FYI
Hi! I recently purchased a used P5 in good condition, but without an instruction manual. After a bit of a search, I found Manuals R Us.They offer downloads of many instruction manuals for older cameras, includingseveral Pentaxes, going back to the HV3. You can also send for reprints or havea manual sent to you on CD ROM. If any of you have an older Pentax and would like a manual for it, you might find it here. Here is the link... http://www.manualsrus.com/Shopping_Cart/pentax.asp Jim
Re: Clue re next limited lens
If we're going to bet on the new Limited wide-angle lens I'd bet on 22mm. If Pentax is consistent, the 43mm lens was midway between 50mm 35mm. The 31mm was midway between 35mm 28mm. A 22mm lens would fall midway between 24mm 20mm lens offerings. For a medium telephoto I'd predict a 110mm lens. Which would probably be followed by 175mm 250mm telephoto lenses. And I still think if there is a 18mm lens in the near future it will be an FA* lens. An 18mm f/2.8 is a pretty standard ultra-wide-angle lens offering! Alexander Grigolia - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Tamron 300mm f5.6, 58mm filter
I have just acquired a Tamron 300mm f5.6, 58mm filter thread in an M42 mount. Cost was the equivalent of $78 US. It appears to be in perfect condition. I am just waiting on a bayonet adapter so I can use it. The only info I could find on the web says it is sharp. Does anyone have any experience (good or bad) with this lens? My main use would be nature photography. I do a lot of bush walking and travel light. I don't go for big blow-ups but I need to get shots that are at least of publishable quality. Peter _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Tamron 300mm f5.6, 58mm filter
Peter, Is this the SP Tamron? I have one of these, which I tested along side an FA 300/4. The Tamron was sightly longer in focal length, with slightly more contrast. I sent back the FA. Bob --- Peter Jesser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have just acquired a Tamron 300mm f5.6, 58mm filter thread in an M42 mount. Cost was the equivalent of $78 US. It appears to be in perfect condition. I am just waiting on a bayonet adapter so I can use it. The only info I could find on the web says it is sharp. Does anyone have any experience (good or bad) with this lens? My main use would be nature photography. I do a lot of bush walking and travel light. I don't go for big blow-ups but I need to get shots that are at least of publishable quality. Peter _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Clue re next limited lens
You can always buy a new monitor as they are getting very cheap! - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 11:24 PM Subject: Re: Clue re next limited lens I have a HUGE spider crawling accross my monitor. I HATE spiders. L8R Bill - Original Message - From: Chris Brogden [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: May 21, 2001 10:10 PM Subject: Re: Clue re next limited lens On Mon, 21 May 2001, William Robb wrote: I bet it's a 19mm William Robb I'm going for a 21mm, myself, unless they come out with the Limited telephoto. chris - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Lens for Sale
Greetings- This is the last time you will see these items on the list. If no one here is interested, I will be placing these items on Ebay in the next day or so: Pentax SMCP-A 300mm f/2.8 ED IF with trunk case, includes manual and original warranty card. Like New plus condition! Includes Pentax 2X-L rear teleconverter in same Like New plus condition with hard case. $2,100.00. Serious offers will be considered. Purchaser pays shipping and insurance. I prefer to sell them together, as they really deserve each other. However, I will sell the lens seperately for $1,900.00. Sorry, but if I seperate the two, the 2X-L is going to John Francis. If you want to see a photo of these items, let me know and I will e-mail it to you off list. Thanks, John Stephenson
pentax fa 24-90
Hi all, has anyone already gained experience with this lens? Are there any reviews in magazines? From what I have read sofar I think the lens is overpriced, so I think I'll wait with buying it. Frank - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
what is ideal lens for photography of mountains
Hi all, this autumn I'll be gaing to Nepal and I want to get some nice pictures of the Himalaya. Can anyone advice me on what focal length lens to use? bye, Frank - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: MZ-3/5N Multiple Exposure.
Hi I have MZ 5n, it does not support Multiple exposures. Bye Ramesh -Original Message- From: Ayash Kanto Mukherjee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 11:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: MZ-3/5N Multiple Exposure. Hi! I just need to know one thing. Is it possible to do multiple exposure in MZ-3/5N? If yes, is it double exposure or more than two exposures? With regards, Ayash Kanto. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: what is ideal lens for photography of mountains
On 22 May 2001, at 16:04, Frank Wajer wrote: Hi all, this autumn I'll be gaing to Nepal and I want to get some nice pictures of the Himalaya. Can anyone advice me on what focal length lens to use? Hi Frank, This question is a hard one, it is along the lines of How long is a piece of string? More information perhaps? Format, your interests, films etc then the answers might make more sense :-) Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: what is ideal lens for photography of mountains
Hi Frank ... The answer depends on what you want to photograph. A long lens for bringing distant views a bit closer is good, as is a wide lens for capturing the great views. A macro would be nice if you'd like to get some close-up shots of rocks, flowers, etc., If I had to take but one lens it would probably be the A100/2.8 macro. You might want to consider a good quality zoom lens, but I couldn't recommend one as I'm not very familiar with them. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ... there is no point in pressing the shutter unless you are making some caustic comment on the incongruities of life - Phillip Jones Griffiths Frank Wajer wrote: Hi all, this autumn I'll be gaing to Nepal and I want to get some nice pictures of the Himalaya. Can anyone advice me on what focal length lens to use? - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Got 24mm /2.8
Hi After loosing an auction for BIN, I got used Pentax A 24mm /2.8 from http://www.vintagevisuals.com/pentax.htm. I paid 204USD, this includes tax shipping. The lens's external body shows usage. Glass does not have fungus, no marks; but when really observe the glass, I see few very-very-minute black particles inside the lens. I cleaned the outer elements of the lens to make sure that they are not on the outer elements. I think they are dust particles. Except for these particles, the glass is very clean. I would like to know does these black particles affect the pics? On weekend I used this lens with MZ5n; it was really light compared to my Tokina AF 20-35 (Non ATX version). I liked the small filter size and fixed focal length made framing/shooting fast. Bye Ramesh - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Cameras on bicycles
