Re: OT u4/3

[Boris Liberman]

Larry, you seem to have forgotten.

When we met, earlier this year, I had my OM-D EM1 on me. I think I have it
for like 5 or 6 years now. It is a good camera, has all the controls and
looks like a small DSLR. These you can find really cheap these days. You
can also look for EM1 mk2 - it is a bit bigger and improves in a number of
areas over my EM1. Most current is EM1 mk3, which is the flagship of the
Olympus range. I used some Panasonic cameras briefly, and I quite liked
them, but because it was brief, I couldn't suggest them - don't have enough
information.

Compared to cameras with bigger sensors, both older (16 MP EM1) and modern
(20MP EM1 mk2/mk3) cameras will exhibit some noise, even at base ISO.
Nothing deal breaking, but it is there.
In terms of ergonomics - they are very convenient (I did not need too much
time at all to get used to my camera) but different from what Pentax offers
(at least as much as I remember from the original K5).

There are second tier cameras - EM5, EM5 mk2 and EM5 mk3. They are smaller,
lighter, but still look like smaller still DSLRs. Most modern EM5 mk3 is
very close in function to EM1 mk2, albeit with some differences caused by
the smaller form factor. Did not try these, but they're probably cheaper.

One last bit, if you decide to own any of these cameras, please buy at
least 1 spare battery, though from my memories of our taking pictures
together, you would be better off buying 3 spare batteries. They are really
cheap and off brand batteries are not too bad. I have one Olympus spare and
two off brand ones (Wasabi power) - all is good.

Boris


On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 4:34 AM Larry Colen  wrote:

> Today the friend I had loaned my u4/3 camera to returned it.  There are a
> lot of things to like about micro 4/3, but using that camera is pretty
> miserable.  It’s an oly E PL1, doesn’t have a viewfinder and trying to make
> adjustments on it is terribly awkward.  However, I can see a lot of
> advantages to u43 over even my K3 when I’m going for a bike ride.
>
> I know that there are a few folks on this list that also have u4/3 systems
> I’m curious about the most cost effective u4/3 body that handles like a
> real camera, and how much it would set me back.  I expect that it would be
> something used to keep an eye out for in the usual places.  It’s not that I
> have the money for one, but it’s generally better to start looking sooner
> rather than later.
>
> My impression is that the OMDs are some of the nicer ones to use.
>
> --
> Larry Colen
> l...@red4est.com
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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.
>


-- 
Boris
-- 
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.

Re: geso walkers mill, fall version

[Paul Stenquist]

Nice set. Glad you got out again. Unpleasant weather is upon us.

Paul

> On Nov 22, 2020, at 2:41 PM, David J Brooks  wrote:
> 
> Our club did a walk in this forest trail area back in Aug but we went back
> Friday for a fall walk and probably one of our last for the time being
> 
> Some fall floor fotosohttp://
> www.caughtinmotion.com/2020-walkers1/album/index.html
> 
> K-5 Sigma 17-70 some minor LR6 adjustments
> 
> Dave
> 
> -- 
> Documenting Life in Rural Ontario.
> www.caughtinmotion.com
> http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/
> York Region, Ontario, Canada
> -- 
> 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.


-- 
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.

Re: geso walkers mill, fall version

[Daniel J. Matyola]

Nice Gallery!

Dan Matyola
*https://tinyurl.com/DJM-Pentax-Gallery
*



On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 2:41 PM David J Brooks  wrote:

> Our club did a walk in this forest trail area back in Aug but we went back
> Friday for a fall walk and probably one of our last for the time being
>
> Some fall floor fotosohttp://
> www.caughtinmotion.com/2020-walkers1/album/index.html
>
> K-5 Sigma 17-70 some minor LR6 adjustments
>
> Dave
>
> --
> Documenting Life in Rural Ontario.
> www.caughtinmotion.com
> http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/
> York Region, Ontario, Canada
> --
> 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.
>
-- 
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.

geso walkers mill, fall version

[David J Brooks]

Our club did a walk in this forest trail area back in Aug but we went back
Friday for a fall walk and probably one of our last for the time being

Some fall floor fotosohttp://
www.caughtinmotion.com/2020-walkers1/album/index.html

K-5 Sigma 17-70 some minor LR6 adjustments

Dave

-- 
Documenting Life in Rural Ontario.
www.caughtinmotion.com
http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/
York Region, Ontario, Canada
-- 
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.

