Len --- * There's no place like 127.0.0.1
From: "Ian bromehead" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: AF360FGZ Question Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 07:32:34 -0800
Leonard
With other flashes and built-ins I have seen this too. I purchased the (older) AF280T, partly because it swivels, and I have found that this has quite a profound Improvement on people's reactions. Does the AF360 swivel, if so, see if that helps to reduce blinking Ian
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 9:26 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Content-Type: text/plain
pentax-discuss-d Digest Volume 03 : Issue 1407
Today's Topics:
RE: istD Histogram display [ "Rob Brigham"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
OT: source of Beseler Spares [ "Paul Ewins"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
Re: on the topic of Frankencameras.. [ Mark Roberts
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ]
Re: Wide angles for *ist D [ Mark Roberts
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ]
Re: I really like the MZ-S! [ "Steve Desjardins"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
Re: on the topic of Frankencameras.. [ "Rob Studdert"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
Re: AF360FGZ Question [ "Leonard Paris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
]
wide angles for 35mm [ "Daichi Saeki (QA/EMC)"
<daichi.sae ]
Re[2]: AF360FGZ Question [ Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
]
Re: Wide angles for *ist D [ Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ]
RE: wide angles for 35mm [ "tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ]
Re: AF360FGZ Question [ "William Robb"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
Re: on the topic of Frankencameras.. [ Alin Flaider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
]
Re: DCPDML warning. [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
Re: *ist D aftermath [ "Christian"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
Re: MZ-S frame overlap [ "mike.wilson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
Re: And now: the *ist D vs. the EOS [ "Dario Bonazza 2"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
Re: How to tell clear glass from UV [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
Re: DCPDML warning. [ Mark Roberts
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ]
Re: MZ-S frame overlap (was Re: And [ "John Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ]
Re: istD Histogram display [ "John Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ]
Batteries, was Re: istD Histogram di [ "Bill Owens"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
RE: *ist D aftermath [ "zoomshot"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
FA 20-35 on *istD [ "Steve Desjardins"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
Re: What is the high-end Pentax lens [ Margus =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=E4nnik?=
<m ]
Re: Batteries, was Re: istD Histogra [ alex wetmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ]
RE: OT: CLA + Rocky & Bullwinkle [ "Butch Black"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 12:06:59 -0000 From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: istD Histogram display Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
I would stick the liths in you pack/car as an emergency backup - their charge lasts 10 years(ish), and get onto the nimh batts now.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Leon Altoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 12 November 2003 11:50 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: istD Histogram display > > > On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 19:46:45 -0500, Herb Chong wrote: > > >i have the auto review turned off. i review only when i think there > >might be a problem. since that doesn't happen very often, i save > >battery power by not having it on except when i need it. > > Herb, > > Are you using the CR-V3 batteries? I have image preview turned off as > well and I am up to 1100 images and the battery display still shows > full power. I have a set of NiMH batteries ready to go but I don't > know if I'll ever get a chance to use them as it looks like these > lithiums aren't planning to stop. > > > Leon > http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 23:14:52 +1100 From: "Paul Ewins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: OT: source of Beseler Spares Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Guys, Does anybody know of a retailer that sells Beseler spares? Ideally somebody who knows how to use email andoesn't mind shipping internationally. I need a new O ring for the 35mm negatrans which came with my recently acquired 45M (thanks again Rob S for the tip!). There doesn't seem to be anybody in Australia who is a Beseler agent, and I can't find an email address on the Beseler website to ask them!!!
BTW, if anybody has a 120 negatrans that they wish to sell or a spare lens board please email me
Thanks,
Paul Ewins Melbourne, Australia
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 07:33:31 -0500 From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: on the topic of Frankencameras.. Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
"Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 11 Nov 2003 at 17:48, William Robb wrote: > >> I expect this is why it's another non first for Pentax. > >It's only at that price point because it has Leica printed on it, it will >probably be made in Portugal too.
I'll bet it never ends up b3ing made anywhere - at least not in production. I'll be surprised if a working prototype is ever shown.
-- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 07:41:35 -0500 From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Wide angles for *ist D Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
This article might be of interest: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/14-vs-16.shtml
-- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 08:15:02 -0500 From: "Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: I really like the MZ-S! Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline
Me too. RE: Autofocus sensor, I'm a "focus and reocmpose" kinda guy. And, to be honest, I've gone back to MF most of the time.
Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 00:42:30 +1000 From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: on the topic of Frankencameras.. Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body
On 12 Nov 2003 at 7:33, Mark Roberts wrote:
> I'll bet it never ends up b3ing made anywhere - at least not in > production. I'll be surprised if a working prototype is ever shown.
I'm not convinced either however Leica have a well founded history of actually listening and servicing their customers.
Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 08:33:13 -0600 From: "Leonard Paris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: AF360FGZ Question Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
It just seems to me that the timing between the two flashes is just about perfect to result in pictures of people with their eyes closed. Has anyone noticed that besides me?
Len --- * There's no place like 127.0.0.1
>If you use a non A lens it reverts to TTL. The double flash can be a >pain in some circumstances but it gives far better exposure accuracy >than TTL. > > > Leon
_________________________________________________________________ Compare high-speed Internet plans, starting at $26.95. https://broadband.msn.com (Prices may vary by service area.)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 08:55:34 -0600 From: "Daichi Saeki (QA/EMC)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: wide angles for 35mm Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi everybody!
I had the opportunity to use a 17-35/2.8 L over the weekend. And now I'm hooked. Is the difference between 17mm and 20mm worth going to a 3rd party lens and do any of you have any suggestions (of lenses you own or owned). I'm not a landscape kind of person. I was using the zoom primarily in a busy kitchen, with flash. I guess another question is that knowing my flash's limitation of 20mm (360FGZ) should I stick to 20-35/4? I also like the option of the fast sigma 20/1.8; any comments? I seriously doubt I'll be jumping to digital anytime soon. I played with a Nikon D100 at the same time and boy did that 1.6x crop really stink. (I still haven't tried the *istD)
Thanks, Daich
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 06:57:57 -0800 From: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Leonard Paris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re[2]: AF360FGZ Question Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
P-TTL can have that effect on people who are prone to blink. Not only does the first flash seem to signal for them to blink, but I have found sound can also cause it. When using leaf shutter lenses on my 67, the focal plane shutter opens first, which causes a noise, then the leaf shutter and flash fire. Seems that "blinkers" will blink from a flash or the sound of the shutter.
Bruce
Wednesday, November 12, 2003, 6:33:13 AM, you wrote:
LP> It just seems to me that the timing between the two flashes is just about LP> perfect to result in pictures of people with their eyes closed. Has anyone LP> noticed that besides me?
LP> Len LP> --- LP> * There's no place like 127.0.0.1
>>If you use a non A lens it reverts to TTL. The double flash can be a >>pain in some circumstances but it gives far better exposure accuracy >>than TTL. >> >> >> Leon
LP> _________________________________________________________________ LP> Compare high-speed Internet plans, starting at $26.95. LP> https://broadband.msn.com (Prices may vary by service area.)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 14:19:10 +0000 From: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "pentax list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Wide angles for *ist D Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On 12/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
>>Heiko, I have the Sigma EX 14mm 2.8 and use it on my D60, giving an >>effective focal length of 22.4mm. On an *ist D it should work out to >>about 21mm. > >That's a good hint. Maybe I was focused on wide angle zooms, too much.
Ah, zooms. I never considered a wide zoom when I wanted my wide angle. I'm not sure why. I had a play with a 15-30 or something like that and to be honest I couldn't see the point of the zooming range. I figure if you're going to be wide and want to zoom in a bit, just move forward instead! The thing with wide zooms that goes against the grain with me is that it instills laziness. With a tele zoom, you can cover a lot of ground without moving a foot, much more than you could if you had to walk to get the right shot with a prime tele.
I can understand using medium wide mostly, and then not being wide enough and needing to zoom out as wide as possible (say, shooting a group in a confined space / small room etc). But if you had the big wide already, you could simply move forward to frame if you were too far back.
That's my twisted thinking anyway.
Plus there's a part of me that still thinks a prime lens has got to be better than a zoom. I'm not sure how true that is in this day and age....
> >>Personally, with a Pentax I would go for the A 15mm 3.5. > >I have an eye on them at eBay. Sometimes you can get one at 450-500 Euro >- that would be about the same as the Sigma EX14. So it comes to a >trade-off: SMC without AF or AF without SMC. At the moment I would go >for the Pentax, too.
