Re: pics

Ryan, Thanks for the comments. I suspect if you hung around the lion area for quite a while perhaps you would get a better shot. They don't seem like they like to move around too much. I was shooting with the longest lens I have (K 300/4) and there were some guys there with some real bazookas -

Re: GFM Pix: No Bunny Ears, Guaranteed!

Peter J. Alling remarked: > Frank, I'm surprised, some of these are really quite good. That's a little harsh, isn't it? :-)

RE: GFM envy

Gianfranco, I still have to get some digitals up. Too busy to give them justice and put up a true webpage. There are a bunch at my msn site though. let me take a peek and see if I can put up a URL. Like Frank, I took quite a few with film. I will be picking them up on Monday if I cannot get e

RE: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

The SMC 2.5/135mm is not an "M", it's a "K". Jens Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 12. juni 2004 01:50 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good? You

Re: inflammatory subjects

Back then, there was this black labrador who peed on a hydrant in a rather posh neighbourhood, and when a group of yellow labradors woofed him to pee elsewhere, the black labrador refused to give up his hydrant. These days black or yellow labs pee wherever the heck they want, but if anyone says a b

Re: pics

Only just got a chance to take a look at the pics, but Bruce they're fantastic! And I agree with Steve on the mountains fading into the next- very nice. Any of the mountain lion not playing hard-to-get though? Regards, Ryan - Original Message - From: "Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: GFM Pix: No Bunny Ears, Guaranteed!

I like the one of the drunken moth too Frank.. though silly me was thinking "What a big moth. Waste of a bucket of ale.." Then I saw the tin (Diet Coke?) and realised, in a very Oprah moment, it wasn't a bucket, and I have to come to terms with being a lush. What I would really have liked to see t

Re: Cotty's GFM pics

Mr Cottrell you've truly outdone yourself! Wonderful shots and I think it's great browsing the creativity of one shot to the next. Love the captions too- Ewoks indeed. You're probably still recovering from compiling this essay, but I already can't wait for the next one! Cheers, Ryan PS. Cougar -e

Re: mz 3/5n & limited lenses

lol thanks for that Dario. I tried the same search for "pentax mz 5n" earlier, and it it didn't yield any limited lenses, so i didn't try 'mz 3'. doh.. Cheers, Ryan - Original Message - From: "Dario Bonazza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2004 3:07 A

RE: reagan cortege

Shawn, You're sick. Seek help. Seriously. I'm not kidding. Your behaviour on the list of late is not normal. You may be a danger to yourself or others. I'm really not joking. I hope you take my advice, for your sake, and the sake of those around you. This will be my only post on this matt

RE: Cotty's GFM pics

Woo hoo! > -Original Message- > From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 6:49 PM > To: pentax list > Subject: Cotty's GFM pics > > A day earlier than advertised, here ya go. Some of the > Powershot pics are fuzzy but it's a Canon - waddya expect. > Not all a

RE: GFM Pix: No Bunny Ears, Guaranteed!

Fun stuff. > -Original Message- > From: TMP [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 10:14 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: GFM Pix: No Bunny Ears, Guaranteed! > > > FINALLY, somebody posts some pics that don't include any bad > photos of me! > > Woohoo... >

Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

Tony, why do you like to argue so much? I REALLY, honestly, think that the Takumar (Bayonet) 135 F2.5 lens is a good lens for $30. My recommendations to the original post were: "$50 is too high. I got mine for $20 or $25 I think. I wouldn't pay more than $30 for it." That was a fair and hones

RE: Tanja versus Britney Spears-was: reagan cortege

Woopsy Poopsy: A second reading reveals that Cotty was replying to Treena, not Tanja. Oh well, just substitute appropriate names where necessary, and substitute "Pentax" for "*istD" (since I don't know if Treena has one). Or, better yet, just ignore my earlier post. Now that I think of it, just