Back in 83/84 I started out with a Praktica MTL5 and Pentacon 50mm/1.8 (brilliant for a beginner). I often took this set-up out on bike rides in the country. It was kept in a bag strapped to the bike. Anyway one day I discovered that the four or five screws that held the mounting flange onto the lens had loosened so much that the lens was about to fall off the camera. Since then I have often carried my MEsuper and 50mm on the bike (including a two week solid tour in the Alps), and this has suffered no ill-effects at all, making me wonder if it's build quality that counts. The Praktica was solid and probably better made than the Russian Zenits, but the MEsuper and A50/1.7 lens have that intangible feel that only comes from superb build quality. Jim Brooks E-MAILS are susceptible to interference. You should not assume that the contents originated from the sender or the Zetex Group or that they have been accurately reproduced from their original form. Zetex accepts no responsibility for information, errors or omissions in this e-mail nor for its use or misuse nor for any act committed or omitted in connection with this communication. If in doubt, please verify the authenticity with the sender. Visit us onhttp://www.zetex.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: what is ideal lens for photography of mountains
HOW CLOSE YOU GOING TO BE? ehm, probably a few kilometers at most. If I make it I'll be at Kala Patar near Everest Base camp!!! ie. I'll be in the Himalaya's, hehehe. Can you give me details on your trip, can I tag along? well, you can book the same trip. Maybe they still have a place for you. Were are going to assume a wide angel is what you desire, so the Pentax 17-28mm Fisheye Wideangle maybe cover most of your needs, if you can handle the fisheye effect at some of the lower ranges. right, wideangle, but I don't want fisheye. I'll probably take my A 35-105 f3.5 along and one wide angle lens, possibly my K28mm f3.5, but I'm not sure if it is short enough. Frank - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: what is ideal lens for photography of mountains
Frank, 600 mm goes with light boots, 24 mm for plastic boots and crampons. [Tell me what you wear and I'll tell you what you shoot.] ;o) Servus, Alin Frank wrote: FW this autumn I'll be gaing to Nepal and I want to get some nice pictures FW of the Himalaya. Can anyone advice me on what focal length lens to use? - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: ideal lens for mountains
Shel wrote: This reminds me of some similar questions, posted here along with the answers: What's the difference between a duck? Ans: The higher it flies the much. Why is it when a mouse spins? Ans: Because one leg is both the same. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ... there is no point in pressing the shutter unless you are making some caustic comment on the incongruities of life - Phillip Jones Griffiths - C'mon, guys. It should be obvious that the ideal lens is the one which allows one to make the most caustic comment on the incongruities of life on the mountain!!;-) Shel, I like the new signature file -- this one's definitely a keeper! Later, Bill Peifer Rochester, NY - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Tamron 300mm f5.6, 58mm filter
- Original Message - From: Peter Jesser [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: May 22, 2001 10:58 AM Subject: Tamron 300mm f5.6, 58mm filter I have just acquired a Tamron 300mm f5.6, 58mm filter thread in an M42 mount. Cost was the equivalent of $78 US. It appears to be in perfect condition. I am just waiting on a bayonet adapter so I can use it. The only info I could find on the web says it is sharp. Does anyone have any experience (good or bad) with this lens? My main use would be nature photography. I do a lot of bush walking and travel light. I don't go for big blow-ups but I need to get shots that are at least of publishable quality. I have a Tamron SP 300mm f5.6 which I also aquired quite inexpensively. I quite like mine. It is well built, and has very good imaging qualities. This lens was discussed briefly a while back, and another list member (Alan Chan, I think) stated it was quite soft. Mine is quite sharp, go figure. It is very compact for a lens of that focal length, which I like. I will almost always give up a stop of speed to get a smaller lens, as long as the lens is a good one. William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: MZ-3/5N Multiple Exposure.
Ayash Kanto Mukherjee wrote: Many thanks for the help. I visited Boz's site just a while ago and found that MZ-S (the brand new flaghship body) can do multiple exposure but I have no idea how much will be the price of that as it has not arrived in the market. Any idea or expectation about it's price? List price, according to Camera World, is $1099. Street price from the reputable mail-order houses ranges from $875 at Adorama to $999 at BH (I wonder how soon it will be before they lower that price?) The release date in Japan is this coming Saturday. We expect the US release date to be the same, but nobody really knows. -- John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Silicon Graphics, Inc. (650)933-82952011 N. Shoreline Blvd. MS 43U-991 (650)932-0828 (Fax) Mountain View, CA 94043-1389 Hello. My name is Darth Vader. I am your father. Prepare to die. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Got 24mm /2.8
- Original Message - From: Ramesh Kumar_C Subject: Got 24mm /2.8 snipped I would like to know does these black particles affect the pics? If there is just a few, and they are small, I wouldn't worry overmuch about it. Most likely it is a bit of the anti reflection stuff they paint onto the inside of the lens barrel that has come off. I really like my A24mm 2.8. It is one of my favourite lenses for 35mm. William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: FYI
Usually Pentax US has older manuals for somewhat less, last I knew it was about $4.00 for shipping and handling you might be getting a photocopy or an original for that amount. At 12:51 AM 5/22/2001 -0700, you wrote: Hi! I recently purchased a used P5 in good condition, but without an instruction manual. After a bit of a search, I found Manuals R Us.They offer downloads of many instruction manuals for older cameras, including several Pentaxes, going back to the HV3. You can also send for reprints or have a manual sent to you on CD ROM. If any of you have an older Pentax and would like a manual for it, you might find it here. Here is the link... http://www.manualsrus.com/Shopping_Cart/pentax.asphttp://www.manualsrus.com/Shopping_Cart/pentax.asp Jim - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: I'm back, some observations, and etc, some of it on-topic