As you know, I'm a manual focus guy. I do us the AF on my AF lenses sometimes, though rarely. Mostly on the 70-200 with my lad's football or whatever. I personally think AF on 14mm lens is a complete and utter waste of time and I never have it switched on. Why? The depth of field at this focal length renders focus almost academic. Certainly with landscapes. I set for good depth of field and let it go. I have not been disappointed.
My focal length choice (he rambled on) has settled well over the years and I now have the right combination for me. I'll use 35mm equivalent here:
Primes 22mm - wide for landscapes and street. 38mm macro - street and portraiture 80mm - portraits
Zooms 44-112mm - street, general use, walkabout, only one lens 112-320mm - landscape, people, sport, everything else + 1.4 TC if needed.
I have it all covered in 5 lenses. I seriously can't think of anything I don't do with that lot. I don't do wildlife (ha!) so I'm not into big glass. Okay, maybe a 100mm macro might be nice but I don't do the macro work to justify it. Besides a 38mm in macro (24mm EX macro) is a very interesting focal length for a macro and it's superb on faces!
Sorry to ramble on. Good luck with your wide quest Heiko.
Cheers, Cotty
___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _____________________________ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 10:24:17 -0500 From: "tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: wide angles for 35mm Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> -----Original Message----- > From: Daichi Saeki (QA/EMC) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Hi everybody!
Hi.
> > I had the opportunity to use a 17-35/2.8 L over the > weekend. And now I'm hooked. Is the difference between > 17mm and 20mm worth going to a 3rd party lens and do any of > you have any suggestions (of lenses you own or owned). I'm > not a landscape kind of person. I was using the zoom > primarily in a busy kitchen, with flash. I guess another > question is that knowing my flash's limitation of 20mm > (360FGZ) should I stick to 20-35/4?
No, there are several ways to get around this. Indoors you can just use bounce off the ceiling or use a diffuser.
tv
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 09:19:24 -0600 From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: AF360FGZ Question Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
----- Original Message ----- From: "Leonard Paris" Subject: Re: AF360FGZ Question
> It just seems to me that the timing between the two flashes is just about
> perfect to result in pictures of people with their eyes closed. Has
anyone
> noticed that besides me?
Happens with flash based red-eye reduction as well. I think what they have in mind is that if the subjects eyes are closed, there is no red eye.
William Robb
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:26:06 +0200 From: Alin Flaider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: on the topic of Frankencameras.. Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Rob wrote:
RS> I'm not convinced either however Leica have a well founded history of actually RS> listening and servicing their customers.
Point to Leica and aim to Pentax. ;o)
Servus, Alin
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 10:40:16 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: DCPDML warning. Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-description: Mail message body Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
When I saw the subject, I thought you were alerting us to some terror warning.
I'd be up for getting together, maybe next week. Have you heard from anyone else in DC?
Geoff
> I am taking a trip north this week.
>
> I will be in Maryland the 13th, 17th, 18th, and 19th. There is a chance I
> will be busy the 19th. Have rental car, will travel.
>
> Hope we can get some of the DCPDML, and anyone else, together while I am
up
> there.
>
> Ciao,
>
> Cisar
> Panama City, Florida
>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 10:58:20 -0500 From: "Christian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: *ist D aftermath Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> So, big question to all *istD owners: > After having purchased and used your new DSLR, are there any of you > who now have second thoughts? Perhaps wishing you had gone the Canon > or Nikon route instead? Given the opportunity to do it again, would > you still purchase the *istD?
No second thoughts. I think it's a great camera that suits my needs. I've had a few prints made (8x12 or so) and the quality is at a level that I want. I'd still go with the ist-D for the SMC glass.
> Even further, would you recommend it above other choices to someone > else who doesn't have any investment in Pentax Glass?
For the price, no. Canon is cheaper to get into now with the rebel D, has
upgrade potential to 10D and <gasp> 1Ds. also they offer USM and IS lenses.
I played briefly with a Nikon D100 and thought its viewfinder was crap.
> Obviously for me, I have a stray zoom or two (28-80 Tamron, 80-320 > Pentax) and an AF280T, 2 AF400T's and a bunch of 67 glass. Other than > that, I am free to choose any direction. So, is the *istD the right > choice?
The only way to know is a side-by-side in-store comparison with whatever competition interests you.