Re: pics

Frank, Thanks, man. I wish I could do that city/street stuff like you do - I think I would need to watch and learn a bit before trying it. Glad that I could meet you there. Bruce Friday, June 11, 2004, 4:15:10 PM, you wrote: ft> Bruce, ft> Great pix. I wish I could do nature stuff like tha

Re: Cotty's GFM pics

Hey Cotty, Thanks for sharing - it brings out much of the fun that was there and even a few things I missed out on. Bruce Friday, June 11, 2004, 4:49:04 PM, you wrote: C> A day earlier than advertised, here ya go. Some of the Powershot pics are C> fuzzy but it's a Canon - waddya expect. Not al

Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

Christ, Antonio, Give it a freaking rest!! You've made your freaking point, do you have to go on and on and on and on? Do you kniow what "beating a dead horse" is? We know you don't like the lens. We know you used to own one. Enough already. Just because Christain says it's not worth the $5

Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

What a load of rubish. You are just being contrary because I said it was a dog. If anyone else where to have said it wasnt a good lens - as many have over the years you would no doubt have agreed and said, yes its only worth $20 or $30 ... given that the questioner is being asked $40 for the le

Re: GFM Pix: No Bunny Ears, Guaranteed!

Frank, I'm surprised, some of these are really quite good. From your disclaimer I expected drek taken by a drunken sailor. I especially liked your nature shot, (the one of the drunken moth). frank theriault wrote: Got back my first GFM roll today. Discovered that I suck as a landscape/nature p

Re: Cotty's GFM pics

Gonz, Every year. First weekend after Memorial Day (so you don't have to miss Indy). This was my first year, but I'm not gonna miss it any more if I can help it. Ya gotta go!!! -frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Opp

Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

> > > BTW, I'm surprised that anyone would challenge Aparicio for offering an > > opinion on a lens. Let's try to maintain some balance here. > > On Jun 11, 2004, at 6:06 PM, Fred wrote: > > >>> is asking $50 for it > >> > >>> The Takumar 135/2.5 bayonet is a dog - best avoided, > >> > >> Well, I

OT: Mildly Amusing

I'm always mildly amused to hear the immature challenge others to a fight. You know, you never know who you are dealing with. Interviews after the TV series 'Band of Brothers' crystalized it for me. They interviewed old men, grandfathers, generally kind and gentle looking. They were once the

Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

Jon, I have owned the Takumar 135/2.5 once in the past. I bought one new off the shelf in 1982, paid about $80 in 1982 dollars for it. I was so disappointed in it's performance that I sold all my Pentax equipment a few months later. ( I was pressured somewhat in this by my two best friends wh

RE: GFM envy

Gianfranco, Some old-fashioned guys (like me ) had to wait to get film back from the lab! First pix just posted, with another 5 or 6 rolls back by next Tuesday. I've only just begun!! BTW, if you show up next year, I'm there for sure! (not to scare you away or anything ). I really hope you

Re: *istD Raw Converter

that only tells me how much better they would be if you processed them in Photoshop CS. Herb - Original Message - From: "Christian Skofteland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 10:12 PM Subject: Re: *istD Raw Converter > I'll disagree. I have a

Re: GFM Pix: No Bunny Ears, Guaranteed!

I'd put this one up there with Cassino's insect shots: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2436610 Nicely "captured"! ;-) Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004

Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

I agree, not worth $50 but not the dog it's made out to be. Definitely not a paperweight. I loved mine. Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Peter J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 5:49 PM Subject: Re: Taku

Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

I loved it. So there! :-p Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Antonio Aparicio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 6:22 PM Subject: Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good? > Aha, the opinion police are back! > > I'v

Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

$50 is too high. I got mine for $20 or $25 I think. I wouldn't pay more than $30 for it. Personally, I loved it. Some people say it's soft. I couldn't tell with largish prints. It isn't multicoated, so don't shoot into the sun. Otherwise, I thought it was a fantastic portrait lens. I sold mi

GFM Pix: No Bunny Ears, Guaranteed!