Re: OT u4/3

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

I have two mFT cameras at present: the Olympus E-M1 (purchased in 2013, just 
when it came out) and the Panasonic GX9 (purchased a couple of months ago). I 
had an E-PL1 in the past, a cheapo that I got from Ebay at under $75, but it 
eventually locked up the IBIS and wasn't worth repairing. 

I wanted a camera that was small and light for my cycling, and that was 
reasonably inexpensive in case I dropped the bike or otherwise lost my pack. 
The GX9 fit the bill: nice size, nice controls, great features, and I found one 
offered on Ebay for $500 or so. I had both Olympus Body Cap Lenses (15/8 and 
9/8 Fisheye) already, as well as the Lumix 14/2.8 along with its wide 
converter. 

The controls are pretty easy to work with, the IBIS is excellent, the sensor is 
very very good. The EVF is "good" (not quite as good as the Leica CL) and has a 
tilting feature to allow easy low angle shooting or copy stand shooting. The 
LCD is a good size and also swivels in the vertical direction. The top deck 
includes a discrete mode selector, EV Compensation selector, and both thumb and 
index finger dials that allow discrete operation of shutter and aperture 
control. The whole package with the OBCL 15mm is very trim and light. 

GX9 with two body cap lenses: 
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50428294896_388818a40b_b.jpg
Still life with OBCL 15mm: https://flic.kr/p/2k1dfkw

Fitted with the Summilux-DG 25mm f/1.4 ASPH (another Ebay acquisition at 
<$400), superb image quality and fast speed net lots of DoF control and very 
fast operation. 

GX9 next to Leica CL, both with Summilux normal lenses (a 1972 'Lux 35 on the 
CL): 
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50598493478_4aa4635881_b.jpg

Three quickie snaps with the Summilux-DG 25 ...
Persimmons: https://flic.kr/p/2k67mTd
Panic Button: https://flic.kr/p/2k8xTuL
Morning Espresso: https://flic.kr/p/2k8xTuk

(The huge lens hood on the Summilux-DG makes a little bulky, but is mostly 
unnecessary. I keep it on most of the time, though, as it helps protect the 
lens from my clumsiness.) 

Given that you can find the GX9 (or the previous GX85 model) for between $300 
and $500 on Ebay, and Olympus body cap lens 15mm for between $60 and $140 (used 
or new) as well, it's a very approachable and modestly priced camera that 
produces excellent results. It has pretty easy to get along with controls and 
ergonomics too, much better than the E-PL1's push button control interface. (Oh 
yes, and never mind that you can adapt other lenses to it.) And it fits very 
nicely with cycling for size and weight.

G


> On Nov 21, 2020, at 6:33 PM, Larry Colen  wrote:
> 
> Today the friend I had loaned my u4/3 camera to returned it.  There are a lot 
> of things to like about micro 4/3, but using that camera is pretty miserable. 
>  It’s an oly E PL1, doesn’t have a viewfinder and trying to make adjustments 
> on it is terribly awkward.  However, I can see a lot of advantages to u43 
> over even my K3 when I’m going for a bike ride. 
> 
> I know that there are a few folks on this list that also have u4/3 systems 
> I’m curious about the most cost effective u4/3 body that handles like a real 
> camera, and how much it would set me back.  I expect that it would be 
> something used to keep an eye out for in the usual places.  It’s not that I 
> have the money for one, but it’s generally better to start looking sooner 
> rather than later.
> 
> My impression is that the OMDs are some of the nicer ones to use.


-- 
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.

Re: OT u4/3

[Brian W]

I have two OMDs - the original E-M10 and the EM-5II. I like them a lot, so much
so that I rarely fire up my K-5 any more.

The EM-10, despite being about 6 years old is still my favourite of the two
because of its compact size & light weight. It loses very little in comparison
with the 5. The 10 series has moved on to the Mk 4 now but they all still retain
the compact size & weight.  The Mk 4 has a 20MP sensor - the earlier ones have a
16MP sensor.