Hey neat Doug. Having lived in Colorado 19 years it's right up there at the top of my favorite places list. Yeah Ouray is pretty cool. I never made it to Telluride. Did you go by Mesa Verde when you were there? I was going to use a Mesa Verde pic for the architecture PUG, but the negatives are still packed. Sounds like a wonderful trip. The list has been practically dead. I hope that means everyone's out there taking pictures and keeping the real film industry alive. Tom C. - Original Message - From: Doug Brewer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 10:37 PM Subject: I'm back, some observations, and etc, some of it on-topic Hi troops, Got back from Colorado and Utah Saturday night and have been wading through the pile of messages waiting for me. I'm think I'm pretty much caught up with list maintenance stuff, but most of what has been posted to the list in my absence has escaped my attention. If there's anything there I need to see, please point it out to me and I'll address it as best I can. Some info and observations: For all you Dead Horse Point fans, it's still there. I did =not= see any actual dead horses nearby. There is a fence along the back side of Arches NP. For some reason, this struck me as odd. Ouray is much cooler than Telluride, but the road from Ridgeway to Telluride is more fun than the road from Rigdeway to Ouray. The road from Ouray to Telluride must be a blast. Tom Till is a hell of a landscape photographer (http://www.tomtill.com). Having four Pronghorn Antelope galloping along side of and within twenty yards of your vehicle is rare enough that you should have your camera out of the bag already, you dope. Always been a jeep and blazer kinda guy, but I have new respect for the old Suzuki Samurai. Anywhere that you can drive around all day without seeing anybody else is my kind of place to be making photos. When I go back, I'm taking a camera that uses a bigger negative. If you're still reading: While my wife was meeting some people in Boulder, my little boy and I drove down to Englewood to visit the Pentax USA HQ. We were greeted and shown around by a very nice guy from the marketing department. Everyone seemed relatively normal and not the least bit surprised to be introduced to some scruffy sunburned geek and his offspring. Must happen a lot. Anyway, one of the places we got to visit was The Cage, where they keep all of the gear that goes to trade shows. It's difficult to describe what it was like in there, but I guess the closest I could get would be that it looked much like what one room of my house would be if I ever won the lottery. Dozens of cameras, lenses, tripods, cases, bags, boxes. Oh, boy. We both enjoyed meeting everyone we met, and Cole thought it was cool that he got to eat two cookies before lunch. Actual photos taken in Utah/Colorado will arrive here on Thursday, at which point I will begin editing with an eye toward integrating some of them into my Grandfather Mountain show. Just think, some of you have the opportunity to travel great distances to see the slides from My Trip Out West. kinda chilling, isn't it? Doug -- Douglas Forrest Brewer Ashwood Lake Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.alphoto.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Ewa Marine housing
Alexandre A. P. Suaide writes: I am considering to attend diving school this summer. The first though I had was: I want to take pictures and don't want to spend a lot of money buying underwater gear. I know that ewa marine makes SLR camera housing for underwater photography. They have a generic house that goes up to 60 feet deep for about $150-200 @ BHPhoto. Does anybody used something like this? Is it good enough to house my PZ-1P and a FA28-70 F4? I intend to go no much deep (20-40 feet). So, can I trust this kind of equipment? Somewhere on the web, I found instructions on how to reload a disposable camera. Took a dot or two of plastic glue to modify the camera to take standard film rolls, and a light-tight bag to load it. The whole point there were instructions of this sort was that the cameras fit into some standard (inexpensive?) diving housing. A bit of work, but certainly inexpensive. hope that helps, patbob ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: what is ideal lens for photography of mountains
Tiger wrote: Were are going to assume a wide angel is what you desire ... well, I prefer my angels to be a bit towards the slender, lithe limber type, myself - though the pleasantness of their companionship can also be a factor !8^D - Bill D. Casselberry ; Photography on the Oregon Coast http://www.orednet.org/~bcasselb [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Ewa Marine housing
I don't think the aperture and shutter speed would be workable, or? Norm Patrick White wrote: snip The whole point there were instructions of this sort was that the cameras fit into some standard (inexpensive?) diving housing. A bit of work, but certainly inexpensive. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: what is ideal lens for photography of mountains
ehm, probably a few kilometers at most. If I make it I'll be at Kala Patar near Everest Base camp!!! ie. I'll be in the Himalaya's, hehehe. I'd say there are two diffenent possibilities for your ideal lens: 1. Just your *best* lens, whatever the focal length (and whatever your definition of best in terms of image quality). or... 2. Your *lightest* lens! Everest base camp is over 17,000 ft altitude and every ounce makes a difference when the air is that thin. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: what is ideal lens for photography of mountains
I'm always on the look out for a wide ANGEL especially one with money!!! GRIN - Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 10:16 AM Subject: Re: what is ideal lens for photography of mountains Tiger Moses wrote: Were are going to assume a wide angel is what you desire, Hi Tiger ... Why would you assume that? -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Buying a Nikon doesn't make you a photographer. It makes you a Nikon owner. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
OT: MAX demonstration on kodak.com
has anyone seen this? Here's url: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/researchDevelopment/productFeatures/pictures.s html? This is just plain manipulative IMHO. Show someone an underexposed photo, and then one properly exposed. For anyone who can spell ISO and knows the difference between 100 and 400, this is just wrong. Kodak might not be intentionally "dumbing down america", but they sure are telling some creative lies to get a product off of the shelf. Brent (listed name here was formerly bigtoeno2 in case someone cares)
In the interests of sharpness
Thanks to everyone who answered my enquiry about using other makes with Pentax lenses. I do appreciate all the help and advice. Further to this matter of focussing, there is something which has puzzled me a lot for some time now. I note on this (and other) discussion lists that there is often a pre-occupation with wide aperture lenses. To-day f1.8 and f1.4 is commonplace. When I started out about 40 years ago f2.8 was considered a pretty good lens speed and f1.4 was not even dreamed about from what I remember. So I have over the years been very much the sort of person who adhered to the f8 and be there idea. Even though I now have f1.8 lenses on my Spotmatics and (golly) even an f1.4 on the F3 I very seldom ever used them until fairly recently and then the results were pretty disappointing. How do people manage to shoot at f1.8 or even wider and still get their image sharp? For goodness sake, even my 105mm f2.8 has a depth of field at f2.8 and close up (about 2 metres) of less than 12 cm! With my 55mm lenses at f1.8 if I don't focus exactly spot-on perfect dead accurate the results are not acceptable. I have taken endless head-and-shoulders portraits by available light at f1.8 or f2 to find to my chagrin that the tip of the nose is sharp but the eyes JUST out of focus, or else the ears look great but pity about the rest of the face. What is wrong here? How do the available light men (and women) get their overall sharpness at big f-stops? Excepting for the fact that large aperture lenses make lovely bright images to focus by (I like) what good is their large aperture for actual shooting? Conrad F. Samuels Kirstenhof SA - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: pentax-discuss-digest V1 #764
