Firstly Nikon, then Canon
--- Lon Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd go Olympus, or mebbe Nikon.
This thread should flare on for a while.
-Lon
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
Pål wrote:
PJ I'm not so shocked by this real possibility at all. After all, the
PJ 35mm format doesn't make much sense for digital. Older lenses can
PJ still be used whereas newere digital only lenses could be made
PJ better, cheaper and smaller.
I don't feel that moving to a lower
http://www.epinions.com/Pentax_SMCP_A_400mm_f_5_6_Telephoto_Lens__Lens_24570
/display_~full_specs
The SMCP-A 400mm f/5.6 telephoto lens is power zoom and auto focus. It can
be manually focused and zoomed on all Pentax bayonet camera bodies. With 6.2
degree viewing angle, it provides all program
Hi all,
I have just uploaded the next KMP release. You will find mostly small
corrections and additions to the Lenses and Teleconverters pages,
and some major changes in the Bodies section.
Now there is an individual page for each camera body, just like with
lenses and teleconverters.
I have
Sorry William but if your coming to his defence or trying to
excuse his behaviour than you should apply that kind of response
to all members of this list, regardless of lenght of time they've been
year or how full their heads are with information. I find it hard
to belive that you can react so
Hi William,
If the employer owns the work, does that include the negs as well or
just the right to reproduce the images and the negs stay in the
photographers
possession?
Feroze
- Original Message -
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002
- Original Message -
From: Alin Flaider [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: A new DSLR standard emerging? (WAS: Re: Nikon DX
lenses: Is this what Pentax is up to?)
I don't feel that moving to a lower sensor size has
anything to do
with maintaining a SLR system, which is the whole
Out shooting some bands at a concert in late summer I was more or less
picked up by this young woman who very much wanted to become a model.
Well, she was nice and funny, and very persistent. (And she said that
she felt I was just the right person for it - Any of you guys that
I don't think that you personally need a camera anymore either. There was a
collection of photographs in the NY Times Magazine section a few weeks ago
by a photographer that works more like a film director. There's a very
large crew and the person who ultimately pushes the button is only the
Someday, I am going to have to read up on Canadian copyrigth law. Of course
in my last look around I found that apparently some lobbying has been done
re copyright here in the US, as there are now several types of work that are
defined as WFH unless otherwise agreed. Which was one of the things
He tests his metal more often, in other words.
You mean mettle?
Woo hoo, I just corrected an editor!!
Oh, yes, you're right. I was thinking of Ezra Pound's dictum from the _ABC
of Reading_, The amateur does not test his metal in the acid of accepted
fact or words to that effect (quoting
Maybe I don't understand this . . .
As I understood it, the old K mount lenses would work fine with a new
APS sensor with a 1.5 or so factor. The new new digital lenses would
not work with the 35 mm film cameras (old or new) becuase of lack of
coverage. This seems OK to me. Pentax will
Bojidar wrote:
First of all, releasing lenses with smaller coverage circles seems to
indicate that the APS-sized digitals are here to stay. Like Alin, I too
had hoped that they are only for-the-time-being solutions.
It might be that this move is just a way to get proper wide angles for the
I am, for one, would be glad to see the new lenses, as long as Pentax continues the
backward-compatibility with the old ones. I want to use the old lenses on DSLR. Not
the new ones on LX.
Faec it, it's like complaining that 35mm lenses don't cover the whole 6x7 circle. Who
gives?
Besides, a
Well, Bruce, I didn't ask why. Everyone knows it's about attempting to
control others through inflicting pain. This is what I don't understand.
Don't you know that control is an illusion? - but thanks for your
sententious description of me.
Regards from,
Piss Face
I guess the part I don't understand is why Nikon would release a lens
covering the smaller sensor when they've got a full-frame coming out?
Do they think full-frame prices will never come down?
On a related note, I understand the argument that a smaller sensor may
be sufficient to equal the
With
respect to focal length, APS sized sensors only have a
negative effect on wide angle. So yes, you might have
to burn a 200-500 dollar hole to get that new wide
angle zoom or prime. But compare that to what happens
to your telephoto lenses such as the 200/2.8 or
300/4.5. The savings there
Out shooting some bands at a concert in late summer I was more or less
picked up by this young woman who very much wanted to become a model.