Combined with the little 14-42mm EZ zoom, the 10 series are the ideal travel
cameras in my opinion, although they aren't weather sealed (unlike the EM-5
series).

If you can pick up a good used Mk2 (probably the best of the series), it
shouldn't set you back more than a few 100 dollars.
 
Cheers
Brian


On 22 November 2020 at 13:33 Larry Colen  wrote:
> 
> 
> Today the friend I had loaned my u4/3 camera to returned it.  There are a lot
> of things to like about micro 4/3, but using that camera is pretty miserable.
>  It’s an oly E PL1, doesn’t have a viewfinder and trying to make adjustments
> on it is terribly awkward.  However, I can see a lot of advantages to u43 over
> even my K3 when I’m going for a bike ride. 
> 
> I know that there are a few folks on this list that also have u4/3 systems I’m
> curious about the most cost effective u4/3 body that handles like a real
> camera, and how much it would set me back.  I expect that it would be
> something used to keep an eye out for in the usual places.  It’s not that I
> have the money for one, but it’s generally better to start looking sooner
> rather than later.
> 
> My impression is that the OMDs are some of the nicer ones to use.
> 
> --
> Larry Colen
> l...@red4est.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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.

-- 
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.

Re: Comparing Sony A7C to Pentax K-1 II

[Mark C]

Thanks for posting that. It's an interesting read, though the article is 
largely confined to comparing the cameras' handling/ergonomics and 
autofocus. Personally I don't see an large difference between DSLR's and 
mirrorless bodies. If the core feature set is equivalent, both can do a 
good job with each approach introducing different trade-offs.


Unfortunately, the core feature set is not always equivalent, and while 
the K1 is still a solidly competitive camera, camera's like the A7R IV 
seem to take things to the next level. (I say "seem to" since I've not 
used one.)


These days I'm shooting mostly film and the 6x7 is my most used camera, 
so I don't feel a pressing need to upgrade. But obviously the future 
will be digital and would like to see signs that there will be an 
upgrade path for Pentax full frame digital. Whether that path continues 
to be DSLR's or veers to mirrorless is not important to me.


Mark


On 11/20/2020 2:49 AM, Henk Terhell wrote:
On Light & Matter a user of the K-1 II shares his experience after 
acquiring the new Sony A7C full frame.
https://www.lightandmatter.org/2020/equipment-reviews/sony-a7c-for-dslr-user/ 



Henk




--
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.

Re: PESO: harrier portrait

[Subash Jeyan]

thank you Larry, and everyone else who looked or commented. appreciate
it

On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 01:33:49 -0800
Larry Colen  wrote:

> > On Nov 21, 2020, at 1:25 AM, Subash Jeyan 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > all i've got to show for a saturday morning's birding:
> > 
> > http://something-feathered.in/2020/11/21/harrier-portrait/  


-- 
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.

Re: OT u4/3

[Steve Cottrell]

On 21/11/20, Larry Colen, discombobulated, unleashed:

>I know that there are a few folks on this list that also have u4/3
>systems I'm curious about the most cost effective u4/3 body that handles
>like a real camera, and how much it would set me back.  I expect that it
>would be something used to keep an eye out for in the usual places. 
>It's not that I have the money for one, but it's generally better to
>start looking sooner rather than later.

I have the Pen F and love it. Haven't had any camera-envy whatsoever since 
owning it. Matched with a lens like the Voigtlander 15/4.5 it's pretty compact 
and will fit in my coat pocket. Available used. 




-- 

  Cheers
Cotty
  


-- 
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.

Re: OT - Printer ink fails to dry completely for a long time.

[Bulent Celasun]

>With R2880, I am also spoiled, and not waiting for long, if at all.

