On 4/10/14, P.J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed:
In the Pink Polaroid picture below and to the left of Pinky is a box
for a recently released FujiFilm X100 Current list price new is $1100 or
more. If they know what they've got they wouldn't sell it for a lot less.
Didn't see the original
Just plane X100, but I checked the Amazon price and they're still
selling if for about $1000. Well they were a couple of days ago.
On 10/5/2014 8:07 AM, Steve Cottrell wrote:
On 4/10/14, P.J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed:
In the Pink Polaroid picture below and to the left of Pinky is
I mean plain, damned spell checker...
On 10/5/2014 12:30 PM, P.J. Alling wrote:
Just plane X100, but I checked the Amazon price and they're still
selling if for about $1000. Well they were a couple of days ago.
On 10/5/2014 8:07 AM, Steve Cottrell wrote:
On 4/10/14, P.J. Alling,
I have two of those Zoom 90WRs. Excellent cameras, for their ilk.
Better than an LX for fending off muggers, too, as they are much
cheaper.
On 4 October 2014 08:42, Christine Aguila christ...@caguila.com wrote:
Hi Everyone:
Had some camera spotting today. Check that old Pentax point
On 5/10/14, P.J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed:
Just plane X100, but I checked the Amazon price and they're still
selling if for about $1000. Well they were a couple of days ago.
Meh.
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__Broadcast, Corporate,
|| (O) |Web Video Production
--
Hi Everyone:
Had some camera spotting today. Check that old Pentax point and shoot the
pink Polaroid. I guess color cameras isn’t such a novel idea after all. Also,
Central Camera had a red Pentax Q—was it cute. First time I was able to play
with one! Very fun!
http://www.caguila.com
On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Christine Aguila christ...@caguila.com wrote:
Hi Everyone:
Had some camera spotting today. Check that old Pentax point and shoot the
pink Polaroid.
If it comes with a matching lipstick you're all set:) But how could
you resist taking home the Fuji
I don't know about Christine but the likely over $1000 price tag would
slow me down a bit.
On 10/4/2014 4:29 AM, Attila Boros wrote:
On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Christine Aguila christ...@caguila.com wrote:
Hi Everyone:
Had some camera spotting today. Check that old Pentax point
On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 6:37 PM, P.J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't know about Christine but the likely over $1000 price tag would slow
me down a bit.
Sorry, I thought we are looking at the used cameras section. Over
$1000 is no deal.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
I’m not sure where you guys are seeing a $1000. The Pentax point shoot,
which I thought interestingly huge by today’s standards, is $45. The pink
Polaroid, which I thought interesting given today’s trend in colored cameras,
is $139+.
Cheers, Christine
On Oct 4, 2014, at 3:29 AM, Attila
are seeing a $1000. The Pentax point shoot,
which I thought interestingly huge by today’s standards, is $45. The pink
Polaroid, which I thought interesting given today’s trend in colored cameras, is
$139+.
Cheers, Christine
On Oct 4, 2014, at 3:29 AM, Attila Boros attila.p...@gmail.com wrote
I was at a party tonight and some of the girls wanted a group photo. So they
grabbed me and handed me their point and shoot. We went into a back room with a
better wall for a background, I took a shot or two, but the flash just made the
shots look terrible. So I grabbed my camera bag, pulled
and handed me their point and shoot. We went into a back room with
a better wall for a background, I took a shot or two, but the flash just made
the shots look terrible. So I grabbed my camera bag, pulled out the K-x and
took a couple of shots, but at 6400 and 1/20 f/2.8 I just wasn't happy
event. Ah, fame! ;))
Jack
--- On Thu, 12/16/10, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote:
From: Larry Colen l...@red4est.com
Subject: Like I'm supposed to know how to use a point and shoot?
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Date: Thursday, December 16, 2010, 2:42 AM
I was at a party
On 10-12-16 5:42 AM, Larry Colen wrote:
I was at a party tonight and some of the girls wanted a group photo. So they
grabbed me and handed me their point and shoot. We went into a back room with a
better wall for a background, I took a shot or two, but the flash just made the
shots look
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 8:37 AM, Bruce Walker bruce.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
Larry, practice and use this technique ...
http://www.speedlighter.ca/2010/12/13/party-recipe/
Did Frank write rule #4: # Tilt whenever you like.