Got back my first GFM roll today. Discovered that I suck as a landscape/nature photog, so I'll spare you the grief. These were taken the first day, so many of the contingent had yet to arrive. They were also taken with the MX, and since I used the LX as the flash cam, no night (ie: party )

Re: *istD Raw Converter

I'll disagree. I have a couple of 20x30 inch prints that were processed with PhotoLab. They'll knock your socks off. Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 7:10 PM Subject:

New Little Toys (definitely On Topic...)

Hi everybody, It seems I cannot stop buying new pieces of equipment as soon as the opportunity arises... I had the chance to buy a couple of demo lenses from the local importer at a more than reasonable price. One of the lenses is the FA 35/2 AL, a lens I was more than once ready to buy new, but *

GFM envy

Hi GFM guys and gals, Just a few words to say how much I appreciated your reports and all the pictures posted (although I was expecting way more...) I guess I should start planning (and saving) for the next year. Ciao, Gianfranco PS: second attempt to send the message, something doesn't see

GFM envy

--- Gianfranco Irlanda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 09:33:54 -0700 (PDT) > From: Gianfranco Irlanda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: GFM envy > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Hi GFM guys and gals, > > Just few words to say how much I appreciated your reports and > all the picture

Woes of the list guy WAS: half of my posts

Doug was telling us at GFM if we get 200 messages in a day, he'll get 900 with all the bounced email messages. If you want to ask him a question, don't rely on him reading a post here. Email him directly. AND Keep your fricken in-boxes cleaned-out. Cory Just finished his third roll of Kodak B&W

Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

Yet another reply gets eaten by the list... Attempt #2, here goes. What about SMC Pentax-M f3.5 vs this non-SMC f2.5? I do want a fairly fast lens. I have a 50mm f2 and love it. Anyway, this particular Takumar 135/2.5 seems to include a UV filter and Pentax front lens cap. I'm tempted to offer $

Re: Cotty's GFM pics

Cotty gets the award for the best snap of me so far. Only problem is, he placed me in a grouping where my piddly little 70-210 zoom looks simply pitiful next to those HUGE lenses. Anybody else thinking you were transported into the "Perspective" Theme PUG? Cory At home waiting for PDML messages

Re: half of my posts

"But I have a feeling Doug might tell me it's my fault, so I hesitated to mention it again. :-)" No, its affecting too many of us. One of mine just this morning didn't come through. Doug? Thanks, Joe

Re: Cotty's GFM pics

Great snaps Cotty. Love the one with the "alien" and the bridge. You're commentary made my laugh, you are a natural comedian. Looks like you guys had a lot of fun. Are you doing it next year again? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A day earlier than advertised, here ya go. Some of the Powershot pics

Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

Get the lens hood for the SMC Tak M42. It fits perfectly and except for a slight difference in finish seems to match this lens much better than the plastic clip on that was originally supplied. Gonz wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree, Fred, on all counts. It's not as bad a lens as everyone

Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

> BTW, I'm surprised that anyone would challenge Aparicio for offering an > opinion on a lens. Let's try to maintain some balance here. > On Jun 11, 2004, at 6:06 PM, Fred wrote: >>> is asking $50 for it >> >>> The Takumar 135/2.5 bayonet is a dog - best avoided, >> >> Well, I would tend to disagr

Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree, Fred, on all counts. It's not as bad a lens as everyone says. $50 is a bit high. Not that it's a bad lens for $50, but rather, they can usually be gotten for cheaper. I have one, and I wasn't unhappy with it - until I bought the SMC 2.5 135mm from Shel. A m

Re: pics

Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >For those on the list that actually like to look at pictures and >discuss photography, I have culled down my GFM pictures to this >gallery. I present them for your enjoyment (or not). I'm sure they >are not perfect, but I find them at least pleasant to lo

Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

Hi Frank, I agree with your evaluation of the SMC 135/2.5. The Takumar may be acceptable, but there are so many superior lenses available for approximately the same price that it doesn't appear to be a good buy. Both the SMC Pentax 135/3.5 and the M version of the same lens can be had for o

Cotty's GFM pics

A day earlier than advertised, here ya go. Some of the Powershot pics are fuzzy but it's a Canon - waddya expect. Not all are here, but most. If you want a decent file size copy of your pic, email me off list and I will oblige. Warning - one large page with 43 pics

Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

You can get an M 135/2.5 for $60 or so. It's far superior to the Takumar lens. BTW, I'm surprised that anyone would challenge Aparicio for offering an opinion on a lens. Let's try to maintain some balance here. On Jun 11, 2004, at 6:06 PM, Fred wrote: is asking $50 for it The Takumar 135/2.5 ba

Re: Giving up on the FA 28-70/4

Thanks for the info Alex. John John Whittingham Technician -- Original Message --- From: alex wetmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 16:36:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Giving up on the FA 28-70/4 > On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, John Whittingham wrote: >

Re: Giving up on the FA 28-70/4

On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, John Whittingham wrote: > This is all a little worrying when I have one fitted to my MZ-3 most of the > time, it's nice to know the rest of the camera bag is full of Pentax A primes > and a couple of Sigma primes. Just check it on a regular basis. Since this was a cheap lens

Re: Giving up on the FA 28-70/4

This is all a little worrying when I have one fitted to my MZ-3 most of the time, it's nice to know the rest of the camera bag is full of Pentax A primes and a couple of Sigma primes. John John Whittingham Technician -- Original Message --- From: "Alan Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: *istD Raw Converter

the 8-vs 16-bit issue was what made me look at the SE version instead. i see now from the new data sheet comparing the four versions that there isn't nearly as much difference anymore. i wish it produced Photoshop files directly instead of TIFF-16. OTOH, i have a lot of Photoshop plugins to automat

RE: pics

Bruce, Great pix. I wish I could do nature stuff like that. I got back my first roll from GFM today (1st of many to come...), and I realized from looking at my pathetic attempts at Nature Photography that I pretty much suck at it. Gives me something to work on for next year, I guess... Enou

Re: *istD Raw Converter

the Pentax converter works OK for small prints, and only if they need minimal processing. Herb - Original Message - From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 1:30 AM Subject: Re: *istD Raw Converter > The Pentax converter is just fi

RE: Testing

Lasse, Is it me, or have you been away. On the bike? Nice to see ya, frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: "Lasse Karlsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subj

Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

I agree, Fred, on all counts. It's not as bad a lens as everyone says. $50 is a bit high. Not that it's a bad lens for $50, but rather, they can usually be gotten for cheaper. I have one, and I wasn't unhappy with it - until I bought the SMC 2.5 135mm from Shel. A much superior lens, in terms

Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

Okay! Fair enough. I accept your evaluation. When I test mine, I'll report back, and we can compare the results... keith whaley Antonio Aparicio wrote: Aha, the opinion police are back! I've owned it, it was a dog, I got rid of it. My opinion. Antonio On 11 Jun 2004, at 23:58, Keith Whaley wrote: A

Re: Giving up on the FA 28-70/4

I'm not a huge believer that the country of manufacture has a big difference with quality of the object. I own a VW TDI car and some members of tdiclub.com (the forums for said cars) claim that the German made ones are better than the ones made elsewhere. My wife's Jetta Wagon TDI is German and m

Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

Aha, the opinion police are back! I've owned it, it was a dog, I got rid of it. My opinion. Antonio On 11 Jun 2004, at 23:58, Keith Whaley wrote: Antonio Aparicio wrote: The Takumar 135/2.5 bayonet is a dog - best avoided, A. By whose word? Are you testifying directly and personally that it's not

Re: Giving up on the FA 28-70/4

I believe glass separation has nothing to do with the manufacturing origin, but the fact that those lenses were designed and manufactured to be cheap, the FA28-70/4 in this case. Some even had aperture blades not working properly. There are reason why some lenses were selling so cheap. Regards,

Re: Gentleman, please ! Was: RE: reagan cortege

Hi, graywolf wrote: I only killfile people who are consistently abusive to others on the list. That has been mercifully few, but there seems to be something in the air this spring. The saps are rising? m

Re: Developing tanks (yes, it's not digital!)