Sadly, I could only realize its strengths after killing it.
:(

Bulent
-
http://patoloji.gen.tr
http://celasun.wordpress.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bc_the_path/
http://photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=2226822
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/bulentcelasun

Igor PDML-StR , 21 Kas 2020 Cmt, 23:48 tarihinde şunu yazdı:
>
>
>
> I vaguely remember that instructions for some inkjet photo printer or photo
> papers suggested to let the prints dry for 24 hours.
>
> With R2880, I am also spoiled, and not waiting for long, if at all.
>
>
> Igor
>
> Sent from mobile phone
>
>
> Bulent Celasun Sat, 21 Nov 2020 02:06:49 -0800 wrote:
>
> I used to have an Epson Stylus Photo Inkjet Printer (Probably R2880)
> which was using Ultrachrome K3 ink set. The print quality, even on
> common garden papers, was above my expectations and I had no problems
> ever when it was operational. Due entirely to my long neglect,
> clogging problem killed that printer.
>
> Now I have an Epson L805, a simpler and cheaper model with a cheaper
> (read, lower quality) ink set (EcoTank).
>
> I have quite a stock of inkjet printing paper (mostly Kodak, labelled
> as premium, ultra etc). Unfortunately, my recent L805 ink set
> (especially the dark tones) is notoriusly late to dry. A fairly dark
> print takes more than a week to dry. Even then, if you put a glass on
> top, there are little foci that stick (or, if you press some plain
> paper on the image you still see a few ink droplets transferred to the
> paper).
>
> Original Epson inkjet papers are very expensive and practically
> unavailable. There is only the A3 size (not suitable for my L805) and
> it is sold for about 3 dollars each. I guess there should be no ink
> drying problem if one can use those.
>
> Now, here is my question:
> Can I do anything "after printing to an ordinary inkjet photo paper"
> to make it dry quicker AND completely without damaging the image?
> Would sunlight or heat or wind or ... work?
>
> By the way, the printer accepts a command to print on a no-name card
> and uses somewhat less ink for that (on the premise that it may not
> absorb the ink well). So, there is practically nothing I can do
> "before" printing.
>
> Comments and help appreciated.
>
> Bulent
>
>
>
> --
> 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.

-- 
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.

Re: Printer ink fails to dry completely for a long time

[Bulent Celasun]

Thank you, Ralph for sharing your experience.

>There used to be hot-air and infrared dryers for RC photo paper in the days of 
>analog photography.

Oh no!
No more gadgets in the... bathroom!
:)

Bulent
-
http://patoloji.gen.tr
http://celasun.wordpress.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bc_the_path/
http://photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=2226822
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/bulentcelasun

Ralf R Radermacher , 21 Kas 2020 Cmt, 22:20 tarihinde
şunu yazdı:
>
> Am 21.11.20 um 17:58 schrieb Bipin Gupta:
>
> > g) A Radiant Heater placed in front of the Prints made them dry almost
> > instantly - Best Solution.
>
> There used to be hot-air and infrared dryers for RC photo paper in the
> days of analog photography.
>
> One example would be the Kaiser 4022 (3ßx40 cm).
>
> Other models like the Kindermann dryers have rollers to transport the
> paper and queeze off any remaining water. Those would obviously smudge
> your prints. I think I even have one of those in my basement lab.
>
> Ralf
>
> --
> Ralf R. Radermacher  -  Köln/Cologne, Germany
> Blog  : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com
> Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf
> Web   : http://www.fotoralf.de
>
> --
> 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.

-- 
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.

Re: Printer ink fails to dry completely for a long time

[Bulent Celasun]

Bipin,

Thank you for sharing your experience and advice.

My inks are declared to be pigment type and understand that
this might have something to do with my problem.

I think I will be looking for different papers first.
While refilling, I will certainly consider non-Epson ones as well.

>A Radiant Heater placed in front of the Prints made them dry almost instantly
I doubt mine will but will try this soon.

With my best wishes : )

Bulent

-
http://patoloji.gen.tr
http://celasun.wordpress.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bc_the_path/
http://photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=2226822
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/bulentcelasun