Dave
Still doesn't solve the PointShit vexation. I like Jack's
- Mensaje original
De: Larry Colen l...@red4est.com
I was at a party tonight and some of the girls wanted a group photo. So they
grabbed me and handed me their point and shoot. We went into a back room with
a
better wall for a background, I took a shot or two, but the flash just
Thu Dec 16 08:54:22 CST 2010
David J Brooks wrote:
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 8:37 AM, Bruce Walker bruce.walker at gmail.com
wrote:
Larry, practice and use this technique ...
http://www.speedlighter.ca/2010/12/13/party-recipe/
Did Frank write rule #4: # Tilt whenever you like.
In
I recently bought a vivitar ps digicam from radioshack.
I was a 12 MP marked down from $129 to $29 so I figured
what the heck. It was a horrible camera. When you took
a pic, you didn't get the review image to show up without
digging thru menus. Outdoors it was nearly impossible
to compose with
List
Subject: Re: Close encounter with a point and shoot
On 23 August 2010 03:32, J.C. O'Connell hifis...@gate.net wrote:
I recently bought a vivitar ps digicam from radioshack.
I was a 12 MP marked down from $129 to $29 so I figured
what the heck. It was a horrible camera. When you took
On 23 August 2010 03:32, J.C. O'Connell hifis...@gate.net wrote:
I recently bought a vivitar ps digicam from radioshack.
I was a 12 MP marked down from $129 to $29 so I figured
what the heck. It was a horrible camera. When you took
a pic, you didn't get the review image to show up without
Scott Loveless wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:52 PM, frank theriault
knarftheria...@gmail.com wrote:
Okay, I'm the other person (so it's nice to know there are at least
two of us, although it scares me that I'm in a group with you...).
;-)
Who wouldn't be scared?
I mean
On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 11:10:37AM -0400, ann sanfedele wrote:
home electronics which have teeny tiny control buttons that are black on
a black surface to make sure you can't
see what you are doing.
That's what you get when you have Hotblack Desiatto design home
electronics for you.
--
In a message dated 4/2/2009 8:10:46 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
ann...@nyc.rr.com writes:
AND ---
home electronics which have teeny tiny control buttons that are black on
a black surface to make sure you can't
see what you are doing.
ann
Yes. This has annoyed me for years.
On Apr 2, 2009, at 10:10 , eactiv...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 4/2/2009 8:10:46 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
ann...@nyc.rr.com writes:
AND ---
home electronics which have teeny tiny control buttons that are
black on
a black surface to make sure you can't
see what you are doing.
In a message dated 4/2/2009 11:06:43 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
pentax...@mac.com writes:
On Apr 2, 2009, at 10:10 , eactiv...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 4/2/2009 8:10:46 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
ann...@nyc.rr.com writes:
AND ---
home electronics which have teeny tiny
touche
On Apr 1, 2009, at 12:49 AM, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: pnstenqu...@comcast.net
Subject: Re: point and shoot
How strange. Did I really need a smiley?
Paul
Did I? ;-)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo
Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 08:54:16PM +0100, mike wilson wrote:
Larry Colen wrote:
Writing software is a development cost not a production cost. NRE,
Non-Recurring Expense.
All I believe about Adobe is true then?
What do you believe
On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 03:04:03AM -0400, John Francis wrote:
How many copies? Have you still got friends there?
Only two copies of the big suites, I don't know how many of the
smaller ones. I've only got one friend there at the moment, and having
just bought some stuff through him I don't
2009/4/1 John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com:
Actually, I think Canon cameras are ok. It's the Canon users that give me a
pain.
MARK!
--
MaritimTim
--
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
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 06:56:43PM -0700, Larry Colen wrote:
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 08:54:16PM +0100, mike wilson wrote:
Larry Colen wrote:
Writing software is a development cost not a production cost. NRE,
Non-Recurring Expense.
All I believe about Adobe is true then?
What
Some one is going to be very grumpy at GFM this year, me thinks.