Tonghang Zhou writes: Surely if you are using Pentax lenses, which are what really matters, then it should be OK? On Mon, 21 May 2001, Conrad Samuels wrote: What is the feeling about my using these cameras with Pentax lenses (they are M42 mount cameras) when submitting pictures to the PUG? I know that in open months concessions are made but the rules seem a trifle ambiguous when discussing Pentax equipment or lenses (quote) for the other months. Perhaps things got more restrictive in the last year while I was absent from the list, but the rule used to be that it was a gallery for PDML members who were using Pentax-brand (or compatible) equipment. I noticed the (new to me) official Pentax-equipment restriction when I submitted my June submission. Since even Pentax-brand equipment is not all Pentax design and manufacture, I assumed the restriction could legitimately be interpreted to mean Pentax-mount (or, perhaps more general, Pentax-compatible) equipment. That would allow me and others to mix and match whatever equipment they have to take pictures without having to worry about whether or not they got a piece of Pentax-brand equipment somewhere in the mix to satisfy PUG submission. After all, I prefer to see the gallary as primarily a way to share images taken by the members, and also as a mild demonstration of what kinds of images can be captured with Pentax and Pentax-compatible equipment, not as having evolved into some sort of elitist club. Is this an unreasonable interpretation? If so, then we should probably nix use of any Pentax-OEM'd equipment too since that stuff won't be a show of what can be accomplished using Pentax-engineered equipment either. later, patbob ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: MAX demonstration on kodak.com
Not everyone is a master of the basics. Simple examples like these were what showed my daughter (just a snap shooter with no intentions of being anything else) why all her mall photos were washed out (no flash) or had dark backgrounds (flash) and that high speed film was what she needed. Now she thinks about what film she wants to use where. The examples are seriously basic, but frankly, you'll have to point out the lie to me, because I don't see it. Note that I removed the offensive html from the original post before replying. Regards, Bob... --- In the carboniferous epoch we were promised perpetual peace. They swore if we gave up our weapons that the wars of the tribes would cease. But when we disarmed they sold us, and delivered us, bound, to our foe. And the gods of the copybook headings said, 'Stick to the devil you know.' --Rudyard Kipling From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] has anyone seen this? Here's url: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/researchDevelopment/productFeatures/pictures.s html? This is just plain manipulative IMHO. Show someone an underexposed photo, and then one properly exposed. For anyone who can spell ISO and knows the difference between 100 and 400, this is just wrong. Kodak might not be intentionally dumbing down america, but they sure are telling some creative lies to get a product off of the shelf. Brent (listed name here was formerly bigtoeno2 in case someone cares) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: In the interests of sharpness
Below... Regards, Bob... --- In the carboniferous epoch we were promised perpetual peace. They swore if we gave up our weapons that the wars of the tribes would cease. But when we disarmed they sold us, and delivered us, bound, to our foe. And the gods of the copybook headings said, 'Stick to the devil you know.' --Rudyard Kipling From: Conrad Samuels [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks to everyone who answered my enquiry about using other makes with Pentax lenses. I do appreciate all the help and advice. Further to this matter of focussing, there is something which has puzzled me a lot for some time now. I note on this (and other) discussion lists that there is often a pre-occupation with wide aperture lenses. To-day f1.8 and f1.4 is commonplace. When I started out about 40 years ago f2.8 was considered a pretty good lens speed and f1.4 was not even dreamed about from what I remember. So I have over the years been very much the sort of person who adhered to the f8 and be there idea. Even though I now have f1.8 lenses on my Spotmatics and (golly) even an f1.4 on the F3 I very seldom ever used them until fairly recently and then the results were pretty disappointing. How do people manage to shoot at f1.8 or even wider and still get their image sharp? For goodness sake, even my 105mm f2.8 has a depth of field at f2.8 and close up (about 2 metres) of less than 12 cm! If the eyes (and nose) are in focus, all else will be forgiven. With my 55mm lenses at f1.8 if I don't focus exactly spot-on perfect dead accurate the results are not acceptable. Yup. I have taken endless head-and-shoulders portraits by available light at f1.8 or f2 to find to my chagrin that the tip of the nose is sharp but the eyes JUST out of focus, or else the ears look great but pity about the rest of the face. It's a hazard. What is wrong here? How do the available light men (and women) get their overall sharpness at big f-stops? I never expect overall sharpness. Just sharpness where it's needed. This is another (of many) reasons why my yield is only about 2 acceptable shots out of 36. Serious lack of focus in the background can often be a blessing. Excepting for the fact that large aperture lenses make lovely bright images to focus by (I like) what good is their large aperture for actual shooting? Even if you're going to shoot at f/2.8, focusing at a fast stop makes the focus more accurate and more sure. If your negative is going to be on the thin side, even an extra half stop makes for a little less grain and a little more contrast - however slight. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
EB: here's one for Texas
I think that someone from Texas should jump all over this one. http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1239107821 Brent from Auburn, AL
Re: Cameras on bicycles
My P5 with winder ME II has been bouncing around in the (padded) carrier bag on the back of my bicycle for years as I have explored the bumpy back roads of downeast Maine, and it will be doing the same thing again this summer, if I ever get around to replacing my tires. IMO, my P5 looks very cheap and plasticky, but over 14 years of use and abuse it has never let me down and never needed service. That camera is indestructible. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: MAX demonstration on kodak.com