> > Thanks for your thoughts. > > -- > Bruce
No problem, Christian
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 16:09:55 +0000 From: "mike.wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: MZ-S frame overlap Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi,
Bruce D wrote:
> Seems odd. One of mine - bought in the retail channel from B&H had > the problem. I seriously doubt that it was a beta tester. It was > packaged and sold as new by a reputable dealer. The problem was > posted on the Pentax website with serial #'s and a way to test if your > camera was affected. This doesn't come across as being fixed before > retail production. > > Perhaps this was the case in your country handled by your importer, > but was not a worldwide case. Production models were shipped to the > US at least with this firmware problem. > > It was fixed early in production because the second MZ-S that I > purchased did not have this problem. It was purchased 4-6 months > after the first one.
<pdmq> That's why I wrote "probably". I was certain that it was fixed in the European and Asian markets but not sure about worldwide. It was certainly known about well before production models began appearing anywhere. </pdmq>
mike
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:19:42 +0100 From: "Dario Bonazza 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: And now: the *ist D vs. the EOS 300D! Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sure I'd be tempted to setup such a further comparison, but I'm not sure I can do that, as I'm afraid very soon I'll be asked to return the *ist D to Pentax importers, which lent it to me for so many days (I kept it far more than promised). However, they've been impressed with the tests and the find of the PPL bug, so it is possible I'll deserve some extra time to play with it.
Then, as you can understand, both the owner of the S2 Pro and the underwritten are busy with jobs other than testing cameras, so it won't be so easy to find some more hours to do that very soon.
Who knows? Maybe I can do that. I'm going to try to find some spare hours this week.
Dario
----- Original Message ----- From: "Brendan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 2:03 AM Subject: Re: And now: the *ist D vs. the EOS 300D!
> Dario are there plans to retest the s2 vs the *istd > in raw? > > ______________________________________________________________________ > Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca >
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 11:32:23 EST From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How to tell clear glass from UV glass? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>So different from my experience. What filter brand did you use?
>I did my test with a Pentax SMC UV filter, I was at a 12,000 ft altitude, mid afternoon, on a clear day. Distant landscape.
>I'll definitely try again next time I travel at high altitude, or simply put a UV filter on my lenses fom now on.
>Andre
You know, I am going to take back what I said.
When I started out (with the K-1000) I was using third party zooms. And I think I used one to take the picture I was thinking of.
Later, the Pentax zoom I used had a B&W skylight filter on it, but I never took it off to see if there was a difference without it.
So I can't really say that I *have* tried long distance shots with a SMC lens without a UV filter and then with one. It's quite possible the SMC coating does work like a UV filter.
I use mainly Hoya UV on my lenses.
Marnie aka Doe (I'll try the SMC SuperTak I now have with filter and without.)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 11:13:43 -0500 From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: DCPDML warning. Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>When I saw the subject, I thought you were alerting us to some terror warning.
Cesar's talking about coming for a visit. With his snakeskin LX's. You don't call that a terror warning?!
-- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 11:40:16 -0500 (EST) From: "John Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MZ-S frame overlap (was Re: And now: the *ist D vs. the EOS 300D!) Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> > Hi, > > John F wrote: > > > They came out with a firmware upgrade for the MZ-S fairly fast > > (to fix the frame-overlapping problem). > > To Pentax's credit, they "fixed" this before retail production started. > Anyone who had this problem had probably been sold a beta tester. > > mike
Not so. My camera was purchased retail from a reputable mail-order store, but had to go back to Pentax (Colorado) to be upgraded.
The problem was limited to very early units, but these were in the hands of the early adopters before the problem was identified.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 11:44:52 -0500 (EST) From: "John Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: istD Histogram display Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> > I would stick the liths in you pack/car as an emergency backup - their > charge lasts 10 years(ish), and get onto the nimh batts now.
That's exactly what I chose to do. I've got rechargeable NiMh cells for everyday use (multiple sets, which I can recharge in one hour).
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 11:58:46 -0500 From: "Bill Owens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Batteries, was Re: istD Histogram display Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
This reminds me of Michael Reichman's gripe about using AA batteries and having to carry a charger if you used NiMh batteries. He prefers a proprietary rechargeable. Doesn't he still need to carry a charger, unless of course he wants the camera out of commission while the battery is charging in camera?