Dave
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Scott Loveless sdlovel...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:52 PM, frank theriault
knarftheria...@gmail.com wrote:
Okay, I'm the other person (so it's nice to know there are at
I use the vf on my G3 sometimes, mostly if its to bright to see the
lcd screen. I hate seeing the len stuck out in the finder, it just
makes it a tad harder to compose.
Much like Nurvana
Dave
--
Equine Photography
www.caughtinmotion.com
http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/
Ontario Canada
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 01:23:24PM -0400, Scott Loveless wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Mark Roberts msrobert...@ysu.edu wrote:
The Sigma DP2 has a 24mm f/2.8 prime (roughly the angle of view of 50mm on
FF) and you can get an accessory optical viewfinder.
The camera is about
- Original Message -
From: Larry Colen
Subject: Re: point and shoot
This really sucks. I just want something simple that I can pull up to
my eye and then throw the photos out on the web when I get home. But
all I see is chimp-approved plastic junk with smile recognition. WTF
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 11:10:27AM -0600, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Larry Colen
Subject: Re: point and shoot
Most of those features are purely software, so don't add anything to
production cost.
Software writers work for free?
A lot do. A lot
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote:
A lot do. A lot of software is being written for reasons other than
financial motivation. For example a Finnish college kid named Linus
Torvalds wrote the basis of an operating system for the fun of it. The
upside of this
- Original Message -
From: frank theriault
Subject: Re: point and shoot
I can't imagine that many cameras have features being powered by
freeware.
I expect that pretty much every new camera has to have new software written
for it, but I could be wrong.
I don't know much
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 1:50 PM, William Robb war...@gmail.com wrote:
I expect that pretty much every new camera has to have new software written
for it, but I could be wrong.
I don't know much about software writing.
That's kind of what I'd think too.
cheers,
frank
--
Sharpness is a
Larry, don't forget viruses - not only they're written for free, the
critters face jail for their distribution.
LF
Larry Colen escreveu:
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 11:10:27AM -0600, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Larry Colen
Subject: Re: point and shoot
Most of those
- Original Message -
From: Larry Colen
Subject: Re: point and shoot
Most of those features are purely software, so don't add anything to
production cost.
Software writers work for free?
A lot do. A lot of software is being written for reasons other than
financial motivation
William Robb wrote:
From: Larry Colen Subject: Re: point and shoot
This really sucks. I just want something simple that I can pull up to
my eye and then throw the photos out on the web when I get home. But
all I see is chimp-approved plastic junk with smile recognition. WTF
happened
- Original Message -
From: Mark Roberts
Subject: Re: point and shoot
What also wouldn't cost a lot more would be to have a feature which
disabled all the other features so that we purists could also enjoy
the camera. Perhaps some manufacturer will implement this someday
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Mark Roberts msrobert...@ysu.edu wrote:
snip
What also wouldn't cost a lot more would be to have a feature which disabled
all the other features so that we purists could also enjoy the camera.
Perhaps some manufacturer will implement this someday...
No!
That's
Actually there is an opensource camera firmware.
I am very tempt to give it a try:
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ#Q._What_camera_models_are_supported_by_the_CHDK_program.3F
Too bad they are all Canon Digicam. If I can get some cheap enough, I
might try it out.
-Pasvorn
--
PDML
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 1:42 PM, frank theriault
knarftheria...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote:
A lot do. A lot of software is being written for reasons other than
financial motivation. For example a Finnish college kid named Linus
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 2:13 PM, William Robb war...@gmail.com wrote:
- Original Message - From: Larry Colen
Subject: Re: point and shoot
Most of those features are purely software, so don't add anything to
production cost.
Software writers work for free?
A lot do. A lot
- Original Message -
From: Adam Maas
Subject: Re: point and shoot
That little operating system that Linus wrote is the second most
popular OS on the planet (Linux). The third (Mac OS X) also relies
heavily on code written by people working for free (As it's based on
BSD, which
Larry Colen wrote:
Writing software is a development cost not a production cost. NRE,
Non-Recurring Expense.
All I believe about Adobe is true then?
