Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update
creates. You want full control over yer photography? Shoot film, and go play in the dark. Wanna do colour? Lets not limit ourselves here. Devote a hundred and fifty square feet of your home to it, and go spend some money filling it with noisey equipment and smelly fluids. Some are even carcinogenic, and they come packaged with really cool chemicals that will take it into your body right through your skin. Sure, you can scan film, which gives you some control, but is a bastard solution at best, neither getting the best out of film, nor out of digitization. This ain't a Pentax issue, this is photography. Or whats left of it once the computers are done with it. >William Robb Well, yeah, sure. And I've been a stronger supporter of digital for longer than you. But I also think some of us are entitled to want it to be better before dropping big bucks. I also believe in getting second/third generation. But I am not saying that it stinks now. :-) Home printing really does save a great deal of bother. At least one can get it the way one wants. And not having to scan, would mean no dust I presume. Which is a big headache. But post processing *could* become more of a burden than a boon. Really, William, us butting heads on this particular issue is amusing. Actually. Marnie aka Doe Hehehe. (Something bounced. Think it was this message, if not, and it appears twice, sorry.)
Re: Resistance
I noticed on Ebay that one can find *ist Ds there. Some sellers are also selling a lense to go with it. I have notice that prices for Canon D30s and D60s have come down, especially the D30s. Maybe I'll go that route. Jim A. > From: "Jose R. Rodriguez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 19:37:33 -0600 > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: Resistance > Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 20:39:35 -0500 > > I also handled the *ist D today for the first time and I am quite impressed. > The viewfinder looks great for an autofocus camera. It think it was a good > thing the store is selling it for $1,699 (body only); very tempting. > > Regards, > > Jose R. Rodriguez > > -Original Message- > From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 3:35 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Resistance > > > I knew when my lab moved two doors down from my local photo store > (Nikon/Pentax - where I got my 67 from) that I would be in trouble. > > I just got back from dropping off some enlargements at the lab and had > to stop in the store. Obviously, my main reason to look was to see if > the *ist D was in - it was! > > So I had to play with it a bit and surprise - their price is quite > reasonable - 1490 body only, grip $199. All in stock. After working > with my 67's for awhile, it sure seems small. Not sure if the grip > improved handling for me or not. I would probably not start with the > grip and see how it went. > > Handling, fit/finish were all very nice. Since I used PZ-1p's for > quite a while, it was very easy to work with. Viewfinder was nice - > reasonable size and brightness. It is a camera that I would consider > buying. Almost walked out with one. Must RESIST!! > > So can anyone tell me how my 67 lenses with adapter will do on the > *ist D. Since they are designed for stop-down control on the lens > themselves, seems that they would work fine in non-program modes. One > wonders what the image quality would be like - certainly something to > consider > > Must RESIST > > -- > Bruce >
Re: perfect exposure
> those are 50,000 different exposure situations. you have a lot of > situations, but not necessarily a lot of different ones. True, a lot of my bazillions of exposures were made in similar situations. What the camera actually has, presumably, is 50,000 sets of relative values for the multiple metering areas and some way to decide how to handle them. I prefer to make my own decisions on how to handle them. Honestly, the camera may be right more often than I am. I make fewer stupid mistakes, though, because I know what I am seeing. I find autofocus to be the same--I miss by a little very often when MFing, but AF tends to either hit dead on or miss by a mile. DJE
Re: Spotmatic? II or F?
On Thu, 6 Nov 2003, Doug Franklin wrote: > On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 16:17:34 -0500, Robert & Leigh Woerner wrote: > > > KEH.com has an LX in "Bargain" condition for what I consider an attractive > > price. > > I had my first bad experience with KEH today. A couple of days ago I > ordered an SMCP-FA 28-70/2.8 from them. Asked for expedited shipping > to have it for this weekend. It arrived today. It wasn't a 2.8 ... it > was a 4. Called to let them know about the problem. Gent on the phone I had the same sort of problem recently. The 28/2 I ordered turned out to be a 28/3.5 marked as a 2 (actually it looked like had been marked twice). They were very good about it, and I just swapped it for the 30/2.8 that I almost got instead anyway. >From what I can tell they have been overwhelmed with stuff lately and quality control might be suffering a bit. Does anybody else feel that that catalog is a bit thicker than it used to be? KEH told me that they had added another guy in ship/recieve to catch up. They're still my best source for used stuff. DJE
Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update
it takes about 3-4 times a long to go through this process with a scan from slide as it does for a digital camera image. most of the time used to be spent scanning, but now because i run FocusFixer on a lot of my images, it takes most of the time. i usually rez up my digital camera images to be about the same resolution as my 4000dpi scanner, so that means i end up with digital image files of about 5000 pixels along the longest dimension no matter what my source. i have two expensive Photoshop color adjustment plugins that i like, trust, and can predict their effects. they make near perfect color adjustment usually an under 30 second task even with these large images. the rest of my system is color managed well enough that once i see what i like on the screen, i know what i am going to get on the printer and that it will be good enough not to need any work to print very well. putting the time in up front makes all this run smoothly. some of it is spending some money up front too. color adjustment with only the tools in Photoshop is much more time consuming. AutoColor and AutoLevels really aren't able to cope with anything complicated. doing it the hard way makes you appreciate how hard it is and also makes you learn what to do when even the really good automatic tools fail. i haven't had many failures with the tools i use though, and i have learned a few tricks since then to make those situations much easier to deal with. >Herb Interesting. Thx. Also nice to know digital is, in a sense, faster than scanning. Marnie aka that Doe person
Re: CLA (was MX Shutter Release Problem)
I seem to recall a list of reliable repair/CLA sources somewhere. Can anyone point me to it? Maris Alan Chan wrote: > Sounds like it's time for a "complete" CLA. > > Alan Chan > http://www.pbase.com/wlachan > >> Just took an MX out for some exercise and the shutter relase jammed >> and became sticky :-(( Any suggestions on what I might check to fix >> the problem. When it jammed, I just whacked the camera against the >> palm of my hand, and it freed things up only to get sluggish, sticky, >> and jam again later. I keep whacking it, it works a time or two, and >> then it's time to smack it again. This pummeling can't be very good >> for the camera ;-))
Re: GFM - looks like I will be there
Butch Black wrote: > Here's an updated version of Abbott and Costello's "Who's on First" (very >funny, especially if you've see or heard the original...) LOL. Marnie aka Doe "What's LOL?" "Laughing out loud." "Okay, you're laughing, big deal, what's LOL?" "Laughing out loud." "I can't see what I am saying is so funny. You must be easily amused. What's..."
Re: Teleconverter suggestions
I guess I'll start a special fund for a special lens :-) Maris Alan Chan wrote: > That zoom at the tele-end is pretty much reachs its limit. Adding > another TC won't do any good imho. > > Alan Chan > http://www.pbase.com/wlachan > >> Only the Pentax FA 80mm f/4.5 - 320mm f/5.6, primarily at the 300mm >> range.
Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update
Herb How do you get a 5000 pixel image on one side from the *istD? According to the review in Dpreview the max resolution of the 6.1megpixel sensor is 3008 x 2008 which seems about right since my 4 megpixel P&S puts out a 2400 x 1600 pixel image. I can believe you can get to the 5000 pixel mark with 4000 dpi scanner as my Minolta Scan Dual III at 2820 dpi gives me a 3808 x 2576 image on max resolution which is still higher then the *istD. If I use hamricks software I can even get raw files from my scans. I just don't think the 6.1 megpixel standard is high enough for landscape photography work. However digital is wonderful for portraits as they are already softened I would think. David - Original Message - From: "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> i usually rez up my digital camera images to be > about the same resolution as my 4000dpi scanner, so that means i end up with > digital image files of about 5000 pixels along the longest dimension no > matter what my source.