- Original Message - From: Brent Subject: OT: MAX demonstration on kodak.com has anyone seen this? Here's url: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/researchDevelopment/productFeatu res/pictures.s html? This is just plain manipulative IMHO. Show someone an underexposed photo, and then one properly exposed. For anyone who can spell ISO and knows the difference between 100 and 400, this is just wrong. Kodak might not be intentionally dumbing down america, but they sure are telling some creative lies to get a product off of the shelf. Kewl. I had to install something called Macromedia Flash to view that. Gotta disagree with you on this one Brent. Showing the difference between the results you can expect with a slow film and a faster film under identical circumstances is called education. FWIW, I use a similar dog and pony show to show people why they should be using a faster film with their little point and shoot cameras at the lab. There are a lot of people out there who couldn't care less about film speed. A lot of customers buy product based completely on price point. They buy a 29 dollar camera because it's the cheapest one hanging in the blister pack alley, then compliment their foolishness with 100iso film, because it's the least expensive. They aren't intentionally being dumb, no one has bothered to educate them, and they haven't seen fit to educate themselves on the subject. William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
PUG Submission guidelines was:Re: pentax-discuss-digest V1 #764
- Original Message - From: Patrick White Subject: RE: pentax-discuss-digest V1 #764 Tonghang Zhou writes: Surely if you are using Pentax lenses, which are what really matters, then it should be OK? On Mon, 21 May 2001, Conrad Samuels wrote: What is the feeling about my using these cameras with Pentax lenses (they are M42 mount cameras) when submitting pictures to the PUG? I know that in open months concessions are made but the rules seem a trifle ambiguous when discussing Pentax equipment or lenses (quote) for the other months. Perhaps things got more restrictive in the last year while I was absent from the list, but the rule used to be that it was a gallery for PDML members who were using Pentax-brand (or compatible) equipment. I noticed the (new to me) official Pentax-equipment restriction when I submitted my June submission. Since even Pentax-brand equipment is not all Pentax design and manufacture, I assumed the restriction could legitimately be interpreted to mean Pentax-mount (or, perhaps more general, Pentax-compatible) equipment. That would allow me and others to mix and match whatever equipment they have to take pictures without having to worry about whether or not they got a piece of Pentax-brand equipment somewhere in the mix to satisfy PUG submission. After all, I prefer to see the gallary as primarily a way to share images taken by the members, and also as a mild demonstration of what kinds of images can be captured with Pentax and Pentax-compatible equipment, not as having evolved into some sort of elitist club. Is this an unreasonable interpretation? If so, then we should probably nix use of any Pentax-OEM'd equipment too since that stuff won't be a show of what can be accomplished using Pentax-engineered equipment either. I ran a survey last summer. The consensus was that since it was the PENTAX users gallery, PENTAX equipment should be used. Even then I could not bring myself to put in a hard equipment restriction. It is impossible to enforce within the confines of the PUG. Please reread guideline #9, which deals with equipment usage. from: http://pug.komkon.org/general/submit.html 9. Themed month gallery images should have been created with Pentax camera and/or lens. Images created with non Pentax equipment are welcome in the open category months. ©PUG 2000 This guideline is far less restrictive than what the general consensus at the time indicated. So far, I have not turned away an image for lack of Pentax content. The guideline is deliberately ambiguous so as to encourage use of Pentax equipment for gallery submissions, without actually making it a requirement. If it makes you feel better, at least one of my own submissions was taken with a Tachihara camera and a Nikkor lens. I did use a Pentax spotmeter however. I am far less concerned with guideline #9 being adhered to than #s 1, 2, 5 , and 7. William Robb PUG maintaner dude - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Clue re next limited lens
At 01:53 PM 5/21/01 -0400, you wrote: The Limited lenses are intended to compete directly with Leica. Leica has always had a 90mm. Furthermore, someone on the list mentioned some sort of converter that had a 1.2x magnification that IIRC was supposed to allow Pentax SLR lenses to be used on Leicas (no not in production). The limited lenses are all about 1.2x off from more common focal lengths. Of course you are free to believe that 1.2 factor on all the limited lenses is just a coincidence. I don't see Pentax trying to compete with Lieca with the limined lenses, it seems more like they are building lenses for a niche market other SLRs makers are mostly ignoring. And if they wanted to compete with Lieca why not release 50mm, 90mm, instead of focal lengths 1.2x off? And are you talking about Leica SLRs or rangefinders for this adaptor? I would think an adaptor to the rangefinders would be nearly useless, as there would be no linkages to the focus aids in the viewfinder, leaving just the distance scale to focus with. Plus a large SLR lens would probably block the viewfinder. So that leaves Leica SLRs. Anyway such an adaptor would take away part of the uniqueness of these lenses - the odd focal lengths. The problem with your 120 or 150 is that Pentax has made lenses of those focal lengths and none of the Limited lenses so far have been of common focal lengths. Also all the Limited lenses so far have a focal length that end in odd numbers. So I seriously doubt your prediction. I meant 120-150mm, as in a range of focal lengths. There were even rumors of something like a 124mm Macro a while back. If there actually is to be a 23mm Limited lens it will undoubtedly be far more compact and sturdily built as well as more expensive than the FA 24/2. Therefor, it would not be a direct competitor. Better built, definently. But a 23mm Limited lens can not be much smaller than the FA 24mm unless they choose something slower than a F1.8 or F1.9 opening. Fast lenses need big glass, and you aren't going to be able to cram a 23mm F1.9 lens into a small package. On the other hand I called Pentax nuts for making the 43mm F1.9 limited, as it would compete too closely with the cheaper and faster 50mm lenses, but I was wrong. Todd - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Cameras on bicycles
Yeah! I have been reading this list for months and there I finially see a mention of my state. Where have you been in Maine? I love it here. I don't think I will ever run out of beautiful scenes to shoot. Caleb - Original Message - From: Steve Sharpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 2:00 PM Subject: Re: Cameras on bicycles My P5 with winder ME II has been bouncing around in the (padded) carrier bag on the back of my bicycle for years as I have explored the bumpy back roads of downeast Maine, and it will be doing the same thing again this summer, if I ever get around to replacing my tires. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: what is ideal lens for photography of mountains