Hi, Frantisek Vlcek wrote: I would like to ask those who used a big processor or lab or something similar. I am using a Jobo, and am searching for something that would kill the algae which invariably form in the waterbath. Chloride is, according to Jobo, dangerous to the plastics or temperature sen

Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

> is asking $50 for it > The Takumar 135/2.5 bayonet is a dog - best avoided, Well, I would tend to disagree with the canine qualities. It's not the best Pentax 135 out there, but I wouldn't exactly call it a dog, either. Still, I do think that $50 might be a bit too high. Fred

Re: Takumar 135/2.5 (Bayonet) any good?

Antonio Aparicio wrote: The Takumar 135/2.5 bayonet is a dog - best avoided, A. By whose word? Are you testifying directly and personally that it's not a worthy lens? How do you know? Have you personally tested one? Or are you parroting someone else's opinion? keith whaley On 11 Jun 2004, at 23:37

Re: pics

Thanks. It is a beautiful setting and the company was great, too. Can't top that. I am certainly going to make every attempt to get back next year. Fear not the lion - the Habitat is very safe for us humans - unless you are lucky, you need a really long lens to get any shots of the lions. -- B

Re: pics

>For those on the list that actually like to look at pictures and >discuss photography, I have culled down my GFM pictures to this >gallery. I present them for your enjoyment (or not). I'm sure they >are not perfect, but I find them at least pleasant to look at. > >non-politcal comments welcome

Re: pics

I was feeling kind of bad that I took nature photos instead of all the shots back and forth of the gang. Hopefully it will help others to know that the location was really beautiful. Thanks, Bruce Friday, June 11, 2004, 11:29:56 AM, you wrote: g> Good lord, Bruce. You actually took nature pho

RE: What'd I say

A few years ago when word came that Ray Charles would come to a nearby city to perform, I bought the ticket right away (50 bucks!) and went to see him perform in top form, and snapped some shots. At the time I thought "if I don't go to a concert of his now, I might never see him in person again

Re: pics

Good lord, Bruce. You actually took nature photos during the Nature Photo Weekend? We may have to drum you off the list for that. Let me check the by-laws. GRIN (for the humor impaired)! I like the cougar shot. -- Bruce Dayton wrote: For those on the list that actually like to look at pictures a

Re: pics

They are great pics. I was showing my wife the pics and she commented that I *WILL* be going to GFM next year, she really liked what she saw. Wow, I didn't even have to bribe her. Then she saw the pic with the mountain lion and changed her mind. LOL. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For those on th

Re: inflammatory subjects

Don't take the name of dog in vein! Peter J. Alling wrote: Hey, wait a minute, what does this have to do with dogs?

Re: reagan cortege

not hearing your opinion isn't going to hurt him arnie - Original Message - From: "Antonio Aparicio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 9:52 AM Subject: Re: reagan cortege > Peter, > > Reagan was involved in affairs both in Iran and Iraq fyi. > >

Re: pics

I don't believe that I have been put on anyone's hate list yet for taking a good pic. I'll certainly take that as a comliment. Thanks! -- Best regards, Bruce Friday, June 11, 2004, 11:14:44 AM, you wrote: PJA> These are really nice, did I mention that I hate you yet? PJA> Bruce Dayton wrote