Re: MX Shutter Release Problem
Sounds like it's time for a "complete" CLA. Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan Just took an MX out for some exercise and the shutter relase jammed and became sticky :-(( Any suggestions on what I might check to fix the problem. When it jammed, I just whacked the camera against the palm of my hand, and it freed things up only to get sluggish, sticky, and jam again later. I keep whacking it, it works a time or two, and then it's time to smack it again. This pummeling can't be very good for the camera ;-)) All thoughts and suggestions appreciated. _ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/photos&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
Re: December PUG Theme
zoomshot wrote: > Gone from the schedule page ( http://pug.komkon.org/general/themes.html ), > what is it? > > Regards, > > Ziggy Clouds annsan
Re: Teleconverter suggestions
That zoom at the tele-end is pretty much reachs its limit. Adding another TC won't do any good imho. Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan Only the Pentax FA 80mm f/4.5 - 320mm f/5.6, primarily at the 300mm range. _ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update
The thing is, Marnie, at the moment, digital solves more problems than it creates. You want full control over yer photography? Shoot film, and go play in the dark. Wanna do colour? Lets not limit ourselves here. Devote a hundred and fifty square feet of your home to it, and go spend some money filling it with noisey equipment and smelly fluids. Some are even carcinogenic, and they come packaged with really cool chemicals that will take it into your body right through your skin. Sure, you can scan film, which gives you some control, but is a bastard solution at best, neither getting the best out of film, nor out of digitization. This ain't a Pentax issue, this is photography. Or whats left of it once the computers are done with it. William Robb - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 8:46 PM Subject: Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update > >Back in the old days, we had to drudge around in dank, dark rooms, inhaling > rotten foul chemical fumes and bruising ourselves on things that go bump in > the night. > Having to make a few mouse clicks to an image file, and then complaining > about how hard it is doesn't carry very well with me. > > >William Robb > > I keep raising issues re DSLRs that some people may not like, but I feel they > are issues that need to be raised. Or answered -- especially if I am seeking > more knowledge. > > I have done a lot of work post processing to print the approx. 10 pics I have > printed thus far (scanned from slides -- well, 10 pics framed and on the > wall, forget how many rejected trials -- and don't know how many hours and hours, > days). > > So don't get huffy. :-) I am also ignorant here, admitted it. But I wanted to > know if one had to post process EVERYTHING, which would be extremely, > extremely tedious. Bill said not, which was good to hear. And I am glad to hear there > are batch processing methods, although I don't have PhotoShop, just Elements. > > Sorry, I am not going to turn into a mindless Pentax praiser. > > I am examining and being critical or semi-critical of all DSLRs. This is a > new technology that may have a way to go yet until MOST of us are happy with it. > And we have the right to critically examine new technology. And to hanker for > more. And think about what we'd like to see develop. We are part of the > process. A very important part. > > So, this "I used to walk ten miles to school through the snow" stuff doesn't > carry very well with me either, sir. > > Marnie aka Doe You get huffy, so can I. ;-) > > >
Re: Colour fidelity & low-light AF of *ist-D
On Thu, 6 Nov 2003, Andre Langevin wrote: > Among some amazonian groups, there is a single word for both green or > blue, But if you show people both green and blue colors and ask if these > are different, they will say they are. They just don't find it usefull > for their purposes to distinguish linguistically these two retinian > impressions. Now, talk about the color of snow to an Inuit... I heard before that Greek doesn't (or didn't) have a word for "blue" as we know it. It was always the "wine-red sea" or words to that effect. I have no idea if my memory or that information is at all accurate. chris
Re: Colour fidelity & low-light AF of *ist-D
On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > chris posted: > > On the subject of weird eyes, a friend of mine can tell which eye she is > > looking out of. I'm not sure if they're spaced further apart than normal, > > or if she just has trouble focusing them properly, but she says that she > > sees things from two slightly different perspectives... almost like > > looking through binoculars that aren't lined up precisely. She can't find > > those hidden 3D images to save her life. > > It's called monocular vision, and a few years ago I would have gone > ballistic seeing this described as "weird." (But I've grown up a lot > since; developed a thicker skin, I guess.) It's the way I've viewed the > world for the better part of four decades now. Sorry, I didn't mean "weird" in a derogatory sense, just in the sense of "other than the norm." I've never heard of monocular vision before, but it actually sounds pretty cool. I'm trying to imagine what it would be like. chris
Re: An old friend gives way gracefully.
On Thu, 6 Nov 2003, Malcolm Smith wrote: > . Suitable for 35mm and MF, > > . Can stand in mud or water (obviously cleaned afterwards!), > > . Available second hand, > > . Various extras to allow it to be used in different ways - for example in > holding the camera pointing down onto a table directly below (I have lots of > use for this) > > . Weight - low importance, durability high, > > . Construction - ? Recommendations please, > > . Price - going to be more than £12 isn't it! I'd have a look at the Manfrotto 055 PRO, possibly with a Manfrotto 488 ballhead if you like ballheads. The center column of the "PRO" version slides out and fits horizontally through the thingy at the top, letting you extend your camera out away from the pod. I use the 488 head for my 67II, and it's about the smallest head I'd use for MedF. Likewise, the 055 is about the lightest tripod I'd use for MedF. You can spend more and get a heavier one if you want. You can see a pic of the 055PRO here: http://db.manfrotto.com/product/templates/templates.php3?sectionid=2&itemid=766 Right now I'm using a Berlebach 3042 with the Manfrotto 488RC ballhead. The Berlebach is a gorgeous, gorgeous tripod. They're made in Germany from ash wood and are super sturdy. The home page is here: http://www.berlebach.de/e_index.php There's a US importer here: http://www.photobooksonline.com/gear/features.html chris
Re: Used LX Pricing in Europe
On Thursday, November 6, 2003, at 10:54 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: I've been updating a data-base with closing prices of interesting Pentax items on eBay for over three years (over 2k items primarily 35mm) and in there I see nothing but evidence of price drops. I agree there that prices have declined somewhat over the last few years. This is the result of both digital camera introductions and economic malaise. But to read the list one would think that prices have dropped precipitously since the release of the *ist-d. That is simply not true. However, I hope film camera prices do continue to drop. I want an M3 an M6, and a Pentax 67II. I wouldn't mind having another LX as well. But I don't anticipate big changes in the near future. But I agree that there will probably be a steady decline, at least on non-collectable 35mm cameras.
Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update
i don't take my images intending to process all of them. i want to leave open as many options as possible and so i shoot in RAW mode. the storage cost and write time are nothing compared to the cost of going back and trying to get the shot again under exactly the same lighting conditions. i seldom shoot action, so there isn't the possible missed moment of that kind. RAW gives a 12-bit/channel image and a 16-bit/channel file. every manipulation costs some slight posterization and running in 16-bit mode gives me all the chances possible to postpone the time when the posterization becomes visible. top that off with the fact that the Pentax *istD firmware is apparently able to put about 1 stop more headroom into an image in RAW mode than JPEG mode and there is no question that i will shoot in RAW mode. every stop additional dynamic range/latitude is gold. the *istD RAW images are also sharper than the JPEG images before manipulation. about 80% of my images just sit there and never get looked at again. 20% goes through basic cropping, sharpening, and color correction/adjustment. these are the ones that i will at least consider for my stock collection. this process is automated enough that i click once, decided if i like the results, choose from 1 of 4 or 5 presets if i don't like what came up to see if the image previews better, and either apply or cancel. usually, about half of them get placed into the stock pile. about 1/3 to 1/2 of the ones that get there get printed. that means about 3-5% of the images i shoot get printed. usually, my first set of adjustments are the only ones i ever make aside from cropping for a specific paper size's aspect ratio. it takes about 3-4 times a long to go through this process with a scan from slide as it does for a digital camera image. most of the time used to be spent scanning, but now because i run FocusFixer on a lot of my images, it takes most of the time. i usually rez up my digital camera images to be about the same resolution as my 4000dpi scanner, so that means i end up with digital image files of about 5000 pixels along the longest dimension no matter what my source. i have two expensive Photoshop color adjustment plugins that i like, trust, and can predict their effects. they make near perfect color adjustment usually an under 30 second task even with these large images. the rest of my system is color managed well enough that once i see what i like on the screen, i know what i am going to get on the printer and that it will be good enough not to need any work to print very well. putting the time in up front makes all this run smoothly. some of it is spending some money up front too. color adjustment with only the tools in Photoshop is much more time consuming. AutoColor and AutoLevels really aren't able to cope with anything complicated. doing it the hard way makes you appreciate how hard it is and also makes you learn what to do when even the really good automatic tools fail. i haven't had many failures with the tools i use though, and i have learned a few tricks since then to make those situations much easier to deal with. Herb - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 9:46 PM Subject: Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update > I have done a lot of work post processing to print the approx. 10 pics I have > printed thus far (scanned from slides -- well, 10 pics framed and on the > wall, forget how many rejected trials -- and don't know how many hours and hours, > days). > > So don't get huffy. :-) I am also ignorant here, admitted it. But I wanted to > know if one had to post process EVERYTHING, which would be extremely, > extremely tedious. Bill said not, which was good to hear. And I am glad to hear there > are batch processing methods, although I don't have PhotoShop, just Elements.
Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update
On 6 Nov 2003 at 21:46, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > So don't get huffy. :-) I am also ignorant here, admitted it. But I wanted to > know if one had to post process EVERYTHING, which would be extremely, extremely > tedious. Bill said not, which was good to hear. And I am glad to hear there are > batch processing methods, although I don't have PhotoShop, just Elements. Post process what you like but in all likelihood to make the best of any image requires a degree of manual post processing that would be extremely difficult to emulate under an automated system. 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
Re: Used LX Pricing in Europe
On 6 Nov 2003 at 21:37, Paul Stenquist wrote: > I looked at Leica M3s today on ebay, hoping I could find a bargain. > Nothing for less than $600. That's not exactly tumbling. Well prices were much stronger for the M3s a few years back however being a "classic" camera I'd expect them to hold their value better than say a K1000. > Prices are about the same as they were before the *ist D -- > believe it or not. I don't know over what period you are basing your observations on as I've been updating a data-base with closing prices of interesting Pentax items on eBay for over three years (over 2k items primarily 35mm) and in there I see nothing but evidence of price drops. 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
Re: Spotmatic? II or F?
DJE wrote: Depends on what you need. Finding batteries for all of them can be a pain. Spotmatic SP (original) has no hot shoe for flash, but has X/FP sync connections. Meters at working aperture and is full manual and mechanical. Spotmatic SPII has flash hot shoe as well as X/FP sync connections, subtle improvements inside. Meters at working aperture and is full manual and mechanical. SPIIa is the same camera with dedicated contacts for a specific type of old Honeywell flash. Only made for a couple of years and a bit hard to find. Spotmatic F is basically an SPII with full-aperture metering (with SMC screw-mount lenses which have the necessary lugs, working aperture with older or off-brand lenses) It also has the "meter turns on when lens cap is removed" photo switch. If you actually use the meter, I might recommend this one because it is the most evolved of the mechanical cameras, plus it is fairly easy to find on the used market. Spotmatic ES is electronically controlled automatic with full aperture metering, or a limited range of (I believe unmetered) faster mechanical shutter speeds. No self timer. Spotmatic ESII is a subtle upgrade of the ES with fuller viewfinder display of shutter speeds, self-timer. If you prefer an automatic camera, this is probably the one to get. Three "bargain" models were sold as well: Spotmatic SL is basically an SP without meter. Spotmatic SP 500 is an SP without selftimer and official max shutter speed of 1/500th although I believe 1/1000th is still there unmarked but useable. Spotmatic SP 1000 is an SP 500 that admits to going to 1/1000th. Pentax also made pre-spotmatic screw-mount cameras which I'd recommend against for casual use because they are less convenient in features, have no built-in meter, and have a less durable shutter. In general parts and repair are much harder to deal with on the pre-spotmatic cameras (These would be S, K, S2, S3, H1, H2, H3, H3v, S1, SV) Personally, I prefer the SPII because I want the hot shoe but don't use the meters. DJE Reply: Whew, lots of useful information. Thanks! But now I am also a bit confused. :-) Re: Which spottie would be best for me. Probably F, but not sure. (Yes, Cotty. :-)) So I've decided I'll download the manuals from Pentax to help get a clearer image of what version does what. Marnie aka Doe And reread and reread what you wrote. Thanks, again.
Re: Resistance is Futile
R. G. wrote: D'Hood, like I'm from D'Hood Did someone call me? C.
Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update
>Back in the old days, we had to drudge around in dank, dark rooms, inhaling rotten foul chemical fumes and bruising ourselves on things that go bump in the night. Having to make a few mouse clicks to an image file, and then complaining about how hard it is doesn't carry very well with me. >William Robb I keep raising issues re DSLRs that some people may not like, but I feel they are issues that need to be raised. Or answered -- especially if I am seeking more knowledge. I have done a lot of work post processing to print the approx. 10 pics I have printed thus far (scanned from slides -- well, 10 pics framed and on the wall, forget how many rejected trials -- and don't know how many hours and hours, days). So don't get huffy. :-) I am also ignorant here, admitted it. But I wanted to know if one had to post process EVERYTHING, which would be extremely, extremely tedious. Bill said not, which was good to hear. And I am glad to hear there are batch processing methods, although I don't have PhotoShop, just Elements. Sorry, I am not going to turn into a mindless Pentax praiser. I am examining and being critical or semi-critical of all DSLRs. This is a new technology that may have a way to go yet until MOST of us are happy with it. And we have the right to critically examine new technology. And to hanker for more. And think about what we'd like to see develop. We are part of the process. A very important part. So, this "I used to walk ten miles to school through the snow" stuff doesn't carry very well with me either, sir. Marnie aka Doe You get huffy, so can I. ;-)
Re: Used LX Pricing in Europe
I looked at Leica M3s today on ebay, hoping I could find a bargain. Nothing for less than $600. That's not exactly tumbling. Ditto the prices on Pentax 6x7. There are no LX near the top of the list right now, save a broken body with no finder. That one is at $188 with 16 hours to go. I know the Pentax folks just bought their digital cameras in the last few weeks, but that didn't change the whole photographic world. Remember, everyone else has been buying digitals for a couple of years now. Prices are about the same as they were before the *ist D -- believe it or not. On Thursday, November 6, 2003, at 08:51 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: Keith Whaley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Wholly Mackerel! It gathered 25 bids and still only got up to €112? Hard to believe! Yes, I hope a PDMLer got it too! Mine cost me 4 times that much (!) and I still think it was a reasonable price... Yep. Prices on cameras are tumbling. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: GFM - looks like I will be there
I actually laughed out loud when I read that one... -frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Brad Dobo. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/features&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
Re: raw conversion (was Undersharpening)
I just got a reply from a question posed to Pentax USA regarding photo-lab: "There may be a Photoshop RAW file plugin released with a future firmware update to the camera. There has been talk of this, but I don't have a definitive timeframe on that. Perhaps Q1 next year..." Pretty vague, but it sounds like they are working on it Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 8:55 PM Subject: Re: raw conversion (was Undersharpening) > reading the bits and producing a recognizable image isn't enough. it has to > be tagged with and processed with the right profiles. since Pentax hasn't > published the file format, it's hard to tell what nonlinearities the Pentax > software corrects for yet. comparing the bits between TIFF16 and what dcRaw > puts out isn't worth my time. > > Herb > - Original Message - > From: "danilo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 11:05 AM > Subject: raw conversion (was Undersharpening) > > > > good news for all you linux users here: > > > > http://www.cybercom.net/~dcoffin/ > > > > you can find a free-software generic raw converter which fits a lot of > digital > > camera's raw format, used also in many commercial product (see web page > for > > details). > > This guy have done a good work. > >
Re: Colour fidelity & low-light AF of *ist-D
i know that: 1) most people are dominant eyed and one eye does less work than others most of the time 2) the dominance switches back and forth during the day for most people 3) people who have different corrections for proper vision in each eye can more easily tell which eye they are mostly seeing things out of even when wearing correction. 4) spend a lot of time looking through a microscope and you are both taught and become used to keeping both eyes open and ignoring the input from one eye. Herb - Original Message - From: "graywolf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 11:52 AM Subject: Re: Colour fidelity & low-light AF of *ist-D > It might be a function of depth perception, like 3D glasses. My right eye seems > to be color dominant. If I look at something and cover my left eye the color > does not change. If I cover my right eye the color gets bluer. > > You are astute to have nowiced that, Joe. I asked an opthalmoligist about it > once, and he didn't know a thing about it. I first noticed it myself years ago > when adjusting my binoculars.
Re: raw conversion (was Undersharpening)
reading the bits and producing a recognizable image isn't enough. it has to be tagged with and processed with the right profiles. since Pentax hasn't published the file format, it's hard to tell what nonlinearities the Pentax software corrects for yet. comparing the bits between TIFF16 and what dcRaw puts out isn't worth my time. Herb - Original Message - From: "danilo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 11:05 AM Subject: raw conversion (was Undersharpening) > good news for all you linux users here: > > http://www.cybercom.net/~dcoffin/ > > you can find a free-software generic raw converter which fits a lot of digital > camera's raw format, used also in many commercial product (see web page for > details). > This guy have done a good work.
Re: perfect exposure
those are 50,000 different exposure situations. you have a lot of situations, but not necessarily a lot of different ones. Herb - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 11:02 AM Subject: Re: perfect exposure > This is the reason I've never used any of those multi-area "intelligent" > metering patterns. I don't know how they are processing what they see so > I don't know what to think of the meter reading. Last I looked the better > multi-area meters were supported by a database of 50,000 exposure > patterns. At 1000 shots a week for 15 years I've been in a lot more > situations than that!
