may be enticed out
of - ... if anyone wants to make a reasonable offer
With tripod collar - I am interested.
Does this rule work in both directions, what I man is
that one f-stop less = thousand dollars less in price? ;-))
Regards
===
Hello Waldek:) It's nice to meet another PDML-er from Poland. Where are you
from?:) Let me invite you to http://www.pentax.osw.pl (unless, of course,
you already know it:))
Hello Artur,
of course I know this website (I even know you, or rather your postings).
In fact, this website drove my
Hi all,
Please put on your generous glasses for this message.
I'll get to what the subject line refers to a bit further down.
First a few small notes, with some Pentax references.
Some of you may remember that I once, around May last year, mentioned
that I discovered some previously unknown and
In a message dated 1/15/2003 11:39:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Did ya miss me?
We figured you were pushing C-41 or something equally esoteric and Masonic. You know,
something involving a hushed temple (hushed lab), strange rites (strange developing),
and funny hand
In a message dated 1/15/2003 5:45:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
No, I've not seen a single British style chimney pot on a chimney in
the U.S.
Oh, maybe I had seen one here, in all my years, but paid so little
attention to it, it just sailed on by. But, I don't
Can digital beat 6x7?
I thought the denizens of the PDML might be interested in these comments
from my friend Michael Reichmann, who runs the Luminous Landscape website
and publishes The Video Journal, a photography magazine on DVD. I have
Michael's permission to quote from his private e-mails:
In a message dated 1/15/2003 9:40:23 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
There's also the theory that metering at the taking aperture is more
accurate (at least with full-frame averaging meters) since it will
take vignetting (and other lens factors?) into
consideration.
Hi,
I think it was Pal that pointed out, that alot of these comparisons between
digital cameras and film are actualy comparing digital cameras vs a scanner.
I very much doubt that a 1Ds can resolve as much infomation as 6x7 film.
Regards,
Paul
- Original Message -
From: Mike Johnston
Hi Amita,
Welcome back! You are a beautiful bride. And Mandy should be playing
center field for the New York Yankees g. Love your pictures of the
pier and the lake as well.
Paul Stenquist
Amita Guha wrote:
Hey everyone, I've been taking a little break from the list, getting
some other stuff
Waldemar,
I've used an SMC Takumar 300mm/4.0 and the more modern A*300/4.0.
They deliver similar results and the A* cost me 10X as much.
While the A*300/4.0 is really nice, I would start with the Takumar.
Image quality is good. You will probably use it on a tripod.
And, you are going to be
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I hadn't thought about it at the time they were shooting the pictures,
but the following day, in the picture of undersigned, was clearly
visible a camera strap over my shoulder, clearly reading Pentax!
I thought that was fun.
And surely you wanted
I don't think you'll need the fast lens for shooting birds if your eyes
are good. I have only one good eye (my left), and I shoot birds with a
400/5.6 Pentax SMC and an A2X-S converter. I do think you'll need more
than a 300mm lens unless you're going to bate the birds with food. But
you may be
In a message dated 1/15/2003 11:40:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
There is much debate as to the evolutionary origins of color perception
in humans. A commonly held theory is that color vision allowed humans
to find fruit, and improving nutrition always has a strong
On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:44:04 -0500 (EST), Brendan wrote:
1 stop is worth it to some, but I much prefer another
100mm so get a 400mm F5.6 instead :-)
One stop means a lot more glass. Glass area doubles on each component
lens within the compound lens. Don't know what thickness does; it's
been
On Thursday, January 16, 2003, at 02:41 PM, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Dan Scott
Subject: Re: Wow..what a week
We just figured you was out taken pitchers.
Learned how to cook a few new dishes, learned the intricacies of vacuum
cleaners, and a few things about
On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 16:01:12 -0500, Christian Skofteland wrote:
For birds, I TOTALLY agree However, 400mm lenses were out of my budget.
My next purchase will be a 2x or 1.4x Sigma matched TC. I'll lose the stop
or two for the extra reach without a worry and I'll STILL use my slow
Mike,
I think there is one aspect where 67 beats digital. That is in cost
for amateurs (meaning not making a living from their photography).
Until your shooting quantity goes up quite a bit, cost will probably
be one of the last strongholds of the film world for awhile.
Not only that, we live
Here comes part two.
And I have't yet arrived at what the subject line refers to.