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the
No!
That's not pure enough!
You're not looking at it from a purist's POV, Mark.
The TRUE purist would look at that button as an enabling button,
allowing one to turn ON the features at will. The true purist would
see that as pandering and therefore unacceptable. The purist's camera
Bob,
That is an ancient paper. :)
Of course, people do use these principles.
-Pasvorn
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote:
It has been a solved problem since probably the invention of the subroutine,
certainly since Parnas wrote his famous paper about designing
In a message dated 3/31/2009 11:24:57 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
war...@gmail.com writes:
Didn't Canon do that already?
William Robb
==
Yes. I used to have the 300D (first digital rebel). It basically used 10D
software with features disabled. Then a Russian hacker came up with
, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: Mark Roberts Subject: Re: point
and shoot
What also wouldn't cost a lot more would be to have a feature which
disabled all the other features so that we purists could also
enjoy the camera. Perhaps some manufacturer will implement
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Paul Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote:
Yes, relying on technology sucks completely. The true purist would disable
all the features of his camera with a sledgehammer. He could then draw his
pictures, unburdened by any assistance from mechanical or
by any assistance from mechanical
PS or electronic devices. What could be more pure?
PS Paul
PS On Mar 31, 2009, at 2:25 PM, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: Mark Roberts Subject: Re: point
and shoot
What also wouldn't cost a lot more would be to have a feature which
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 02:17:15PM -0400, Mark Roberts wrote:
William Robb wrote:
From: Larry Colen Subject: Re: point and shoot
This really sucks. I just want something simple that I can pull up to
my eye and then throw the photos out on the web when I get home. But
all I see is chimp
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Paul Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote:
Yes, relying on technology sucks completely. The true purist would disable
all the features of his camera with a sledgehammer. He could then draw his
pictures, unburdened by any assistance from mechanical or
I know it's ancient. That's my point. And very few people use those
principles or have even heard of them, in my experience.
Bob,
That is an ancient paper. :)
Of course, people do use these principles.
-Pasvorn
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote:
Bob W wrote:
Hands up all the software developers on this list who have read the
aforementioned paper, and ever put the principles into practice?
Read the paper, but that was many years ago. Have used the concepts in
nearly every piece of for release software I've ever worked on. As
Hands up all the software developers on this list who have read the
aforementioned paper, and ever put the principles into practice?
Read the paper, but that was many years ago. Have used the
concepts in
nearly every piece of for release software I've ever worked on. As
opposed to
Bob,
With all kidding aside, your observation is - unfortunately - true.
Many folks cut corner for the sake of short-term gain.
Sigh...
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote:
I know it's ancient. That's my point. And very few people use those
principles or have
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 05:34:49PM -0400, frank theriault scripsit:
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Paul Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net
wrote:
Yes, relying on technology sucks completely. The true purist would disable
all the features of his camera with a sledgehammer. He could then
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 08:58:59PM +0100, Bob W scripsit:
Hands up all the software developers on this list who have read the
aforementioned paper, and ever put the principles into practice?
Well, both, but that's kinda cheating.
-- Graydon
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote:
It would be a matter of designing a suitably minimal framework with
scalability that people could use to add components ('plug-ins' I believe is
the modern term for such things), then providing a way for people to supply
the
On Mar 31, 2009, at 14:34 , frank theriault wrote:
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Paul Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net
wrote:
Yes, relying on technology sucks completely. The true purist would
disable
all the features of his camera with a sledgehammer. He could then
draw his
- Original Message -
From: Paul Stenquist
Subject: Re: point and shoot
Yes, relying on technology sucks completely. The true purist would
disable all the features of his camera with a sledgehammer. He could
then draw his pictures, unburdened by any assistance from mechanical
How strange. Did I really need a smiley?
Paul
- William Robb war...@gmail.com wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Paul Stenquist
Subject: Re: point and shoot
Yes, relying on technology sucks completely. The true purist would
disable all the features of his camera
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 08:54:16PM +0100, mike wilson wrote:
Larry Colen wrote:
Writing software is a development cost not a production cost. NRE,
Non-Recurring Expense.
All I believe about Adobe is true then?