Re: pics

These are really nice, did I mention that I hate you yet? Bruce Dayton wrote: For those on the list that actually like to look at pictures and discuss photography, I have culled down my GFM pictures to this gallery. I present them for your enjoyment (or not). I'm sure they are not perfect, but I

RE: reagan cortege

Hi DagT Thanks for the comments. -Shawn -Original Message- From: Dag T [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 2:04 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: reagan cortege My g... how pathetic. It reminds me of some really bad B-movie. This isn´t barbaric. The barbarians

Re: inflammatory subjects

Hey, wait a minute, what does this have to do with dogs? John Francis wrote: Reminding us of Simon King's post sometime back (I may need to archive my PDML folder about now..) about the dyslexic, agnostic insomniac who lay awake in bed all night, wondering if there was a dog.. Cheers, Ryan The

Re: reagan cortege

My g... how pathetic. It reminds me of some really bad B-movie. This isn´t barbaric. The barbarians had a civilization, but you don´t. DagT På 11. jun. 2004 kl. 03.28 skrev Shawn K.: You'd break your leg kicking my hard ass tough guy. I've fought tougher than you before, and would welcome a goo

RE: reagan cortege

Bob, there is this old saying, "An eye for an eye leaves the world blind." I'm pretty much sick of this insult fest, so I'm going to put an end to it now by not returning the favor. I've had a few glasses of wine interspersed over the past two years, so I'm not a drunk as you imply, I've never been

Re: inflammatory subjects

> > Reminding us of Simon King's post sometime back (I may need to archive my > PDML folder about now..) about the dyslexic, agnostic insomniac who lay > awake in bed all night, wondering if there was a dog.. > > Cheers, > Ryan Then there was the dyslexic devil-worshipper who sold his soul to Sa

RE: PAW: Venus - of course

Hi Dag, Is that curvy thingy on the floor your fingernail?:-) Yefei > > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: PAW: Venus - of course > Message-Id: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > ..pas

Re: pics

Quite pleasant to look at indeed! Thank you very much for posting them. Bruce Dayton wrote: For those on the list that actually like to look at pictures and discuss photography, I have culled down my GFM pictures to this gallery. I present them for your enjoyment (or not). I'm sure they are not

FS Fryday

1. Pentax-M 135/3.5 Excellent condition, caps. $35 2. Commercial Komura 210/5.6 #1 shutter (4x5) $150. Covers 5x7 so provides good movements. 1/8 to 1sec are out. Glass is clean and clear. 3. Ilex Paragon 7 1/2" (191mm) in Ilex #3 (4x5) $150. Shutter works beautifully and lens is clean and

pics

For those on the list that actually like to look at pictures and discuss photography, I have culled down my GFM pictures to this gallery. I present them for your enjoyment (or not). I'm sure they are not perfect, but I find them at least pleasant to look at. non-politcal comments welcome www.da

Re: Finally, my extensive, longer-than-a-Tanya [cannot access Mark Roberts' site]

Mark Roberts wrote: Turns out my web host has some IP ranges blocked at *his* firewall, even for web connections, due to Denial of Service (DoS) attacks. If you're in one of these ranges I think you're out of luck. Mark, THX for the explanation. Arturo ##

OT: Bearskins (Re: reagan cortege - no political content!

Hi, > PS. Hilarious fact: Regarding the difficulties encountered while searching > for a synthetic alternative to bearskin, "They were also subject to static > electricity, which was rather embarrassing when they passed under > (electricity) pylons." > http://www.news-star.com/stories/081497/world

Re: reagan cortege

Hi, Friday, June 11, 2004, 7:04:46 AM, Shawn wrote: > I've seen you Bob, you're ugly, are you married, that would be a long shot, > proof that where there's one ugly dumbfuck, there's another ugly dumbfuck > that loves him... I guess you have the better of me Shawn. Whereas you're handsome and a

Re: mz 3/5n & limited lenses

Try: http://www1.ocn.ne.jp/~y.kita/kizai/camera02.jpg --Mike

Re: mz 3/5n & limited lenses

http://www.altavista.com/image/results?q=pentax+mz3&mik=photo&mik=graphic&mi p=all&mis=all&miwxh=all&stq=0 Dario Bonazza - Original Message - From: "Ryan Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "PDML" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 5:33 PM Subject: mz 3/5n & limited lenses > Was j

New Little Toys (definitely On Topic...)