Bipin Gupta , 21 Kas 2020 Cmt, 20:00 tarihinde şunu yazdı:
>
> Hello Bulent and other Friends with a similar problem.
> I bought some photo paper in Dubai in bulk and pretty cheap. Using a
> Canon Pixma MG6470 AIO Printer I had the same problem with the Black
> Ink taking longer to dry. It would smudge and spoil the entire print.
> This Printer uses two kinds of Black ink Tanks - one Dye Black and the
> other Pigment Black.
> I am a Techie and a DIY person and a deep research took me to this 
> conclusion:-
> a) Some photo papers have a thicker coating on which Ink takes longer to dry.
> b) Pigment Ink sits longer on paper before it dries - pigments in the
> Ink are some kind of very fine solid and will not enter the paper
> structure easily.
> c) Dye Inks sink into the paper and dry faster.
> d) Cheaper Bulk Ink from Ali Baba was no better or worse than Canon's
> original which is 5-times as expensive.
> I do refilling as DIY fun and they work OK.
> e) Better Photo Paper dried faster - Matte being better than Glossy -
> but still the Dye Black Ink took longer to dry.
> Experiment with quality Photo Paper.
> f) Bond Letter Paper - 90 to 120 GSM - dried the fastest. Not bad -
> good print quality.
> g) A Radiant Heater placed in front of the Prints made them dry almost
> instantly - Best Solution.
> Stay safe and Blessed in these Pandemic times.
> Bipin B. Gupta
> retd Advisor Nissan ME, N. Africa & CIS
> Thornhill, Ontario.
>
> --
> 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.

-- 
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.

Re: PESO: harrier portrait

[Larry Colen]

> On Nov 21, 2020, at 1:25 AM, Subash Jeyan  wrote:
> 
> all i've got to show for a saturday morning's birding:
> 
> http://something-feathered.in/2020/11/21/harrier-portrait/

That’s nice, but that Indian Roller shot is amazing.


> 
> montagu's harrier (female)...
> 
> k3ii and sigma 150-500 OS HSM @500 mm, handheld. cropped image.
> 
> -- 
> 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.
> 

--
Larry Colen
l...@red4est.com




-- 
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.

Re: OT u4/3

[Bob Pdml]

On 22 Nov 2020, at 02:34, Larry Colen  wrote:
> 
> […]
> I know that there are a few folks on this list that also have u4/3 systems 
> I’m curious about the most cost effective u4/3 body that handles like a real 
> camera, and how much it would set me back.  I expect that it would be 
> something used to keep an eye out for in the usual places.  It’s not that I 
> have the money for one, but it’s generally better to start looking sooner 
> rather than later.
> 
> My impression is that the OMDs are some of the nicer ones to use.

I have an OMD E-M1 MkII and several lenses. The whole system is very good 
indeed and I like the cameras and lenses a lot. 

I haven’t taken the E-M1 on a multi-day bike tour yet, but I did make my E3 
(4/3rds but not micro 4/3rds) on a couple of trips to France a few years ago in 
a Domke F5 strapped to the handlebars. That worked quite well but the camera 
and lens were a bit bulky, and the bag is not meant to be strapped to a bike 
and I wore a hole in it.

I’ve been carrying the E-M1 on day trips in a Crumpler insert inside a proper 
handlebar bag 
(https://www.sjscycles.co.uk/luggage/gilles-berthoud-handlebar-bag-gb905-black-53-litre/)
 which also fits other bits and pieces such as my wallet, phone, glasses, map 
and compass, sandwich and so on. This works well. This set-up will take the 
body and my 12-40/2.8 lens, but that combo is quite bulky so I bought a pancake 
zoom 
(https://www.olympus.co.uk/site/en/c/lenses/om_d_pen_lenses/m_zuiko/m_zuiko_digital_14_42mm_13556_ez/index.html),
 which is not too bad for on-the-bike use, but on a long multi-day trip I’d 
pack a proper lens as well.

To reduce bulk further, and to get to your question, I’ve been thinking of 
getting one of the less SLR-like bodies and the choice seems to me to between 
the rangefinder-like Olympus Pen-F and the Panasonic GX8 or GX9, which all have 
viewfinders rather just squint at the screen on the back. 

However, the Pen-F is discontinued and still rather pricey; the others are also 
quite pricey, even used, so I’m not sure I want to go there now that I’ve 
stopped working.

If I pursue this idea of bulking down I might look at something else 
altogether. I have used my Fuji X20 a lot, but the viewfinder is too small and 
picture quality could be better; it has also found its way apparently 
irretrievably into somebody’s handbag. 

But something small, robust with a decent VF, good picture quality, manual 
settings, RAW, and a zoom range of about 25-100mm 35mm-equivalent would be a 
winner.


-- 
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.