Well, she was nice and funny, and very persistent. (And she said that
she felt I was just the right person for it - Any of you guys that
would
Just don't use thin cardboard.I sent out several pictures lately
in soft cardboard,some arrived ok and 2 were bent in half
to fit into a rural mailbox,even with the do not bend contains
photos hilited in yellow.
Complaint to Canada Post went nowere,as anticipated.
Dave
Begin Original
Two things:
There is clearly no clear distinction between an amateur and a pro that
one cannot nitpick about. The most obvious distinction is based on
earning a reasonable part of one's income from photography, the key and
controversial word being reasonable. The pro/amateur camera
distinction
Subject: Re: A new DSLR standard emerging? (WAS: Re: Nikon DX lenses:Is
this what Pentax is up to?)
Maybe I don't understand this . . .
As I understood it, the old K mount lenses would work fine with a new
APS sensor with a 1.5 or so factor.
They would work, but I'm not so sure about
-Original Message-
From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
With
respect to focal length, APS sized sensors only have a
negative effect on wide angle. So yes, you might have
to burn a 200-500 dollar hole to get that new wide
angle zoom or prime. But compare that to what happens
to
At 01:01 PM 12/13/2002 +, Cotty wrote:
I also don't want to clip some box on my belt that's a power unit!
(It'll probably be only available in Japan only) My pants will fall
down!!
Guess I'm gladly out of the digital game for a long while!
There are reports of an accessory hat with two
Either the oil is getting thick, (dirty), or the return spring is getting
fatigued. A cleaning will most probably fix the problem, (if you can find
someplace to do the repair). It might be difficult to justify the cost
however.
At 12:11 PM 12/13/2002 +, you wrote:
Would some of you
It's not quite that simple.
What will we do for a 50/1.4? 24/2? Even if Pentax decided to release
a 35/1.4, how many folks would be happy to shell out $1000 for what is
basically a 50/1.4?!
You guys dont understand. A 35mm F1.4 lens designed for
a smaller sensor will be as cheap to produce
Among other things the lens automatically works correctly in
stop down mode on un-coupled devices and when mounted reversed.
It can be a pain to try to use certain 3rd party m42 lenses on un-coupled
extension tubes or for that matter a K to M42 adapter since they lack auto
manual switches.
I thought about the Kodak camera. The problem here is finding the sweet
spot of price and resolution. Once they start releasing APS senor
lenses, they'll have a certain commitment to that format and the smaller
sensor will always be a cheaper camera. After all, $1000 is cheap for a
DSLR but
tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll wait and see what Pentax does, but I have to admit I'm concerned.
I was content with the pace at which Pentax released new cameras in
the past because I knew the quality of my prints depended on the
lenses, not the camera. This is no longer true with digital -
Even with the lessor requirements of the APS format sized format I doubt
such a lens would be 'Tiny'.
At 05:48 PM 12/13/2002 +0300, you wrote:
I am, for one, would be glad to see the new lenses, as long as Pentax
continues the backward-compatibility with the old ones. I want to use the
old
Never underestimate the Idiocy of the postal services. To insure something
from being bent my guess you'd have to mail it with a 1/8th inch steel plate
as backing. Even then someone might just take it as a challenge.
At 10:35 AM 12/13/2002 -0500, you wrote:
Just don't use thin cardboard.I sent
hat Pentax is up to?)?=
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: onet.poczta
Hi,
You are right. If we cannot use out nice manaual lenses and even new FA ones on future
dslr it would be the end of Pentax in slr market.
I do hope it will be the truth.
Alek
uytkownik Bojidar Dimitrov [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa:
-Original Message-
From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
It's not quite that simple.
What will we do for a 50/1.4? 24/2? Even if Pentax
decided to release
a 35/1.4, how many folks would be happy to shell out
$1000 for what is
basically a 50/1.4?!
You guys dont
J. C. O'Connell schrieb:
You guys dont understand. A 35mm F1.4 lens designed for a smaller sensor will be as cheap to produce as a 50mm F1.4 for 35mm or even cheaper.