Hi everybody, It seems I cannot stop buying new pieces of equipment as soon as the opportunity arise... I had the chance to buy a couple of demo lenses from the local importer at a more than reasonable price. One of the lenses is the FA 35/2 AL, a lens I was more than once ready to buy new, but *l

Re: Gentleman, please ! Was: RE: reagan cortege

Gonz, flame war? I think you are going a bit over the top mate. I have said nothing inflamatory, just my opinions fairly conservatively put. You may not agree with them, that is your choice, but to taint them as some lesser form of vermin seems a bit extreme. I dont like a lot of what you have

RE: reagan cortege - no political content!

While we're on the subject...you can see this guy - http://www.bigdayphoto.com/reagan/040609-175432-6051.htm Is a navy guy who passed out. 2 Navy guys in front of me passed out while standiing at attention waiting for the caisson. Apparently people were passing out left and right. Well, some sec

Re: inflammatory subjects

On 11/6/04, LATER ALLINGATOR, discombobulated, offered: >Freaudian slips are supposed to have some sort of meaning, Cotty you're >a strange man :-) Believe me, some people think dogs *are* gods - I know - my first girlfriend was an obedience champ (the trainer, not the dog ;-) Cheers, Cotty

Re: reagan cortege - no political content!

Please tell us the tail. . . .er, tale. Stephen Moore wrote: A couple of thinlots right up there among the best in capturing the little details that limn the humanity of the scene. (I've got a funny story about the caparisoned horse that appeared in the JFK funeral, but that's for another time, pre

Test

My past few messages seems to have gone nowhere. Wonder if this innocent one can slip through. Yefei

Re: half of my posts

"aren't showing up in the digests or the archive. "?" Doug, a number of us are having this problem. Joe

Re: reagan cortege

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I doubt it, probably not and I don't think so. I don't know, I have my suspicions, but you may be right. keith Gonz wrote: TMP wrote: well, i'm a woman, and i can't say you are doing much for me right now... tan. Tan, this Shawn person actually is a woman. With a mi

Re: reagan cortege - no political content!

Semper fi! He is indeed a USMC drum major. tom wrote: You can also see the guy following him is wearing a Marine hat. tv -Original Message- From: Keith Whaley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 5:27 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: reagan cortege - no politica

Re: Gentleman, please ! Was: RE: reagan cortege

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey Gonz, Talk to the flamers, not me. When people start making claims about Reagan being a good president, etc. etc. then it is only normal that those who disagree with that statement will voice their opinions too. For what its worth, I was saddened to hear of his deat

Re: PAW: Venus - of course

Very original, very striking, and very well done. I love it! [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ..passing by my living room... http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2435150&size=lg

Re: reagan cortege - no political content!

In a message dated 6/11/2004 7:18:31 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You can also see the guy following him is wearing a Marine hat. tv --- Very nice photos, tv! I especially like all the leg shots and the kid shots. You really captured the event. Marnie aka Doe

Re: Gentleman, please ! Was: RE: reagan cortege

Antti, the GFM may have been a photo meet, but not many of the posts here had anything to do with photography or pentax. As to the rest of your comments I think that the list should not censor peoples reactions to photos that are posted for feedback. In this instance the photos were of a politi

Re: snaps from GFM and a couple of comments (obligatory Pentax content)

Nice work Mark. Debbie and I got so close to McRae peak and then my acrophobia kicked in. The funny part is that I like climbing up get realy unnerved when I actually get to the top.

  1   2   >