Re: Undersharpening
reading the supported file formats doesn't suggest that. dcRaw does, but i don't know what it does with all of the EXIF 2.2 and other image metadata. Herb - Original Message - From: "Keith Whaley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 9:32 AM Subject: Re: Undersharpening > > nothing reads Pentax RAW format except Pentax software, yet. i'm not holding > > my breath. > > I believe GraphicConverter will. > > http://www.lemkesoft.de/en/index.htm
Re: Used LX Pricing in Europe
Keith Whaley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Wholly Mackerel! It gathered 25 bids and still only got up to 112? >Hard to believe! >Yes, I hope a PDMLer got it too! >Mine cost me 4 times that much (!) and I still think it was a reasonable price... Yep. Prices on cameras are tumbling. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Let's talk MV for a bit...
I hear all the kudos for the MX, but rarely for the great little MG, nor, for that matter, the MV or MV-1... This will give you something to read and perhaps think about, while you're pondering all the other, more popular older cameras Pentax has come out with. The MV came out in '79, as a simplified version of the ME. Same body and shutter. Less info in the viewfinder. This is the camera that brought out the more simple but quite effective Auto, 100X and B mode controls on the top plate. Aperture priority in the "Auto" mode (same as the ME,) while "100X" was the shutter speed and was used for flash exposures. It was purely mechanical. Great if you lost battery power. The MV-1 had the same body, except it could be used with a motor drive, and had a self-timer. Both these cameras were almost identical in size and shape as the much loved MX! The MX was about 1/2" wider and a little heavier. The MG, also aperture priority and having center-weighted metering, came out 3 years later, had the same body and controls as the little MV, but the more sophisticated viewfinder of the ME, plus a few additional features. I've used the MG extensively and found it a very capable small 35mm camera. I have no reason to believe the sister camera, the MV, won't perform right along with it. Besides, they take all m-42 lenses, with the adapter, and of course, all K-mounts clear up thru the A's. Perhaps the F's as well. If anyone likes the idea of the tough and reliable K series bodies, but wants just a little smaller and lighter, either of these two great little cameras will still fill the bill! keith whaley
RE: Resistance
I also handled the *ist D today for the first time and I am quite impressed. The viewfinder looks great for an autofocus camera. It think it was a good thing the store is selling it for $1,699 (body only); very tempting. Regards, Jose R. Rodriguez -Original Message- From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 3:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Resistance I knew when my lab moved two doors down from my local photo store (Nikon/Pentax - where I got my 67 from) that I would be in trouble. I just got back from dropping off some enlargements at the lab and had to stop in the store. Obviously, my main reason to look was to see if the *ist D was in - it was! So I had to play with it a bit and surprise - their price is quite reasonable - 1490 body only, grip $199. All in stock. After working with my 67's for awhile, it sure seems small. Not sure if the grip improved handling for me or not. I would probably not start with the grip and see how it went. Handling, fit/finish were all very nice. Since I used PZ-1p's for quite a while, it was very easy to work with. Viewfinder was nice - reasonable size and brightness. It is a camera that I would consider buying. Almost walked out with one. Must RESIST!! So can anyone tell me how my 67 lenses with adapter will do on the *ist D. Since they are designed for stop-down control on the lens themselves, seems that they would work fine in non-program modes. One wonders what the image quality would be like - certainly something to consider Must RESIST -- Bruce
Re: The istD brotherhood needs a name!
John Francis wrote: > > > > > Sorry, I'm more Pink Fairies generation 8-) > > In between Pink Floyd and Pink, then? _all_ shades inbetween ;-)
Re: Bored at work, so....
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Walkden) wrote: > I'd imagine a hood for the M 85/2 would do the job. Try Jessops > Classic - you never know. Surely it's going to intrude at the corners? > http://www.schneideroptics.com/filters/filters_for_still_photography/han > dbook/pdf/B%2BWHandbook_Full.pdf err, 9Mb PDF download. > Or Heliopan http://www.heliopan.de/picts/Preisliste.pdf (p16, > tele-blenden) > Available in the UK from Teamwork in London: > http://lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/HoTMaiL?curmbox=F1&a > =25bf5528b7c2fbeeea6184c46873fad1 This URL works better: http://www.teamworkphoto.com/heliopan.html I'll look at those. thanks, --- John Dallman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Resistance is Futile
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joseph Tainter) wrote: > I am a bit miffed that the strap does not include pockets. There's > nowhere to put the eyepiece cover. Me too. I found a tiny Lowepro zip case - meant for a credit-card size digital camera - that now holds the eyepiece cover, the IR remote and a spare CF card. That seems to work OK for me. > Beyond the DA 16-45, Pentax needs soon to bring out (a) DA 50-200 f4; > (b) DA 13-20 f4; and (c) fast primes at 13 and 16 mm. If they don't, > Sigma will get my money, although I am very reluctant to buy a consumer > zoom from Sigma. Snap! I'm reckoning on a Sigma 12-24 at present. When the credit card heals up a bit. --- John Dallman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: The istD brotherhood needs a name!
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mike wilson) wrote: > > You folks work it out. > > It'll be a while for me. > The pixies. Seconded - also Pink Fairies generation. --- John Dallman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bored at work, so....
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stan Halpin) wrote: > Working from memory here, not with the item in hand, but I believe the > hood for the Tak 85/1.8 has a 52mm thread Um, my SMCT 85/1.8 has a 58mm thread. --- John Dallman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: An old friend gives way gracefully.
On Thu, 6 Nov 2003, graywolf wrote: > > . Weight - low importance, durability high, > > > > . Construction - ? Recommendations please, > > > > . Price - going to be more than £12 isn't it! I find Manfrotto/Bogen to be very solidly built and sturdy, but also heavy and more expensive than average. They are a pro company and make tripods all the way up to the size you could put artillery on. They make a great range of tripods, too. Personally I use a tripod very rarely so I bought a tripod designed not for flexibility or light weight but for stability. I've also got a bogen monopod that has been holding up long telephotos 3 days a week for 15 years. Carbon fiber is nice, but REALLY spendy. DJE
Re: The istD brotherhood needs a name!
> > Sorry, I'm more Pink Fairies generation 8-) In between Pink Floyd and Pink, then?
Re: Spotmatic? II or F?
On 6/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >Actually I think I am sticking with the Elan for my main camera. While I like >the Pentax interface better, I am pretty happy with an USM IS zoom that I >have. And I like the Elan's fast auto focus. And, as for buying more >expensive >glass and investing more and more into glass, I pretty much have to stay with >the same brand. So down the road, it's quite possible I'll be going with >a Canon >DSLR. But maybe not, we shall see. Marnie used to sit on the fence, but now she's not so sure ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
RE: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update
> -Original Message- > From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > A lot of these issues are resolved by people who use their > noggins for > something other than stuffing food into the biggest hole on it. Sometimes I use mine to hamg a hat on, but that's about it. Theoretically, you can use a dlsr just like film camera - shoot jpg's, upload the card at CVS or Walmart, let them do the work. Robb - do you have any idea how many of your customers do this? tv
Re: Spotmatic? II or F?