That I do not believe as the distance of the lens to the focal plane
will not be changed so that a 35mm f1.4 must be a
Never underestimate the Idiocy of the postal services. To insure something
from being bent my guess you'd have to mail it with a 1/8th inch steel plate
as backing. Even then someone might just take it as a challenge.
I just re-read this and realize that possibly someone could take this as a
To mail a picture costs me a $1.00.I might have to charge
postage on this itemvbg
Dave
Begin Original Message
From: Peter Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To insure something
from being bent my guess you'd have to mail it with a 1/8th inch
steel plate
as backing.
Pentax User
Stouffville
This is worth a look - have a chuckle...
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1945289157
:-)
Cotty
Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at
http://www.macads.co.uk/
Oh, swipe me! He paints with light!
Folks,
I know Brendan and a few others have used this Fuji 100 BW film but seeing
as how it's been about a month or two I want to find out what developer
people are using to develop the film if they're doing it on their own (i.e.
not dropping it off for processing). Which one gives the results
No bids yet, and not a camera or lens, so maybe fair game?
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1924642712
Cotty
Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at
http://www.macads.co.uk/
Oh, swipe me! He paints with
Alin wrote:
results? - current APS sized 6 MPixel cameras are not convincing at
all in a digital versus film argument, at least not to me. Just
because today's scanners are poor in exploiting film capabilities
(see Nyquest sampling frequency theorem) doesn't mean digital
Needs autofocus. Must be a girl . . .
Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA 24450
(540) 458-8873
FAX: (540) 458-8878
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 12/13/02 11:25AM
This is worth a look - have a chuckle...
Tom wrote:
I'll wait and see what Pentax does, but I have to admit I'm concerned.
I was content with the pace at which Pentax released new cameras in
the past because I knew the quality of my prints depended on the
lenses, not the camera. This is no longer true with digital - the body
is no
I know the photo on the LX early version page has to be because Boz
don't have a good photo of the black body, but it is funny.
At 10:51 AM 12/13/2002 +0100, you wrote:
Hi all,
I have just uploaded the next KMP release. You will find mostly small
corrections and additions to the Lenses and
Good point. But since you still get the A/M
switch on every auto aperture PENTAX screwmount
lens, I like that system better. The aperture
ALWAYS stops down fully unless it's REALLY
fowled with oil because its forced hard
by the body and isnt relying on a spring
that may weaken with age.
JCO
On top of that, it seems we are really talking two standards here. One
for APS size sensor and one for full frame. I have seen plenty of
8X10 prints from Nikon D100 and they look just fine. A large portion
of the SLR community doesn't commonly print beyond 8X10. Why use so
much more horsepower
J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe I don't understand this . . .
As I understood it, the old K mount lenses would work fine with a new
APS sensor with a 1.5 or so factor.
They would work, but I'm not so sure about fine. I think
that lenses designed strictly for a smaller image
Musta used a 'softening' filterG
Dave
Begin Original Message
From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:25:35 +
To: Pentax List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: OT: eBay auctiothat fills one with confidence
This is worth a look - have a chuckle...
Hi gang,
I bet Pentax has all this time been waiting for the sensor technology to
upgrade on a level that a good quality 5 mpix 17x13mm chip can be
made. The Digital Auto 110 would be something ;)
-mte
There are reports of an accessory hat with two power units mounted on
either side, much like the much lauded and technologically advanced beer
hat of the '70s. I understand that as the power units discharge, the waste
heat is scavenged and reused in the winter for ear warming.
That's got to
From: Arnold Stark
J. C. O'Connell schrieb:
You guys dont understand. A 35mm F1.4 lens designed for a smaller sensor
will be as cheap to produce as a 50mm F1.4 for 35mm or even cheaper.
That I do not believe as the distance of the lens to the focal plane
will not be changed so that a 35mm f1.4
If Pentax does the same thing, what is the harm? Seems to make lots
of sense. Don't abandon the mount, just make a few specific lenses to
cover the wide side. If and when full frame is a economically viable
option, then build and sell it.