Bill
----- Original Message ----- From: "John Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 11:44 AM Subject: Re: istD Histogram display
> > > > I would stick the liths in you pack/car as an emergency backup - their > > charge lasts 10 years(ish), and get onto the nimh batts now. > > That's exactly what I chose to do. I've got rechargeable NiMh cells > for everyday use (multiple sets, which I can recharge in one hour). > >
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:00:41 -0000 From: "zoomshot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: *ist D aftermath Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
-----Original Message----- From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12 November 2003 03:55 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: *ist D aftermath
So, big question to all *istD owners:
After having purchased and used your new DSLR, are there any of you who now
have second thoughts? Perhaps wishing you had gone the Canon or Nikon route
instead? Given the opportunity to do it again, would you still purchase the
*istD?
Even further, would you recommend it above other choices to someone else who
doesn't have any investment in Pentax Glass?
Obviously for me, I have a stray zoom or two (28-80 Tamron, 80-320
Pentax) and an AF280T, 2 AF400T's and a bunch of 67 glass. Other than that,
I am free to choose any direction. So, is the *istD the right choice?
Thanks for your thoughts.
--
1 - No second thoughts, meets all my expectations, would purchase again.
2 - If this baby hadn't appeared by last month I would have gone the Canon way as I couldn't have waited any longer. Downside would have been a high loss in investment of glass.
3 - Over time I have changed all my lenses to AF and picked-up what I would call the pro stuff so results have met all my expectations.
4 - Starting from scratch then it would probably not be my first choice as the others offer a far greater choice of lenses and are further down the road in the development cycle.
5 - For a first timer probably a choice because of the size. With cameras it
does matter!
Ziggy
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 12:06:25 -0500 From: "Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: FA 20-35 on *istD Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline
Has anyone tried the above lens on the *ist D? I know this may have been said, but I could have missed it in the flurry of recent *ist posts.
Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:07:52 +0200 From: Margus =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=E4nnik?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: What is the high-end Pentax lens strategy???? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi there,
as I see, those new DA lenses can not be used on 35mm cameras... %&*^(%(! :(((
BR, Margus
Joseph Tainter wrote:
> The DA 16-45 is forthcoming, hopefully soon. As a constant aperture > zoom, my interpretation is that it is intended to be a serious lens. > From the one photo I have seen,it may also have internal zooming. Not > sure if the front rotates during focusing. > > Pentax had the FAJ 18-35 ready to go. It goes with the *ist D to > reviews, in kits, and in the manual. This is a pity, but it is the only > wide angle zoom lens that Pentax could offer at a budget price. Canon's > new budget dslr comes with a comparable inexpensive zoom. > > As I posted last week, Pentax needs soon to come out with the following: > > DA 50-200 f4 > DA 13-20 f4 > And fast primes at 13 and 16 mm.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 09:06:33 -0800 (PST) From: alex wetmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Batteries, was Re: istD Histogram display Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Bill Owens wrote: > This reminds me of Michael Reichman's gripe about using AA batteries and > having to carry a charger if you used NiMh batteries. He prefers a > proprietary rechargeable. Doesn't he still need to carry a charger, unless > of course he wants the camera out of commission while the battery is > charging in camera?
Even if he is charging in camera he would still need to carry a power supply for the camera. Those are often larger than AA chargers.
I'm very happy that the *ist D uses AA batteries. On my last overseas trip I had to carry four chargers: Sony one for my digital cameras, AA one for various devices, my laptop one and the iPod one. The Sony one was the largest by far. The AA one was able to run on AC or car lighter outlets so it was the most useful.
alex
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 12:15:32 -0500 From: "Butch Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: OT: CLA + Rocky & Bullwinkle Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Previously written:
Enough time for me to chime in on this one...
Rocky's real name was Rocket J. Squirrel.
What other useless stuff do I keep in my noggin???
Heading north in the morning,
Cisar Panama City, Florida
Extra brownie points for the correct answer; what was Natasha's last name?
P.S. My late cat Boris (Catanoff) was named after Boris in the series. He got the name because my girlfriend at the time had a cat named (Natasha) Kitsky. One should never let an opportunity for a good pun go unused.
Butch
Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself.
Hermann Hesse (Demian)
-------------------------------- End of pentax-discuss-d Digest V03 Issue #1407 **********************************************
_________________________________________________________________
Concerned that messages may bounce because your Hotmail account is over limit? Get Hotmail Extra Storage! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es