On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Okay, this is kind of weird, but instead of getting a MX to stay hanging > around this list (being a semi-Canon defector), I've been thinking about a > Spotmatic. Screwmount lenses also will fit on my Elan 7e, so not so weird as all > that. A Zenitar fisheye would work on both. And I already have the Super Tak 35mm > 3.5. So screwmount lenses are starting to appeal to me more and more. Then it > occurred to me, I've been thinking of an all manual camera anyway, so why not > a Pentax all manual screwmount instead of the all manual MX? > > Spotmatics also go fairly cheaply on ebay. > > But there are different versions. Right off the bat, I notice a II and a F. > > Which would be the best to get? Or is there another version that would be > even better? Depends on what you need. Finding batteries for all of them can be a pain. Spotmatic SP (original) has no hot shoe for flash, but has X/FP sync connections. Meters at working aperture and is full manual and mechanical. Spotmatic SPII has flash hot shoe as well as X/FP sync connections, subtle improvements inside. Meters at working aperture and is full manual and mechanical. SPIIa is the same camera with dedicated contacts for a specific type of old Honeywell flash. Only made for a couple of years and a bit hard to find. Spotmatic F is basically an SPII with full-aperture metering (with SMC screw-mount lenses which have the necessary lugs, working aperture with older or off-brand lenses) It also has the "meter turns on when lens cap is removed" photo switch. If you actually use the meter, I might recommend this one because it is the most evolved of the mechanical cameras, plus it is fairly easy to find on the used market. Spotmatic ES is electronically controlled automatic with full aperture metering, or a limited range of (I believe unmetered) faster mechanical shutter speeds. No self timer. Spotmatic ESII is a subtle upgrade of the ES with fuller viewfinder display of shutter speeds, self-timer. If you prefer an automatic camera, this is probably the one to get. Three "bargain" models were sold as well: Spotmatic SL is basically an SP without meter. Spotmatic SP 500 is an SP without selftimer and official max shutter speed of 1/500th although I believe 1/1000th is still there unmarked but useable. Spotmatic SP 1000 is an SP 500 that admits to going to 1/1000th. Pentax also made pre-spotmatic screw-mount cameras which I'd recommend against for casual use because they are less convenient in features, have no built-in meter, and have a less durable shutter. In general parts and repair are much harder to deal with on the pre-spotmatic cameras (These would be S, K, S2, S3, H1, H2, H3, H3v, S1, SV) Personally, I prefer the SPII because I want the hot shoe but don't use the meters. DJE
Re: My Evening With Lexar
That IS encouraging news... keith whaley William Robb wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Keith Whaley" > Subject: Re: My Evening With Lexar > > > Do keep us informed on that one... > > May save some of us a headache... > > On a positive note > When I realized just how mwmory hungry a 6mp camera is, I bought a 1 gig > Sandisk card, which also came with it's own reader. > I plugged the reader into my computer, turned on the computer, and the > computer immediately found the reader and installed it. > This is using a Win XP computer. > > William Robb
Re: Colour fidelity & low-light AF of *ist-D
Hi, Thursday, November 6, 2003, 9:42:35 PM, you wrote: >>I don't think it's empirically testable. If two people attach the same >>label to the same experience then that is all we can know, or need to >>know. (...) >>Bob > Among some amazonian groups, there is a single word for both green or > blue, But if you show people both green and blue colors and ask if > these are different, they will say they are. They just don't find it > usefull for their purposes to distinguish linguistically these two > retinian impressions. Now, talk about the color of snow to an > Inuit... Yes, it's true for many different peoples. It's not quite what I meant though. At the risk of boring everybody to death, here's what I meant. Let's assume that you and I can both distinguish between the colour of a matadors' cape, the colour of the clear sky, and the colour of grass. Suppose you and I are looking at the same matador's cape under identical lighting conditions. It is possible that the colour sensation you experience when you look at the cape is the same as the one I experience when I look at a clear sky. It is also possible that the sensation I experience when looking at the cape is the same as the sensation you experience when you look at grass. The important thing is that it's possible we may each have a different colour experience when we look at the same thing. We have agreed to attach the label 'red' to the colour sensation we experience when looking at a matador's cape, but our experiences are different. This is almost certainly a true, but highly exaggerated, account of what really happens. Provided each of us always has the same response to the same stimulus i.e. each of us has consistent colour vision then it doesn't matter that your response and my response to the same stimulus differ, because our responses are wholly internal. In addition, we can't test to see whether our responses differ or not, because we can only externalise the experience by showing the other person something that provokes in us the same response as the original stimulus. Consistency means that they will experience their characteristic response. Because of this it makes no difference at all to anything whether our internal experiences are the same or different. We behave, and the world behaves, as if they are the same. Our brains are mutual Chinese boxes. This is different from the people who say each of their eyes sees the same thing slightly differently, because these people can compare the sensations in the same brain. That is roughly equivalent to a 3rd person being able to compare our mental experiences and notice the differences. It is also different from typical colour blindness, which is just a reduced ability to distinguish between colours. For instance, I might have the same colour sensation when I look at a matador's cape and at Robin Hood's legwear, whereas you might experience 2 different colour sensations. This in turn is different from your Amazonian example. -- Cheers, Bobmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update
> But I hope that something evolves so people don't have to post process every > image. Otherwise, well, might as well take all digital images to a lab -- or > spend hours and hours doing it one's self, which sort of negates some of the > gain of a DSLR. As I said elsewhere, in Photo-J we used to "post process" every image after scanning--unsharp, auto levels, etc. On the other hand, this can be automated with software if you don't want a tailored-to-the picture solution. We've got PS7 set up at work so it's two or three clicks to done for a good image (optional rotate, auto toning in curves, action that sizes and does other things for newspaper use) because I'm handling 100 images a week. Doing your own post-processing also means you are making "custom" prints every time, which is not cheaply done by a lab because you are paying for THEIR time. It's just like doing your own darkroom work, really, and many of us don't trust anyone else to do that for us. DJE
Re: My Evening With Lexar
- Original Message - From: "Keith Whaley" Subject: Re: My Evening With Lexar > Do keep us informed on that one... > May save some of us a headache... On a positive note When I realized just how mwmory hungry a 6mp camera is, I bought a 1 gig Sandisk card, which also came with it's own reader. I plugged the reader into my computer, turned on the computer, and the computer immediately found the reader and installed it. This is using a Win XP computer. William Robb
Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update
- Original Message - From: Subject: Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update > > But I hope that something evolves so people don't have to post process every > image. Otherwise, well, might as well take all digital images to a lab -- or > spend hours and hours doing it one's self, which sort of negates some of the > gain of a DSLR. > > At least for me. A lot of these issues are resolved by people who use their noggins for something other than stuffing food into the biggest hole on it. Both of my digital cameras have built in controls for sharpening, contrast and saturation. By using these three controls, I can get a picture that goes from flat and soft to too sharp and punchy. Do a little experimenting, find where you like these three controls set, and forget about them. Photoshop also has a little known feature called "actions". Using this particular feature, you can automate pretty much anything you do on a repetitive basis, and then batch process entire directories of image files while watching Seinfeld reruns. Back in the old days, we had to drudge around in dank, dark rooms, inhaling rotten foul chemical fumes and bruising ourselves on things that go bump in the night. Having to make a few mouse clicks to an image file, and then complaining about how hard it is doesn't carry very well with me. William Robb
Re: Spotmatic? II or F?
As a side item, if you wanted fast AF you should have tried out a PZ1p. You would never have gone over to the other side. Boy, what a can o' worms I've opened. PENTAX ROCKS. Robert - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 5:09 PM Subject: Re: Spotmatic? II or F? > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > Girlfren', you're going to buy an LX eventually. We all do. Might as > > well just save all the intermediate heartache and get it now. > > Hehehehehe. Well, maybe. :-) > > Tom wrote: > > >Spot on, ERNR! Marnie: you want the LX, of course, but if you do go > for a Spotmatic, the F is the model to get. It's the top of the line > Spottie, and a really sweet camera. Stick with SMC Takumar lenses, > and you can use open aperture metering. Use modern PX625A 1.5 volt > cells instead of the original mercury ones: the metering circuitry is > balanced, so the voltage difference won't matter. > > >-tih > > Thanks for the battery tip. > > Actually I think I am sticking with the Elan for my main camera. While I like > the Pentax interface better, I am pretty happy with an USM IS zoom that I > have. And I like the Elan's fast auto focus. And, as for buying more expensive > glass and investing more and more into glass, I pretty much have to stay with > the same brand. So down the road, it's quite possible I'll be going with a Canon > DSLR. But maybe not, we shall see. > > However, screwmount lenses are sort of semi-compatible. I could switch lenses > between cameras, be "backward compatible" on the Canon ;-). And I've wanted > another all manual camera. So I think this is going to be my best solution. > > Also getting just Takumar scremounts for the metering -- no problemo. The > only exception will be the Zenitar. > > Thx. Marnie aka Doe Still looking around, so if anyone on the list has a > Spottie F to sell, please contact me off list. Hehehehehe. >
Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update
- Original Message - From: "Butch Black" Subject: Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update > > This begs a second question however. Why do people expect to do photography > these days and with no effort on their part and get professional results It's because people demand to be allowed to be stupid and lazy, but still operate on the pretext that they are doing something. The more successful products cater to this slothful indolence. William Robb
Re: Re[2]: GFM - looks like I will be there
> > Not the What, THE WHO. If you were around then, you would never > forget him/it? Maybe his real name was Pat (SNL) :) Gregory, IIRC. Makes me real glad that I've always read PDML using software that supports bozo filters.