Exactly. Pentax wants to make a viable APS sensor
My normal film is Kodak Portra 160 or 400 NC. On early mornings under
cloudy conditions I use Kodak Max 800 because of the additional speed
and increased contrast. I don't particulary like the color and the
added grain of the Max 800, however. Has anyone used a film that gives
the color and
Subject: Change in stop down mechanics K vs. M42 was RE: SMC-A 20mm 2.8
diaphragm
What you say is true. If you stick with Pentax(Takumar) you're all set.
My only point on the K mount change is that it is probably easier to
engineer
Right
and build,
Right
therefore simpler with
And given the same basic technology, the larger sensor will have higher
resolution.
Or dont forget, given the same number of Mpixels, a larger
sensor will be more sensitive. This would allow faster
shutter sppeds and or better DOF when needed.
JCO
Hey Joe,
Thanks for the first peak at this new film. I've got to go out and
shoot some (just sitting in the fridge). I wonder how it compares to
the 400VC product?
Thanks again,
Bruce
Friday, December 13, 2002, 10:01:43 AM, you wrote:
JT I spent November in France, during which I shot
-Original Message-
From: Ken Archer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
My normal film is Kodak Portra 160 or 400 NC. On early
mornings under
cloudy conditions I use Kodak Max 800 because of the
additional speed
and increased contrast. I don't particulary like the color and the
added
Okay, I mentioned previously that I bought a PDMLer's MZ-5n. Also included was the
28-70mm AF/Al Autofocus lens. I've played with it a bit and don't particularly like
its feel (sheesh, now I sound like the rest of you!). I shot one role (not back yet)
all autofocus to see how it worked. I also
Here's what I do:
- Put like-sized prints in plastic print-file envelopes.
- Tape envelopes shut.
- Tape envelopes to cardboard that's a bit larger than the envelope.
This prevents the photo corners from being dinged.
- If it's a small order, I place another piece of cardboard on top
making a
Ken,
The two to try are Portra 800 and Fuji NPZ 800. There was a recent
thread on this. The bottom line seems to be that the Portra should be
shot more about 640 and the NPZ is a true 800.
Bruce
Friday, December 13, 2002, 4:22:10 AM, you wrote:
KA My normal film is Kodak Portra 160 or 400
Can someone who own the FA 50mm F/1.4 tell me if his/her lens has an
aperture click at f/1.7? My new FA 50mm f/1.4 lens does not have a
distinct click stop at the f/1.7 aperture. There is a click stop at
f/1.4 and f/2.0 but not at f/1.7. There are distinct click stops at all
other full and
Ken,
I heartily recommend Portra 800. Give it a try.
Michael Cross
Ken Archer wrote:
My normal film is Kodak Portra 160 or 400 NC. On early mornings under
cloudy conditions I use Kodak Max 800 because of the additional speed
and increased contrast. I don't particulary like the color and
Forgot to mention. I did not push the film, but several times I
underexposed by 1 to 1.5 stops. The prints look fine.
Joe
It would appear that although the title of the thread is still strange the
subject matter has changed. I'm back and ready to make a whole load of
filters should it happen again.
Photographers don't usually hand over the negatives after they have
completed an ordinary job, like taking pictures of
T Rittenhouse wrote:
The computer electronics law of halves should apply. That is 1/2 the price,
or twice the capability per year. That puts a 14mp 24x36 sensor camera down
into the $1000 range in two years. But there is always the WTMWB factor to
consider.
But that just isn't happening. See
Ken Archer asked:
I don't particulary like the color and the
added grain of the Max 800, however. Has anyone used a film that gives
the color and grain of Portra NC with additional speed and contrast?
They won't be quite the same look as Portra 400 NC, but you'll
probably be happier with
Expose @ ISO 80
HC-110(b)
Mike,
Since I am usually working under rather blah conditions when I need
the 800 film, I need something with a little more contrast in it. I
have heard that Portra 800 has about the same kind of contrast as
160/400 NC, is that true?
On Friday 13 December 2002 06:35 pm, Michael Cross wrote:
David.
Did you look at:
http://www.digitaltruth.com/
They have the Acros film listed.
Dave
Begin Original Message
From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:49:06 -0500
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Fuji Acros Again
-Original Message-
From: David
Bruce,
Does the NPZ 800 have the exaggerated colors that most Fuji films seem
to have?