At 08:16 AM 5/22/01 -0700, you wrote: Tiger Moses wrote: Were are going to assume a wide angel is what you desire, Hi Tiger ... Why would you assume that? Seriously? Well, he's going to, didn't say he was going near. Its like I dont say I going to the Rockly mountains and stop at Oklahoma/Colorado border. If he used a 200mm and was near the mountains, he might not get enough extra to amke it a scenic picture. He gets a peak, or a bolder or a snow cliff. I assume he already has a camera, and assume he probably has a 50mm, so what else would he near for the mountains = something wider. Now for the TRIP he migh tbenefit from 100+mm lenses for the people and other photo ops, but to photograph mountains, a wide angle is the most common application I would presume, never said it was the only. Fair assumption? - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
PZ-5
Does anyone on this list know anything about the Pentax PZ-5? (Not the ZX-5, but the Euro-version-only PZ-5, which was never sold new in the States.) I'm thinking of getting one, but I do have some questions I'd like to ask first before I do so. I'm mostly concerned about the changable options. (Such as spot metering instead of CWt'ed, rewind film leader out or in, etc...) On the PZ-1(p) these can easily be changed by the camera owner. But specs for the PZ-5 say these options there can only be changed by an authorized factory rep. So what happens if the body I get is not set up with the options I prefer? Who could change it, as Pentax of America says this is not their camera and they won't support it? (They won't even supply me with a manual for it; it's as if for them this camera doesn't exist. Which I find a bit strange...) Any responses here would be greatly appreciated. I did notice on the Pentax owners list that one person there owns a PZ-5. If that person is still around perhaps they could clue me in on this camera. (And, of course, anyone else who's also knowledgable about it...) Remember though, it's not the ZX-5, or the ZX-5n. It's PZ-5. Peace, Skip - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: PZ-5
Boz's site has a lot of info on the PZ series, including the PZ-5. This link will take you right to where you want to be: http://phred.org/pentax/k/bodies/Z-PZ/index.html Live long and prosper William Robb - Original Message - From: dosk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: May 22, 2001 1:07 PM Subject: PZ-5 Does anyone on this list know anything about the Pentax PZ-5? (Not the ZX-5, but the Euro-version-only PZ-5, which was never sold new in the States.) I'm thinking of getting one, but I do have some questions I'd like to ask first before I do so. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: what is ideal lens for photography of mountains
- Original Message - From: Tiger Moses Subject: Re: what is ideal lens for photography of mountains At 08:16 AM 5/22/01 -0700, you wrote: Tiger Moses wrote: Were are going to assume a wide angel is what you desire, My wife was a wide angel once. Then her thyroid started acting up. HAR!! Wheatfield Willie - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: In the interests of sharpness
Conrad Samuels wrote: How do people manage to shoot at f1.8 or even wider and still get their image sharp? Very, very carefully! For goodness sake, even my 105mm f2.8 has a depth of field at f2.8 and close up (about 2 metres) of less than 12 cm! Someone tell us what the number is for the 85/1.4. It's ridiculously small. With my 55mm lenses at f1.8 if I don't focus exactly spot-on perfect dead accurate the results are not acceptable. I have taken endless head-and-shoulders portraits by available light at f1.8 or f2 to find to my chagrin that the tip of the nose is sharp but the eyes JUST out of focus, or else the ears look great but pity about the rest of the face. What is wrong here? How do the available light men (and women) get their overall sharpness at big f-stops? Excepting for the fact that large aperture lenses make lovely bright images to focus by (I like) what good is their large aperture for actual shooting? Well...like anything else it's a toss up. Due to the DOF, not everything is going to be in focus, but you learn quickly which parts matter. For portraits, generally it's the eyes. Many people, myself included, like a really short DOF when doing portraits. A short DOF gives a photo a certain 'look' that sometimes works. Also, it helps to obscure stuff you're not really interested in showing. Here's some examples: http://www.bigdayphoto.com/tom/sweetgum-fall.html http://www.bigdayphoto.com/tom/pug2.html http://www.bigdayphoto.com/tom/ollie-corner.html http://www.bigdayphoto.com/tom/oranges.html tv - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: In the interests of sharpness
Conrad, A lot of photographers use a tripod even in bright light when sharpness is important. If you want maximum sharpness in your images a tripod (or other strong support) is a must. I've seen 11x14 BW prints from FA* lenses that look like they were taken by a medium format system. A sturdy tripod and careful development can do wonders! Alexander Grigolia - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: AF 2.8 35-70mm
Thank you Todd for your reference. I checked the site, did put in fresh batteries and used my multimeter in resistor mode and guess what? This beatiful heavyweight works! Regards, Wim van Heugten - Oorspronkelijk bericht - Van: Todd Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Verzonden: zaterdag 19 mei 2001 23:31 Onderwerp: Re: AF 2.8 35-70mm Yes, this lens only autofocuses on the ME-F, but it will work on a MF lens on other Pentaxes. I suggest you take a look here, for information on the contacts and how to test the focusing: http://www.phred.org/pentax/k/extras/K-mount/Kf.html From what I have heard it's not a great performer, plus it's bulky and hard to focus manually. Todd At 11:55 PM 5/17/01 +0200, you wrote: Hi, I'm back since a long time (beginning of this year). Can anybody help me with the following: I just got myself the first AF lens from Pentax the 35-70mm. It was cheap while the former owner considered it as the AF is not functioning. AFAIK the AF does only work when the lens is mounted on the MEF camera. Is that true? If yes, how can I test if the AF is working without having the MEF available? What is the value of such a lens if it is in good working order and undamaged? Regards, Wim van Heugten - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Winder LX Accesory Question
Hey gang, One more question about the Winder LX . . . Does anyone know the name of the specific part that connects between the Winder LX and the Remote Battery Pack? I know what it's supposed to look like, but don't know the name . . . I need to order the part from Pentax CO, and want to know ahead of time what it's name is . . . unless anyone has the cord for sale? Oh, BTW, the cord should have 3 pins on each end of it . . . Thanks in Advance, Illinois Bill - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: MZ-3/5N Multiple Exposure.