Re: raw conversion (was Undersharpening)
> btw, how many of you use linux for graphic manipulation issues? Some of the time, for most of my personal work. I use Linux at home all the time unless I need a particular non-linux program. For pro pre-press use photoshop is still much better (even older versions) but Gimp is catching up quick. I've got a great new mac G4 with PS7 at work which has pretty much stopped me using the older mac with PS5.5 that I have on loan from my mother for mac-compatible work-related use. I've also got PS3 for windoze running under WinMe and 3.11, and Gimp for windoze running under WinMe, but I haven't used either in at least a year since I only boot to windoze for games. DJE
Re: Spotmatic? II or F?
Have you considered an ESII? It's a screwmount LX without TTL flash! OK, it's a little bit more than that. OK, OK, it's a lot more than that... Andre --
Re: The istD brotherhood needs a name!
for me. > > > > The pixies. > Digitalado. Lewis _ Crave some Miles Davis or Grateful Dead? Your old favorites are always playing on MSN Radio Plus. Trial month free! http://join.msn.com/?page=offers/premiumradio
Re: DSLR on eBay
Hi Malcolm Smith wrote: > I may have muddied the waters on this one, as I assumed at £900 this was > offered as second hand, although it may have gone higher in the last minute > as you missed it. Was this as new from a dealer? >From my Schuljunger German, it appeared to be BNIB, offered by a dealer, with full warranty. Wish I'd bookmarked the page, now m
Re: Spotmatic? II or F?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Girlfren', you're going to buy an LX eventually. We all do. Might as > well just save all the intermediate heartache and get it now. Hehehehehe. Well, maybe. :-) Tom wrote: >Spot on, ERNR! Marnie: you want the LX, of course, but if you do go for a Spotmatic, the F is the model to get. It's the top of the line Spottie, and a really sweet camera. Stick with SMC Takumar lenses, and you can use open aperture metering. Use modern PX625A 1.5 volt cells instead of the original mercury ones: the metering circuitry is balanced, so the voltage difference won't matter. >-tih Thanks for the battery tip. Actually I think I am sticking with the Elan for my main camera. While I like the Pentax interface better, I am pretty happy with an USM IS zoom that I have. And I like the Elan's fast auto focus. And, as for buying more expensive glass and investing more and more into glass, I pretty much have to stay with the same brand. So down the road, it's quite possible I'll be going with a Canon DSLR. But maybe not, we shall see. However, screwmount lenses are sort of semi-compatible. I could switch lenses between cameras, be "backward compatible" on the Canon ;-). And I've wanted another all manual camera. So I think this is going to be my best solution. Also getting just Takumar scremounts for the metering -- no problemo. The only exception will be the Zenitar. Thx. Marnie aka Doe Still looking around, so if anyone on the list has a Spottie F to sell, please contact me off list. Hehehehehe.
Re: GFM - looks like I will be there
On 6/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >>Nah, not Brad, but The Who. > >How 'bout Mafud? >;-) Bound to happen suda or lada. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
RE: DSLR on eBay
mike wilson wrote: > Malcolm Smith wrote: > > > It seems cheap at that price and a bit suspect too. I would be > > concerned about warranty issues from this sort of sale. > > In my experience, warranties are not worth the paper they are > written on but I would think that a one issued in any EU > country would have to stand in any other. It looked > unsuspicious to me. Or, rather, it looked a lot less > suspicious than many other offers I've seen. Mike, I may have muddied the waters on this one, as I assumed at £900 this was offered as second hand, although it may have gone higher in the last minute as you missed it. Was this as new from a dealer? If so, my warranty issues are, sort of, unwarranted. Malcolm
RE: DSLR on eBay
I would be concerned about warranty issues from this sort of sale. Malcolm I think the key words for a valid warranty are "original bill" (from a recognized seller). Any "unfilled international warranty" is a useless piece of paper if you don't have the original bill or it is not stamped by the original seller. A short personnal eBay seller's warranty is probably all you can hope on eBay. Andre --
Re: Spotmatic? II or F?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Girlfren', you're going to buy an LX eventually. We all do. Might as > well just save all the intermediate heartache and get it now. Spot on, ERNR! Marnie: you want the LX, of course, but if you do go for a Spotmatic, the F is the model to get. It's the top of the line Spottie, and a really sweet camera. Stick with SMC Takumar lenses, and you can use open aperture metering. Use modern PX625A 1.5 volt cells instead of the original mercury ones: the metering circuitry is balanced, so the voltage difference won't matter. -tih -- Tom Ivar Helbekkmo, Senior System Administrator, EUnet Norway www.eunet.no T: +47-22092958 M: +47-93013940 F: +47-22092901
Re> Cotty's November PUG comments Part 2
Hi, Cotty Thanks for your comments, and specially for the web site promotion! Thanks again Disapaired Albano (too much work, luckiky) Cotty wrote: "Weird Portrait of Juan Pablo " by Albano Garcia, Argentina Top class result from Albano. Vist his home page - he ahs some cracking stuff on there. Avant-garde and cutting edge. Another superb shot from a fine photographer. = Albano Garcia "El Pibe Asahi" __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree
Re: GFM - looks like I will be there
On 6/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >>>(b) a place to stay - which could be the back of somebody;s van.. >> >>There's a movie in this. >> >>Cheers, >> Cotty > > >Deliverance? Silence of the Lambs. Bill and Ted's bogus journey. Butch Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself. Hermann Hesse (Demian)
Re: Plaxo
"Dr E D F Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Plaxo is distributed by Verisign [...] That bloody annoyance is from Verislime as well? May they rot in hell! -tih -- Tom Ivar Helbekkmo, Senior System Administrator, EUnet Norway www.eunet.no T: +47-22092958 M: +47-93013940 F: +47-22092901
Re: MX Shutter Release Problem
> It probably needs a CLA. Has it been done recently? If so, the problem is elsewhere. It was cleaned and adjusted within the past 18 months. Then Graywolf is right. And its repair will cost less than a complete CLA. Find a technician that doesn't charge a high minimum price for repairs, you know, like $70 to change the batteries for that old lady. Andre --
Re[2]: GFM - looks like I will be there
Not the What, THE WHO. If you were around then, you would never forget him/it? Maybe his real name was Pat (SNL) :) -- Best regards, Bruce Thursday, November 6, 2003, 11:08:45 AM, you wrote: >> >> On 6/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >> >> >Nah, not Brad, but The Who. >> >> The what? JF> I don't know
Re: Colour fidelity & low-light AF of *ist-D
It's an interesting thought, but what I perceive to be blue might actually [be] what you perceive to be green. (...) And how would one actually prove any of this? Ryan I don't think it's empirically testable. If two people attach the same label to the same experience then that is all we can know, or need to know. (...) Bob Among some amazonian groups, there is a single word for both green or blue, But if you show people both green and blue colors and ask if these are different, they will say they are. They just don't find it usefull for their purposes to distinguish linguistically these two retinian impressions. Now, talk about the color of snow to an Inuit... Andre --
Re: The istD brotherhood needs a name!
H A R ! - Original Message - From: "mike wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 3:26 PM Subject: Re: The istD brotherhood needs a name! > Collin Brendemuehl wrote: > > > > You folks work it out. > > It'll be a while for me. > > The pixies. > > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.536 / Virus Database: 331 - Release Date: 11/3/2003
re: PUG
Thanks Tom, glad you liked it. Regards Albano Tom wrote: Jeez guys, nice job. In particular - "Bug" by " A Stationary Moment. " by Mike " Second Honeymoon " - Amita "Ewelina and Pawel" by Maciej - I don't know if you were trying or not, but this shot has a great combination of modern and classic elements. There are some things a purist would condemn, but it's nevertheless a great shot. " Weird Portrait of Juan Pablo " - Albano " Grass Trees " - Derby -- Thomas Van Veen Photography www.bigdayphoto.com 301-758-3085 = Albano Garcia "El Pibe Asahi" __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree
Resistance
I knew when my lab moved two doors down from my local photo store (Nikon/Pentax - where I got my 67 from) that I would be in trouble. I just got back from dropping off some enlargements at the lab and had to stop in the store. Obviously, my main reason to look was to see if the *ist D was in - it was! So I had to play with it a bit and surprise - their price is quite reasonable - 1490 body only, grip $199. All in stock. After working with my 67's for awhile, it sure seems small. Not sure if the grip improved handling for me or not. I would probably not start with the grip and see how it went. Handling, fit/finish were all very nice. Since I used PZ-1p's for quite a while, it was very easy to work with. Viewfinder was nice - reasonable size and brightness. It is a camera that I would consider buying. Almost walked out with one. Must RESIST!! So can anyone tell me how my 67 lenses with adapter will do on the *ist D. Since they are designed for stop-down control on the lens themselves, seems that they would work fine in non-program modes. One wonders what the image quality would be like - certainly something to consider Must RESIST -- Bruce
Re: Spotmatic? II or F?