On Friday 13 December 2002 06:34 pm, Bruce Dayton wrote:
Ken,
The two to try are Portra 800 and Fuji NPZ 800. There was a recent
thread on this. The bottom line seems to be that the Portra should
be
It would appear that although the title of the thread is still strange the
subject matter has changed. I'm back and ready to make a whole load of
filters should it happen again. I've changed it again in the hope that most
filters will not delete it without it being read.
Photographers don't
Though not the same concept, an outfit called Photographer's Edge
(www.photographersedge.com)
sells calendar blanks already bound, onto which you attach 4 X 6
horizontal prints. Prices range from $5.99 to $4.99 each depending on
volume. Add in the cost of the prints (13 images required) and
Ken,
I really haven't used it outside too much. But its really not going to
be a higher contrast film I would say.
How about Kodak Supra 800? It is supposed to have higher contrast and
punchy colors.
Michael
Ken Archer wrote:
Mike,
Since I am usually working under rather blah conditions
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Ken Archer asked:
I don't particulary like the color and the
added grain of the Max 800, however. Has anyone used a
film that gives
the color and grain of Portra NC with additional speed
and contrast?
They
Dr E D F Williams wrote:
It would appear that although the title of the thread is still strange the
subject matter has changed. I'm back and ready to make a whole load of
filters should it happen again.
Oh, we know that you will! Why don't you just drop it Doctor.
Everybody else has.
A
Ken,
I haven't noticed any real problems with the NPZ, but then, I haven't
shot lots of it. It did seem on the cool side (typical for Fuji), but
no real problems.
If you are shooting only 35mm, there is also Supra 800. It is much
more contrasty than Portra 800 and maybe finer grained.
Dr E D F Williams,
Having been certified by Mr. Bruce Rubenstein as Piss Face, May I
recommend, should I not already be there, that you put me in one of your
filters. Yup, I volunteer.
All of the photos negatives that I produce as part of my job belong to my
clients, therefore all is handed
Michael,
My FA 50mm f1.4 does NOT have a click
between 2 and 1.4.
On my PZ-1p I do get a f1.7 readout.
SN# of lens: 5140XXX
Purchased from BH around August 2002
Mark Mangum
-Original Message-
From: Michael Cross [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 12:34
Mine has no click stop at 1.7
Jostein
- Original Message -
From: Michael Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 7:33 PM
Subject: FA 50mm F/1.4 Aperture Ring
Can someone who own the FA 50mm F/1.4 tell me if his/her lens has an
aperture
Follow up,
Michael, FYI..
There is also no click between 11 16 and
16 22. All others have the half stop clicks.
Mark Mangum
-Original Message-
From: Michael Cross [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 12:34 PM
To: Pentax Mail
Subject: FA 50mm F/1.4
I asked, you answered, I'm happy
Feroze
- Original Message -
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 1:51 PM
Subject: Re: Bruce R
- Original Message -
From: Feroze Kistan
Subject: Re: Bruce R
Sorry William but if your
-Original Message-
From: Bob Blakely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
MORE GUNS.
Dr E D F Williams,
Having been certified by Mr. Bruce Rubenstein as Piss Face, May I
recommend, should I not already be there, that you put me
in one of your
filters. Yup, I volunteer.
Can I have a
On Fri, 2002-12-13 at 10:33, Michael Cross wrote:
Can someone who own the FA 50mm F/1.4 tell me if his/her lens has an
aperture click at f/1.7? My new FA 50mm f/1.4 lens does not have a
distinct click stop at the f/1.7 aperture. There is a click stop at
f/1.4 and f/2.0 but not at f/1.7.
Okay, it's official: I suck at doing digital darkroom stuff.
I saw others' complaints about the time required to do the post
processing digitally instead of handing it off to a lab to do
wet, and even with that in mind I'm too slow. And whether it's
lack of skill, lack of tools, or both (it
What on earth have I done? For Gud's sake? Are you off your medication? You
really must keep taking those pills old chap.