I have not done this, I just know somebody who did. BTW they were never able to get it loaded exactly the same way either, but they were close enough to get usuable images. I do my double exposures using a Ricoh body that has that feature built in. Todd At 09:42 AM 5/22/01 +0530, you wrote: On Mon, 21 May 2001, Todd Stanley wrote: The only way I know of is to shoot some frames a roll, rewind, retrieve the leader, and shoot the same roll again. You have to be very exact while loading or it will be off, plus it will confuse the heck out of most labs. Todd Hi Todd! I think that will be difficult to do. I hope that you have tried the above mentioned trick with your camera body (If I can correctly remember it is ZX-M). Best regards, Ayash Kanto. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: what is ideal lens for photography of mountains
The answer is simple: A very expensive lens you don't have. Feeling enabled? Todd At 04:04 PM 5/22/01 +0200, you wrote: Hi all, this autumn I'll be gaing to Nepal and I want to get some nice pictures of the Himalaya. Can anyone advice me on what focal length lens to use? bye, Frank - - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Winder LX Accesory Question
Hi, Battery Cord LX --- Bob mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tuesday, May 22, 2001, 10:13:33 PM, you wrote: Hey gang, One more question about the Winder LX . . . Does anyone know the name of the specific part that connects between the Winder LX and the Remote Battery Pack? I know what it's supposed to look like, but don't know the name . . . I need to order the part from Pentax CO, and want to know ahead of time what it's name is . . . unless anyone has the cord for sale? Oh, BTW, the cord should have 3 pins on each end of it . . . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Chromogenic BW Film
erm, I think you have misunderstood something. I have never used XP2. The conclusions I stated were based solely on Ilfords technical article that YOU posted. The difference in grain for different exposures would be evident whether you shot a whole roll or a single frame at a different rating. Therefore mixed rating films is as valid as re-rating an entire roll. I do not say whether the results are any good or not. My posting was based on the fact that you said 'It should be noted that nowhere in the data sheet could i find anything that said exposing a roll using different film speeds was acceptable or good practice.' I merely pointed out that while the article was much more technical than this, that is precisely what it said. Even if you/we dont like the effect on grain, Ilford says the grain improves with rerating. I dont want to get into pedantism, and based on what you and others have observed, I seriously doubt their claims, but I can see the theory, as presumably you can based on your post regarding Kodaks claims for Tri-X. Rob Brigham -Original Message- From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 21 May 2001 18:05 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Chromogenic BW Film Rob Brigham wrote: Surely the phrases 'extremely wide exposure latitude of XP2' and 'No matter which film speed is chosen, standard C41 processing is recommended.' confirms that the exposure lattitude of the neg is wider than paper so over or under exposing a single frame by a stop or two can be corrected at the printing stage with no noticeable effect as the final print will always be 18% grey by default. That's nonsense - at least to me. There are differences in grain and negative density (as specifically stated in Ilford's description). That, to my eyes, produces a noticeable effect. Also, see Mark's comments. Other noticeable effects. While a film may have a wide exposure latitude, varying exposures will produce different results. It can't be helped. Whether or not the results are acceptable, or even noticeable, depends on how critical you are and whether these differences are meaningful to you. They are to me. Perhaps Mark I are a bit more critical than you when it comes to judging print quality or seeing the results of different exposures. The only effect would be the change in characteristic of the grain etc, Agreed. You are contradicting yourself g. Of course, etc may cover a pretty broad range of characteristics. Which other characteristics were you thinking of when you wrote that? -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ... there is no point in pressing the shutter unless you are making some caustic comment on the incongruities of life - Phillip Jones Griffiths - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT: MAX demonstration on kodak.com
Well, for people with PS cameras, this stuff does hold true, though most PS, except really cheap ones, should be able to expose #1 correctly independent of film speed. On #2 most PS cameras would fire the flash to keep the shutter high enough to avoid shake. #3 is just plain silly, as I don't know of any PS camera can open up that wide, plus it's interesting how they say Depth of Focus instead of Depth of Field. #4 is classic PS camera results, as these cameras with their pinhole zooms will turn out results like the before picture. On a SLR I would say open the lens up to get a faster shutter, as it's obviously quite stopped down. #5 holds true for any camera when you use flash, though I would say both pictures look like crap. But what they are implying isn't true, what really happened is the fast film allowed for more of the background, which is lit by ambient light, to show up. The last one is the best though, as both pictures are underexposed, just the first one is worse than the second. I would tell the person taking the picture to get their fingers off the front of the flash. And what's with the extra set of legs on the left side? Todd At 01:03 PM 5/22/01 EDT, you wrote: has anyone seen this? Here's url: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/researchDevelopment/productFeatures/pictures .s html? This is just plain manipulative IMHO. Show someone an underexposed photo, and then one properly exposed. For anyone who can spell ISO and knows the difference between 100 and 400, this is just wrong. Kodak might not be intentionally dumbing down america, but they sure are telling some creative lies to get a product off of the shelf. Brent (listed name here was formerly bigtoeno2 in case someone cares) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: what is ideal lens for photography of mountains
Yes, indeed! How about the FA 20-35mm f/4. A really great lens for shooting the grandeur of mountain landscapes. Len --- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Todd Stanley Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 4:38 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: what is ideal lens for photography of mountains The answer is simple: A very expensive lens you don't have. Feeling enabled? Todd At 04:04 PM 5/22/01 +0200, you wrote: Hi all, this autumn I'll be gaing to Nepal and I want to get some nice pictures of the Himalaya. Can anyone advice me on what focal length lens to use? bye, Frank - - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Fast Zeiss 85s in M42?
I found these curiosities under Pentax Screw Mount at http://www.midwestphoto.com/WVCollectibles.html 75 f1.5 Biotar (coated), 9 $569 85 f1.8 Zeiss Pancolor w/case caps, 9+ $375 Those are U.S. dollars. Does anyone know how they measure up against the SMC Takumar 85/1.8? - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Clue re next limited lens
Well Bill, Since someone here on the list said he actually knows someone who got to use the 23mm for a week, I would guess there is at least a prototype in existance. Me? At this point I would be suprised to see a limited that did not maintain that 1.2x ratio. But, of course, my actual knowledge of what Pentax is doing is about the same as most other members on the list, pure speculation, so you have as much of a chance as I do of being right. --Tom William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Tom Rittenhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: May 21, 2001 11:53 AM Subject: Re: Clue re next limited lens If there actually is to be a 23mm Limited lens it will undoubtedly be far more compact and sturdily built as well as more expensive than the FA 24/2. Therefor, it would not be a direct competitor. --Tom I bet it's a 19mm William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Chromogenic BW Film