Gray wolf wrote: >Of course since the MX was designed to my specs I would be a churl to switch. ? You big honcho? Re input -- Probably the F, then. IIRC, the meter on the K-1000 was always on. The lens cap turned it off. So I'm used to that. Also, thanks, Dave. Marnie aka Doe
Re: The istD brotherhood needs a name!
Collin Brendemuehl wrote: > > You folks work it out. > It'll be a while for me. The pixies.
Re: GFM - looks like I will be there
"Bill Owens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Nah, not Brad, but The Who. How 'bout Mafud? ;-) -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Colour fidelity & low-light AF of *ist-D
I remember noticing this maybe 15 years ago. I just thought that I was getting old, or that one eye was irritated. Apparently everyone has a dominant eye, mine is my left eye, and it appears cooler than my right eye, which does seem to have a noticeable warmer tint to it. rg graywolf wrote: It might be a function of depth perception, like 3D glasses. My right eye seems to be color dominant. If I look at something and cover my left eye the color does not change. If I cover my right eye the color gets bluer. You are astute to have nowiced that, Joe. I asked an opthalmoligist about it once, and he didn't know a thing about it. I first noticed it myself years ago when adjusting my binoculars. How about a few others on the list checking it out and letting us know if it works that way with everyone, or are some of us different? -- Joe Wilensky wrote: This brings up a question I have always wanted to ask -- related to the fact that my own two eyes see colors slightly differently! It's easiest to see in skin tones, but if I close one eye and then the other, it's obvious to me that my right eye sees a slightly "warmer" or redder rendition than my left. It's slight, and with both eyes open I suppose I see an average or mix of the two that isn't disconcerting, but it's obvious that at least slight differences must exist among people. Maybe wide ranges of difference are normal, like television sets where the tint is all out of whack and faces look green or magenta. Has anyone tried this? It may be more noticeable in daylight or artificial light. Just a quick switch from one eye to the other and back should tell you. Joe I think its more likely that different eye/brain sets might see the same colour very slightly shifted, one way or the other, on the spectrum. One person might see it a little redder or bluer than another. But, as we decided before, one can never really know. Its not the same as colour blindness. My guess is that normal human eyes all see the spectrum the same way and it is in the brain that differences might arise ... if they do. Don Hi, Thursday, November 6, 2003, 2:24:49 PM, you wrote: > It's an interesting thought, but what I perceive to be blue might actually > what you perceive to be green. Imagine people around you who go thru life > seeing 'blue' vegetables (though it seems perfectly normal to them *because* > that's what they always known the label 'green' to refer to). And how would > one actually prove any of this? I don't think it's empirically testable. If two people attach the same label to the same experience then that is all we can know, or need to know. I have no empirical evidence that other people think; you could all be automata* as far as I know, but I assume that you all do think. It's similar to the Turing** test, or these games of Chinese boxes that AI researchers enjoy so much. Cheers, Bob *as a matter of fact I happen to think exactly that, except that I include myself as an automaton. It doesn't alter the argument. **I've always believed that 'the Who' of long ago was a Turing test > that some researcher was conducting.
test
test
Re: More on RAW
Vuescan: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I just send him an email with the request. On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 19:31, Brian Dipert wrote: > Some of you who are dabbling in digital imaging may already be familiar with > Hamrick Software's excellent VueScan flatbed and negative/slide scanner > software (www.hamrick.com). VueScan also supports the RAW formats of quite a > few DSLRs. I've been in contact with Ed Hamrick, and have confirmed that he > employs the earlier-described RAW library from Dave Coffin. Sooner or later, > Ed plans to roll in the latest iteration of that library, thereby securing > *ist D support. Emails to Ed expressing your interest may speed the process > along. > > I've also been in communication with Cerious Software, developer of the > equally excellent ThumbsPlus program (www.cerious.com). I've used ThumbsPlus > ever since I learned, many years ago, that it supported the RAW format of my > now-retired Kodak DC120 digital rangefinder camera. Adding *ist D RAW > support is on their list of features, currently low on the list though, and > they're awaiting feedback before they bump up its priority. > > Finally, I've emailed Lemke Software inquiring as to their *ist D RAW > support plans for Graphic Converter. Will report back to the list if/when I > hear anything back from them > == > Brian Dipert > Technical Editor: Mass Storage, Memory, Multimedia, PC Core Logic and > Peripherals, and Programmable Logic > EDN Magazine: http://www.edn.com > 5000 V Street > Sacramento, CA 95817 > (916) 454-5242 (voice), (617) 558-4470 (fax) > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Visit me at http://www.bdipert.com -- Frits Wüthrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
AW: Digital Back for 645Nii?
Rollei even developed and presented a prototype back for the 3003 in 1987, with 350.000 pixels. But then, before digital technology really took off, they had to discontinue the camera. Rollei was either too late or too early most of the times. Sven -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: graywolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 6. November 2003 17:24 An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Betreff: Re: Digital Back for 645Nii? ... I still keep thinking that something along the lines of the strange late Rollei 2000, 2002, 3000 series 35mm cameras would be the perfect basis for a film/digital camera. For those who do not remember those, they were 35mm's with a modular design similar to the Bronica ERTSi's including interchangeable backs which would solve the main problem. -- ...
Re: Spotmatic? II or F?
> > Spotmatics also go fairly cheaply on ebay. > > But there are different versions. Right off the bat, I notice a II and a F. > > Which would be the best to get? Or is there another version that would be > even better? I'd go with the Spotmatic F - it's the successor to the Spotmatic II, and the camera that introduced full-aperture metering to the Pentax lineup.
Re: Spotmatic? II or F?
http://212.187.14.19/spotmatic/cameras.htm This is a site its all m42 mount stuff. Also PPRO site at www.whitemetal.com has a list of many m42 cameras I have the SP 500 and a Spotmatic 1000 and 5-6 lenses.They are great cameras. Dave > Okay, this is kind of weird, but instead of getting a MX to stay hanging > around this list (being a semi-Canon defector), I've been thinking about a > Spotmatic. Screwmount lenses also will fit on my Elan 7e, so not so weird as all > that. A Zenitar fisheye would work on both. And I already have the Super Tak 35mm > 3.5. So screwmount lenses are starting to appeal to me more and more. Then it > occurred to me, I've been thinking of an all manual camera anyway, so why not > a Pentax all manual screwmount instead of the all manual MX? > > Spotmatics also go fairly cheaply on ebay. > > But there are different versions. Right off the bat, I notice a II and a F. > > Which would be the best to get? Or is there another version that would be > even better? > > Marnie aka Doe Boy, when/if I got digital I would have OLD and NEW. That > would be ironic. Not positive I want to do this yet, but it sort of makes sense. > Input welcome. >
Re: Spotmatic? II or F?
I would get the II. The F allows open aperture metering only if you use SMC Takumar lenses. The meter on the F always is on. You turn it "off" using the lens cap. You can use older Super Takumars and SMC Takumars on the II. Metering is stop down. Of course, there are lots of other M42 mount lenses out there besides Pentax. Good Luck. Jim A. > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 13:45:12 EST > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Spotmatic? II or F? > Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 13:45:37 -0500 > > Okay, this is kind of weird, but instead of getting a MX to stay hanging > around this list (being a semi-Canon defector), I've been thinking about a > Spotmatic. Screwmount lenses also will fit on my Elan 7e, so not so weird as > all > that. A Zenitar fisheye would work on both. And I already have the Super Tak > 35mm > 3.5. So screwmount lenses are starting to appeal to me more and more. Then it > occurred to me, I've been thinking of an all manual camera anyway, so why not > a Pentax all manual screwmount instead of the all manual MX? > > Spotmatics also go fairly cheaply on ebay. > > But there are different versions. Right off the bat, I notice a II and a F. > > Which would be the best to get? Or is there another version that would be > even better? > > Marnie aka Doe Boy, when/if I got digital I would have OLD and NEW. That > would be ironic. Not positive I want to do this yet, but it sort of makes > sense. > Input welcome. >
RE: GFM - looks like I will be there
> -Original Message- > From: John Francis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > On 6/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: > > > > >Nah, not Brad, but The Who. > > > > The what? > > I don't know Huh? tv
Re: Spotmatic? II or F?