Christmas night me and a couple of friends went to a night club
(mostly young people between 20 and 30). Met and talked to a lot of
nice people. This guy comes up to me Damn, your pictures were good.
Fantastic!.
Paul Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it was Pal that pointed out, that alot of these comparisons between
digital cameras and film are actualy comparing digital cameras vs a scanner.
What I like about Michael Reichmann's approach is that he *doesn't* do this:
He judges by the final results
Hi, Amita,
Let me add my voice to the chorus: Welcome Back!
Lovely pics of the wedding, BTW...
cheers,
frank
Paul Stenquist wrote:
Hi Amita,
Welcome back! You are a beautiful bride. And Mandy should be playing
center field for the New York Yankees g. Love your pictures of the
pier and
In a message dated 1/15/2003 5:49:09 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ernst Haas, _Color Photography_
William Eggleston John Szarkowski, _William Eggleston's Guide_
Joel Meyerowitz _Cape Light_ (one of the all-time photography bestsellers,
by the way)
Eliot Porter, _In
There's a reason why there has been all those good deals on MF gear on
ebay starting last year.
The empiricists don't give a hoot about what the theorists think on the
subject of.
BR
Hi Guys;
Given the recent book thread I thought you might like the link to Photo
District News (PDN) article on the 31 most influential photo books.
http://www.pdnonline.com/features/books03/
BUTCH
Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself
Hermann Hesse (Demian)
Mike wrote:
By the way, when Michael says every test I did, including side by side
shoots, he really means it--he actually runs the tests and looks at the
results. In my experience of him, he truly has no particular axe to grind.
He has been saying this about every digital slr since the
Dont want to start another WAR but the very best
Macro lenses are only fair at infinity. There
is a new generation of Macros optimized for both
closeup and infinity, but these are compromized
for closeups... Which type is the viv VS1?
JCO
-Original Message-
From: Paul Stenquist
Here comes part three.
Now we're approaching what I meant by the subject line.
I got this film scanner last week. I have been scanning a lot of very
old as well as recent rolls and frames.
Quite a few times I have stopped just to watch some picture that I
never really seen before, other than as a
From the Luminous Landscape:
Many of us have used Nikon cameras for years and have
accumulated a collection of Nikon or Nikon-compatible
lenses and accessories. We should consider ourselves
lucky since it looks like only Canon, Contax, Pentax
and Nikon lenses will be useable with the new
I just took the first step in color calibration - bought a CRT to run
on my laptop. Partly due to the LCD is starting to have a few pixel
problems and partly to deal with color calibration.
As a side note - I remember when inkjet printers were just coming on
strong and rapidly pushed the dot
Paul wrote:
I think it was Pal that pointed out, that alot of these comparisons between
digital cameras and film are actualy comparing digital cameras vs a scanner.
He does.
I very much doubt that a 1Ds can resolve as much infomation as 6x7 film.
It can't.
The person in question is also
--- Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I have Michael's permission to quote from his
private
e-mails:
I'm using a Canon 1Ds. The most remarkable
photographic product I've
ever owned. Almost large format image quality from
35mm. It's hard not
to sound too enthusiastic about it.
About a week ago I was pondering 35mm digital
vs medium format film. Assuming you get a killer
35mm digital sensor, the digital limit will be determined solely
by the lens. say 100 line PAIRS / mm that equates
to about 32Mpixel
But with medium format, the lenses arent as sharp
so they lose the
-Original Message-
From: Mark D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
I seem to recall tv saying something about switching
to digital when he'd be able to shoot in low light
with no noise. Time to pay the piper Tom! ; )
I'd do it right now if I didn't have to pony up $10k to switch
I never shoot with it at infinity. But it's great at ten feet or less.
Paul Stenquist
J. C. O'Connell wrote:
Dont want to start another WAR but the very best
Macro lenses are only fair at infinity. There
is a new generation of Macros optimized for both
closeup and infinity, but these are
- Original Message -
From: Mark Roberts
Subject: Re: Can digital beat 6x7? Answer seems to be yes
Paul Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it was Pal that pointed out, that alot of these comparisons
between
digital cameras and film are actualy comparing digital cameras vs a
- Original Message -
From: Paul Jones
Subject: Re: Can digital beat 6x7? Answer seems to be yes
The Flextight photo that the luminous landscape guy uses is actualy a
lower
end Imacon scanner and only 3200dpi, which is not the great.
I think scanning on one of the high end Imacon
1 - 100 of 162 matches
Mail list logo