Interesting idea, Bill. While I used to use XP-1s variation in contrast, higher speed in contrastier lighting, I never thought of doing so rigorously as would need to be done to approximate the zone system. I don't see why it wouldn't work with a little serious testing. --Tom William Robb wrote: Tom inadvertantly brings up the beauty of the chromogenics. They are the films that allow the roll film camera shooter to actually utilize a meaningful zone system of exposure. Stay with me on this for a moment. I hope I can make some sense here. The traditional BW shooter has 2 controls at hand. We use exposure and development to hit a specific contrast range. That contrast range is the one which prints well on the paper we like to print on, more or less. So, within this framework of 3 variables, we go to work. So, what happens when we lock in another variable. The contrast range is already locked, now we lock the development with the use of the C-41 process (Has anyone actually tried to push XP-2?? Just curious). So, what we need is a wide latitude film with a characteristic curve that will give a different contrast range throughout it's exposure slope. For example, it may have a somewhat steep slope at the lower end, flattening out as the exposure increases. This is what the chromogenics do. More than once, I have gone off on a rant about exposure ranges and film latitude. If the scene fits within the film's usable range, then a usable ( not neccesarrily optimized ) print can be made from the resulting negative. Dye image films have an extraordinary usable range. They don't block up the way silver image films do. XP-1 had a range in exess of 10 stops. I bet XP-2Super and T-400CN have longer ranges. The average scene is less than 7 stops, and is closer to 6 stops. Go measure some scenes if you don't believe me, but make sure your meter is colour blind, or else your measurements are useless. Tri-X (the favourite film of the PDML, according to Albano's survey) has a very long toe with a moderate slope. What this means it that Tri-X has a lot of exposure latitude. It also means that Tri-X responds well to development controls. I don't know if this means anything in context, but it just came to mind. Anyway, we were talking about exposure controls. The idea is to fit a particular exposure/development combination into a given scene. Since the chromogenics seem able to give a variable exposure slope depending on exactly where the exposure range sits on it, it is possible to use meaningful zone system controls with them. Sometimes we forget that St Ansel invented the Zone system when emulsions were thick, and had somewhat short exposure ranges. Now, emulsions are thin, and have very long ranges. Now, rather than having a long toe, we have a long shoulder. The Zone system user can work with it, though it is not a replacement for a darkroom and custom film processing and printing. I just wish the emulsions were harder and more permanent. William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Cameras on bicycles
At 2:45 PM -0400 5/22/01, T Caleb Fauver wrote: Yeah! I have been reading this list for months and there I finially see a mention of my state. Where have you been in Maine? I love it here. I don't think I will ever run out of beautiful scenes to shoot. I'm just outside of Ellsworth. Great cycling and photography area...down around Surrey, on to Blue Hill, east to Toddy Pond... Of course Mt Desert Island is close by, as well, which is superb for photography and hiking. We also have a small apartment down in Biddeford (southern Maine), as my wife is in med school there, so I'm starting to explore that area as well. Next week we're going way downeast and into New Brunswick for a few days. It will be my first trip to NB, and you can be sure that the cameras will be with us! :^) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Clue re next limited lens
On Tue, 22 May 2001, Tom Rittenhouse wrote: At this point I would be suprised to see a limited that did not maintain that 1.2x ratio. 31mm = 1.107x (from 28mm) 43mm = 1.229x (from 35mm) 77mm = 0.906x (from 85mm) A 1.2x ratio taken from 28mm, 35mm and 85mm lenses would give focal lengths of 34mm, 42mm and 102mm respectively (or would be taken from lenses with focal lengths of 26mm, 36mm and 64mm respectively), so I'm not sure where you took that number from, unless it's derived from the 43mm Limited ratio. chris - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Pocketable Camera
I'm looking for a small, pocketable, full-frame 35mm camera, perhaps a bit smaller than the Canon GIII. Requirements are: Minimal features (built-in meter that can be overridden would be nice) Quiet, unobtrusive operation Minimum shutter lag - prefer focal plane shutter w/up to 1/1000 No pop-up flash, red-eye reduction, etc. Good build quality No autofocus Any suggestions? -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ... there is no point in pressing the shutter unless you are making some caustic comment on the incongruities of life - Phillip Jones Griffiths - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: MAX demonstration on kodak.com
I agree that it's educational (I saw the slide show and nothing else). But what was it educating? That you need MAX 400 to get these results? They never really talked ISO, they only said see low speed film, now see MAX 400. It was as if MAX 400 was the solution. What does low-speed mean? What does 400 mean? What does MAX mean (probably nothing). Why not use 800 in these cases? Tom C. (disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing) :-) Gotta disagree with you on this one Brent. Showing the difference between the results you can expect with a slow film and a faster film under identical circumstances is called education. FWIW, I use a similar dog and pony show to show people why they should be using a faster film with their little point and shoot cameras at the lab. There are a lot of people out there who couldn't care less about film speed. A lot of customers buy product based completely on price point. They buy a 29 dollar camera because it's the cheapest one hanging in the blister pack alley, then compliment their foolishness with 100iso film, because it's the least expensive. They aren't intentionally being dumb, no one has bothered to educate them, and they haven't seen fit to educate themselves on the subject. William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: MAX demonstration on kodak.com
What a load of RUBBISH! You are exactly right. Why not just say that you should use the right film for the conditions? Not that this "new" film will solve your problems. I noticed the term "Depth of Focus" was used as opposed to "Depth of Field". Is this an acceptable term? If not, does there marketing department understand basic photography? Or was it a deliberate attempt not to use the normal terminology? And to beg the question... If a person with a camera didn't already know this, do you really think they would take the time to research the issue on Kodak's website? It reminds me of my phone company's long recorded introduction when you call their customer service number. Itkindly lets you know thatyou can now report phone line troubles using their corporate web-site. Ha ha... My phone doesn't work so I guess I'll just log on using my analog modem and let them know... Tom C. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 11:03 AM Subject: OT: MAX demonstration on kodak.com has anyone seen this? Here's url: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/researchDevelopment/productFeatures/pictures.s html? This is just plain manipulative IMHO. Show someone an underexposed photo, and then one properly exposed. For anyone who can spell ISO and knows the difference between 100 and 400, this is just wrong. Kodak might not be intentionally "dumbing down america", but they sure are telling some creative lies to get a product off of the shelf. Brent (listed name here was formerly bigtoeno2 in case someone cares)
Re: Pocketable Camera
- Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: May 22, 2001 5:29 PM Subject: Pocketable Camera I'm looking for a small, pocketable, full-frame 35mm camera, perhaps a bit smaller than the Canon GIII. Requirements are: Minimal features (built-in meter that can be overridden would be nice) Quiet, unobtrusive operation Minimum shutter lag - prefer focal plane shutter w/up to 1/1000 No pop-up flash, red-eye reduction, etc. Good build quality No autofocus Any suggestions? Contax G2 William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: PZ-5; Boz's site no help there....
Skip, The PZ-5 had some reduced functions, but probably used the same chip as the PZ-1p (or PZ-1?). In that case, the factory would have to reset it. I remember Pal saying something about the 645n or new 6x7 having the capability of doing 1/3 stop bracketing (or 1/2 stop?), but the factory had to make the adjustment for you. I would imagine the same thing here. Regards, Bob S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well, thanks for responding with info about Boz's site, which I'm well familiar with. But it's no help. Actually, the spec's I'm questioning below are based on data I originally got from Boz's site. It's there where he (Boz) states that the PZ-5 camera's changeable options, (unlike the PZ-1), can only be changed by an authorized factory rep. (And that's what I'm questioning...) If no one in the PDML does not know anything about this camera, I guess I'll have to try Pentax America again. If they won't help me, perhaps they can give me a foreign Pentax contact who can...? Skip - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