What do you believe about Adobe?
They seem to treat their employees well, a
- Original Message -
From: pnstenqu...@comcast.net
Subject: Re: point and shoot
How strange. Did I really need a smiley?
Paul
Did I? ;-)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit
From: Scott Loveless
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote:
The Canon A series used to be a great compromise between features
and price...at a cost, that in this case was its size.
I've been looking at the A series. I just have to bottle my
conscience
Scott Loveless wrote:
I have the same problem with mobile phones. I don't want to check my
email, surf the web, download music/movies/ringtones, text, take
pictures or wipe my butt with it. I want to talk to people on the
phone. I want an address book and voice mail. That's about it. No
Frank,
The CL is nice, but it is not exactly inexpensive, at least to me. :)
May be Olympus Stylus Epic is a good choice for a film guy?
-Pasvorn
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 9:07 AM, frank theriault
knarftheria...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 9:51 AM, Scott Loveless
Scott.
I bought my daughter the A540, i think it is, for xmas a while back,
and it does a good job, and has a VF.
My G3 has a VF, so maybe look into a G series.
Dave
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 9:51 AM, Scott Loveless sdlovel...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi there.
The 750z I've been using the last few
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Pasvorn Boonmark pasv...@boonmark.net wrote:
Frank,
The CL is nice, but it is not exactly inexpensive, at least to me. :)
May be Olympus Stylus Epic is a good choice for a film guy?
I was just jerkin' Scott's chain.
cheers,
frank
--
Sharpness is a
...about to attacked...
Scott, the Nikon D50 - I think that's the model - offers a compact with
wide angle zoom and optical viewfinder, around $100. Optical finders are
getting hard to find indeed...
LF (well, if Pentax offered any I'd suggest it)
Scott Loveless escreveu:
On Mon, Mar 30,
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 12:49 PM, frank theriault
knarftheria...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Pasvorn Boonmark pasv...@boonmark.net
wrote:
Frank,
The CL is nice, but it is not exactly inexpensive, at least to me. :)
May be Olympus Stylus Epic is a good choice for a
Jaume Lahuerta wrote:
- Mensaje original
De: Scott Loveless sdlovel...@gmail.com
No optical VF is a deal breaker, unfortunately. Didn't someone
offer a small digital camera with a prime lens not too long ago?
This must be either Sigma DP1/DP2 or Ricoh GR Digital. Not sure about
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Mark Roberts msrobert...@ysu.edu wrote:
The Sigma DP2 has a 24mm f/2.8 prime (roughly the angle of view of 50mm on
FF) and you can get an accessory optical viewfinder.
The camera is about $650.00, though. Not available yet, but should be very
soon. Amazon is
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Scott Loveless sdlovel...@gmail.com wrote:
snip Am I the only person in the whole wide world
that doesn't want a zillion worthless features at the expense of
something functional?
Apparently you are...
cheers,
frank
--
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept.
Optical viewfinder yes, compact no. The D50 is an older Nikon DSLR. I
suspect you're referring to the P50, which should be avoided. Nikon's
PS production of the last few years start at bad and get rapidly
worse.
Optical finders are dying off. Mostly because PS finders are typically horrid.
-Adam
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Scott Loveless sdlovel...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 12:49 PM, frank theriault
knarftheria...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Pasvorn Boonmark pasv...@boonmark.net
wrote:
Frank,
The CL is nice, but it is not exactly
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:46 PM, frank theriault
knarftheria...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Scott Loveless sdlovel...@gmail.com wrote:
snip Am I the only person in the whole wide world
that doesn't want a zillion worthless features at the expense of
something functional?
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Adam Maas a...@mawz.ca wrote:
Optical viewfinder yes, compact no. The D50 is an older Nikon DSLR. I
suspect you're referring to the P50, which should be avoided. Nikon's
PS production of the last few years start at bad and get rapidly
worse.
Optical finders
No potical VF and not pocketable, but 10x optical zoom, aperature and
shutter priority, super macro and my real dinosaur Optio MX
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:46 PM, frank theriault
knarftheria...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Scott Loveless sdlovel...@gmail.com wrote:
snip Am
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:52 PM, frank theriault
knarftheria...@gmail.com wrote:
Okay, I'm the other person (so it's nice to know there are at least
two of us, although it scares me that I'm in a group with you...).