Don
Dr E D F Williams
http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams
Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery
Updated: March 30, 2002
- Original Message -
From: Keith Whaley
You have my sympathies. It's certainly not easy, just more doable than
a color enlarger. I often kill work and go back to the original, but I
haven't had to do much on deadline and I can get pretty frustrated just
enjoying my hobby. I can't image taking my 500 vacation pictures,
digital or
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Okay, it's official: I suck at doing digital darkroom stuff.
I saw others' complaints about the time required to do the post
processing digitally instead of handing it off to a lab to do
wet, and even with that in mind I'm too slow. And whether it's
[disclaimer: these are pretty basic questions, but hey! I never claim to
be more than a beginner... but a professional beginner, ofcourse! g]
It's been said on numerous occasions that the exposure compensation dial
works as flash compensation in M mode. Okay, so if I understand this
correctly,
What is not being addressed here is that many of the shooters who are
currently buying DSLRs aren't looking for 30meg files. One of the features
that they like about the Kodak 14n is that it can be configured to only
produce 8meg (not compressed) files. Giant files, unless you really need
them,
Study and practice are indeed the keys.
*nod* That's why I stuck that bit in.
I've been giving prints as Christmas gifts and have no trouble going from
insert the slide into the scanner to print emerges from the inkjet
printer in about 30 minutes.
I had some try to minimize my 5 o'clock
On Friday, December 13, 2002, at 01:37 PM, tom wrote:
Can I have a cool name too?
tv
Nope. If you want a cool name, you'll have to earn it. :-)
Dan Scott
Ditto here.
Mine has no click stop at 1.7
Jostein
-Original Message-
From: Jerome Daryl Coombs-Reyes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
It's been said on numerous occasions that the exposure
compensation dial
works as flash compensation in M mode. Okay, so if I understand this
correctly, for half intensity, dial in -1 EV of flash
On Friday, December 13, 2002, at 12:29 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And I am wondering which telephoto (to 200) or prime (to 200 or 300)
that I might get. One which I won't have to pay more than $100 for (or
much more than that). Pentax or other brand. (Don't want much, do I?)
You could
On Fri, 2002-12-13 at 12:21, Bruce Rubenstein wrote:
What is not being addressed here is that many of the shooters who are
currently buying DSLRs aren't looking for 30meg files. One of the features
that they like about the Kodak 14n is that it can be configured to only
produce 8meg (not
Thanks, Tom! Very nice explanation. Much appreciated.
- jerome
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, tom wrote:
The camera is still metering for the ambient light. You've set the
sperture/shutter speed for a correct ambient exposure. If you dial
in -1, the camera is telling you that the manual
Bruce,
I shoot mostly retriever hunt tests and field trials. I had three
weekends in a row in October where it rained everyday. When I came
home after the first weekend, you couldn't tell what color my truck was
for all the mud. After the third weekend of rain, it kind of dawned on
me why
Printed and in the binder.Thanks Tom
Dave
Begin Original Message
From: Jerome Daryl Coombs-Reyes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:16:45 -0500 (EST)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Flash questions
Thanks, Tom! Very nice explanation. Much appreciated.
- jerome
- Original Message -
From: T Rittenhouse
Subject: Re: A new DSLR standard emerging? (WAS: Re: Nikon DX
lenses:Isthis what Pentax is up to?)
The computer electronics law of halves should apply. That is
1/2 the price,
or twice the capability per year. That puts a 14mp 24x36
sensor
No. You have to repeately post to a thread that has nothing to do with
photography, without trimming your reply so that your post is 75 lines long
with 1 new line and then you have to claim that you can do this because
freedom of speech is protected under the First Amendment (this really
impresses
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The computer electronics law of halves should apply. That is 1/2 the price,
or twice the capability per year. That puts a 14mp 24x36 sensor camera down
into the $1000 range in two years.
Graywolf,
It's called Moore's Law, but it doesn't work so good for some
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You could look for an M 200/4 or the earlier and larger 200/4. You'd
like the feel and probably like the quality better than a
cheap zoom that goes to 200.
I'd second Dan's recommendation on the M 200/4. It's small and good.
I also use a Pentax FA 70-210/4-5.6?
1 - 100 of 156 matches
Mail list logo