Response at the end: > Okay, this is kind of weird, but instead of getting a MX to stay hanging > around this list (being a semi-Canon defector), I've been thinking about a > Spotmatic. Screwmount lenses also will fit on my Elan 7e, so not so weird as all > that. A Zenitar fisheye would work on both. And I already have the Super Tak 35mm > 3.5. So screwmount lenses are starting to appeal to me more and more. Then it > occurred to me, I've been thinking of an all manual camera anyway, so why not > a Pentax all manual screwmount instead of the all manual MX? > > Spotmatics also go fairly cheaply on ebay. > > But there are different versions. Right off the bat, I notice a II and a F. > > Which would be the best to get? Or is there another version that would be > even better? > > Marnie aka Doe Boy, when/if I got digital I would have OLD and NEW. That > would be ironic. Not positive I want to do this yet, but it sort of makes sense. > Input welcome. Girlfren', you're going to buy an LX eventually. We all do. Might as well just save all the intermediate heartache and get it now. ERNR ;-) >
Re: GFM - looks like I will be there
> > On 6/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: > > >Nah, not Brad, but The Who. > > The what? I don't know
Re: raw conversion (was Undersharpening)
- Original Message - From: "danilo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > btw, how many of you use linux for graphic manipulation issues? > > > ciao > Danilo. > I use the Gimp on Linux or Photoshop on Windows depending on my mood and where I am. Christian
An old friend gives way gracefully.
{Sigh!} It had to happen, I'm just surprised it lasted as long as it did,
for my massive outlay of £12 back in the mid 70s. But my tripod demised
today. One leg gave way and the LX on top fell gently sideways into my
jacket pocket!
Anyway, my needs for a tripod have changed since last time I was thinking
about buying one; just that now I have more motivation and more needs. Can
anyone point me in the right direction for a tripod which is:
. Suitable for 35mm and MF,
. Can stand in mud or water (obviously cleaned afterwards!),
. Available second hand,
. Various extras to allow it to be used in different ways - for example in
holding the camera pointing down onto a table directly below (I have lots of
use for this)
. Weight - low importance, durability high,
. Construction - ? Recommendations please,
. Price - going to be more than £12 isn't it!
Malcolm
Spotmatic? II or F?
Okay, this is kind of weird, but instead of getting a MX to stay hanging around this list (being a semi-Canon defector), I've been thinking about a Spotmatic. Screwmount lenses also will fit on my Elan 7e, so not so weird as all that. A Zenitar fisheye would work on both. And I already have the Super Tak 35mm 3.5. So screwmount lenses are starting to appeal to me more and more. Then it occurred to me, I've been thinking of an all manual camera anyway, so why not a Pentax all manual screwmount instead of the all manual MX? Spotmatics also go fairly cheaply on ebay. But there are different versions. Right off the bat, I notice a II and a F. Which would be the best to get? Or is there another version that would be even better? Marnie aka Doe Boy, when/if I got digital I would have OLD and NEW. That would be ironic. Not positive I want to do this yet, but it sort of makes sense. Input welcome.
Re: Colour fidelity & low-light AF of *ist-D
On 6/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >I've never noticed any color difference between my eyes, and in a simple test >now, also don't. > >One has a lot of floaters, though. If that helps. ROTFL. Marnie, you kill me. Sorry folks. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: raw conversion (was Undersharpening)
On Thu, 6 Nov 2003, danilo wrote: > > btw, how many of you use linux for graphic manipulation issues? > > > ciao > Danilo. > I only seem to use Linux or OpenBSD these days... I use the Gimp (www.gimp.org) for image manipulation, and X-Sane to do my scanning. I also use imagemagick (www.imagemagick.com) to batch resize my images. - Chris -- Chris Murray /"\ [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN http://apeman.org/ XAGAINST HTML MAIL Cell: 604.861.8307 / \/ Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
Teleconverter suggestions
I have a Pentax ZX-5N. Any suggestions (or links to reviews) for a decent teleconverter, price range preferably $100 or less? Maris
Re: Resistance is Futile
Or along graywolf's lines: D'Hood, like I'm from D'Hood John Francis wrote: I still think it should be called, D'gang. Full-starr'd knights? (with apologies to Walt Whitman)
Re: Colour fidelity & low-light AF of *ist-D
On 6/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >Hell, my left eye sees colors differently (more blue) than my right eye, how >could anyone think that two different people would see them the same? Hey Tom, if you went to one of those retro 3-D movies of the Blob or whatever, you wouldn't need the cardboard glasses :-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: December PUG Theme
Clouds. zoomshot wrote: > Gone from the schedule page ( http://pug.komkon.org/general/themes.html ), > what is it?
Re: Resistance is Futile
On 6/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >I'm still going to call it the starkistdee or Sexist D, though, because >I think the name is really, really stupid. Okay, it's not as stupid as >naming a camera "Rebel." I think this is totally in keeping with the ethos behind naming the camera the *ist D. You are doing exactly what Pentax wanted, and personalising it. I think one or two others are doing this also and you are to be congratulated for persevering. Not that I have one, but hypothetically, if I did, as it were, I think I would refer to it as a Majist D. As in 'is this your Majist D'? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
More on RAW
Some of you who are dabbling in digital imaging may already be familiar with Hamrick Software's excellent VueScan flatbed and negative/slide scanner software (www.hamrick.com). VueScan also supports the RAW formats of quite a few DSLRs. I've been in contact with Ed Hamrick, and have confirmed that he employs the earlier-described RAW library from Dave Coffin. Sooner or later, Ed plans to roll in the latest iteration of that library, thereby securing *ist D support. Emails to Ed expressing your interest may speed the process along. I've also been in communication with Cerious Software, developer of the equally excellent ThumbsPlus program (www.cerious.com). I've used ThumbsPlus ever since I learned, many years ago, that it supported the RAW format of my now-retired Kodak DC120 digital rangefinder camera. Adding *ist D RAW support is on their list of features, currently low on the list though, and they're awaiting feedback before they bump up its priority. Finally, I've emailed Lemke Software inquiring as to their *ist D RAW support plans for Graphic Converter. Will report back to the list if/when I hear anything back from them == Brian Dipert Technical Editor: Mass Storage, Memory, Multimedia, PC Core Logic and Peripherals, and Programmable Logic EDN Magazine: http://www.edn.com 5000 V Street Sacramento, CA 95817 (916) 454-5242 (voice), (617) 558-4470 (fax) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit me at http://www.bdipert.com
Re: Resistance is Futile
On 6/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >After proclaiming on the list that I would not buy a DSLR until Pentax >came out with a full-frame model...my *ist D arrived yesterday. [snip] Way to go Joe! Give us an update after the weekend mate. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: GFM - looks like I will be there
On 6/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >>>(b) a place to stay - which could be the back of somebody;s van.. >> >>There's a movie in this. >> >>Cheers, >> Cotty > > >Deliverance? Silence of the Lambs. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Resistance is Futile
> > I still think it should be called, D'gang. Full-starr'd knights? (with apologies to Walt Whitman)
Re: GFM - looks like I will be there
On 6/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >Nah, not Brad, but The Who. The what? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: MX Shutter Release Problem
Most likely either dirt, or a slightly bent linkage in the camera. Any decent repair shop ought to be able to fix it easily. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Just took an MX out for some exercise and the shutter relase jammed and became sticky :-(( Any suggestions on what I might check to fix the problem. When it jammed, I just whacked the camera against the palm of my hand, and it freed things up only to get sluggish, sticky, and jam again later. I keep whacking it, it works a time or two, and then it's time to smack it again. This pummeling can't be very good for the camera ;-)) All thoughts and suggestions appreciated. Kind regards, Tyrone -- Email.it, the professional e-mail, gratis per te: http://www.email.it/f Sponsor: Metti il turbo alla tua casella di posta: 100 MB per inviare e ricevere tutto quello che vuoi. Clicca qui Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=1624&d=6-11 -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com "You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway."
Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update
>This is easy to try, just download a full size *ist D file from somewhere (they are all over the net by now) and print one and see what you think. >alex Good idea! Marnie aka Doe
Re: Colour fidelity & low-light AF of *ist-D
It's an interesting thought, but what I perceive to be blue might actually what you perceive to be green. Imagine people around you who go thru life seeing 'blue' vegetables (though it seems perfectly normal to them *because* that's what they always known the label 'green' to refer to). And how would one actually prove any of this? Curiously, Ryan From: "Doug Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Do we all see the same colours? Two people look at a coloured object; both agree that it's yellow-green. But do they actually perceive identically? This is starting to sound a bit like the philosophical debate of naive realism versus representationalism Butch Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself. Hermann Hesse (Demian)