;-)
Who wouldn't be scared?
I mean seriously, that's why I posted like a
Scott Loveless wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Mark Roberts msrobert...@ysu.edu wrote:
The Sigma DP2 has a 24mm f/2.8 prime (roughly the angle of view of 50mm on
FF) and you can get an accessory optical viewfinder.
The camera is about $650.00, though. Not available yet, but should be
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:52 PM, Scott Loveless sdlovel...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Adam Maas a...@mawz.ca wrote:
Optical viewfinder yes, compact no. The D50 is an older Nikon DSLR. I
suspect you're referring to the P50, which should be avoided. Nikon's
PS production
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Scott Loveless sdlovel...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
I'm a curmudgeon at 33.
That's okay, you look 45...
cheers,
frank
;-)
--
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
Scott Loveless wrote:
I have the same problem with mobile phones. I don't want to check my
email, surf the web, download music/movies/ringtones, text, take
pictures or wipe my butt with it. I want to talk to people on the
phone. I want an address book and voice mail. That's about it. No
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Doug Brewer d...@alphoto.com wrote:
Scott Loveless wrote:
I have the same problem with mobile phones. I don't want to check my
email, surf the web, download music/movies/ringtones, text, take
pictures or wipe my butt with it. I want to talk to people on the
Nope.
http://photo.net/photos/RickW
--- On Mon, 3/30/09, Scott Loveless sdlovel...@gmail.com wrote:
Am I the only person in the whole
wide world
that doesn't want a zillion worthless features at the
expense of
something functional?
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Well, P50 it is. Remember reading about it on PopPhoto. I wouldn't
challenge your statement about avoiding it, but since the order is about
some compact (not really, but still smaller than a DSLR) and not so
expensive (one bill, $100) camera with an optic viewfinder, I tried to
increase the
Hi there.
The 750z I've been using the last few years for snapshots is just
about shot. Besides losing the charger, I've also managed to break
the articulating LCD again (Pentax fixed it under warranty the first
time). So I'm shopping for an inexpensive pocket camera with an
optical viewfinder
,
and this produces a lag between frames when shooting at full resolution. No
optical VF I am afraid.
Regards,
Jaume
- Mensaje original
De: Scott Loveless sdlovel...@gmail.com
Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Enviado: lunes, 30 de marzo, 2009 15:51:40
Asunto: point
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote:
The Canon A series used to be a great compromise between features and
price...at a cost, that in this case was its size.
I've been looking at the A series. I just have to bottle my
conscience long enough to actually
- Mensaje original
De: Scott Loveless sdlovel...@gmail.com
No optical VF is a deal breaker, unfortunately. Didn't someone
offer a small digital camera with a prime lens not too long ago?
This must be either Sigma DP1/DP2 or Ricoh GR Digital. Not sure about the
Sigma, but at
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 9:51 AM, Scott Loveless sdlovel...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi there.
The 750z I've been using the last few years for snapshots is just
about shot. Besides losing the charger, I've also managed to break
the articulating LCD again (Pentax fixed it under warranty the first
Someone asked about point and shoot cameras that also take movies. I
hadn't tried shooting movies with the 5 megapixel Panasonic DMC-TZ1
at that time, but I did today. I'm quite impressed. It shoots in
either 16x9 or 4x3 format. Speeds from 10fps to 30 fps. In 16x 9,
30fps mode, it can
Chris Brogden [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa / wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jul 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
okay pug-sters, anyone willing to admit that they occasionaly use
a point and
shoot to take photographs?
if so, what p/s do u use and why?
Many years ago I purchased the Pentax IQ
EDT
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: anyone shoot w/a point and shoot?
okay pug-sters, anyone willing to admit that they occasionaly use a point and
shoot to take photographs?
if so, what p/s do u use and why?
i'll get the ball rolling...i use a konica big mini 302 35mm/3.5 to shoot
1 - 100 of 116 matches
Mail list logo
