Re: Motor Drive for Ricoh KR-10
From the instruction manual of the KR-10... The RICOH XR WINDER-1 can be used with the KR-10. By operating the shutter release button on the winder, it can be used for rapid sequence photography at approximate 2 frames per second (at shutter speed of 1/125 sec.) By just setting the selection switch you may choose frame-by-frame shots or rapid sequence shots according to your needs. You can for instance capture the rapid movement in sports, or the fleeting facial expressions that make your picture-taking a more enjoyable experience. Currently being auctioned at ebay... http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1244326755 That'll be 5 bucks... :^) Jim - Original Message - From: James Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 8:38 PM Subject: Motor Drive for Ricoh KR-10 Can anyone tell me about and/or what motor drives will work on a Ricoh KR-10? James - 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: Flash for Z1p
I have a non-original TTL flash (30 guide number) for my Z1p. If I use it together with the built-in flash (14 guide number), is it equal to 44 guide number? The equation is: SquareRoot(30*30 + 14*14) = 33 regards, Alan Chan _ 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: Dismembering ZX body
Ok. I got a broken SF-10. Mount matches dimensions of ZX-M perfectly on the face. I removed the mount from the SF-10. Easy. Lifts right off. Then ... I try to take the mout off the ZX-M. It's ok until... it won't lift off the area where the pins are located. Does it need -- rotated, flexed, shifted ... ??? Anyone taken apart a ZX/MZ body before? (The goal is to put the metal mount onto the M. Though all K mounts look the same, most are not interchangable. I don't think the SF-10's mount will fit on the any MZ/ZX bodies. Besides, the MZ/ZX-M are completely made of plastic, I doubt there would be any benefit to use a metal mount (the contact pins won't fit anyway). regards, Alan Chan _ 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: Spotted on eBay
Damn, he doesn't ship internationally, now I am missing out on this hot buy, a one in a life time change to get a advanced professional camera like this. I will forget about getting a LX or MZ-S now, those have only one finder. Frits Or the Acronymic design. Puts OSHA's new standard to shame. Chris From: Norman Baugher [EMAIL PROTECTED] Not to mention the detachable DELUXE flash!! Norm http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1243254729 - 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: June Commentary: Eduardo Carone Costa Junior
My suggestion to crop was only intended to correct the symmetry of the two sides. If you look at the photo, you'll see the two arch shapes on each side are almost identical. However, the area on the right is slightly wider and its midpoint appears to be just a slight amount lower. If you were to rotate the picture one degree or maybe even just half a degree counterclockwise (in Photoshop) and then crop just a slight amount to make the two arches equal, it would be perfectly symmetrical. This isn't critical, but to my eye, something that is almost symmetrical seems to beg for perfection. Again, it's only my subjective opinion. Paul Eduardo Carone Costa Júnior wrote: PAUL STENQUIST wrote: Eduardo Carone Costa Junior: Orange Dome I found this image quite compelling. I like the geometric patterns and the symmetry. The pattern displayed on the dome interior is interesting. It seems to suggest a sun or even a Sun God. It resembles some Mayan images I've seen. I'm not surprised that Eduardo had trouble scanning this photo. The extreme highlights in the windows combined with the subtle lighting of the interior surfaces make for a difficult situation for both film and scanner. One window highlight has burned out a section of the interior surface at the lower left. I might have patched that small area in PhotoShop, although I realize that some would consider that excessive tampering. I might also have cropped the image just a tiny bit and rotated it a degree or so to perfect the symmetry. Nevertheless, a very nice photograph. Thank you for your kind words. As I mentioned some days ago, I'm less than pleased with that photo. When taking it, I was confronted with the K series metering inability to cope with fast film and long exposures --- I only discovered what was happening later, here at the PDML, reading some posts about this topic... If that were not enough, I also had some difficulties trying to scan it to my old flatbed scanner and compressing it to comply with PUG rules. I hope I can do better, next time I get the chance to photograph the interior of that church... The orange color was actually caused by a second row of windows at the inner part of the dome... I assume they are made from colored glass. I wonder if you could explain why do you think a little more cropping would be better? I'm just curious and would like to learn something more about cropping, because, sometimes, I have difficulty when deciding how much cropping is ok :-) Thanks again, Eduardo. - 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 .
PUG Commentary: Frank Theriault
Frank Theriault, Gingerbread I'm a big fan of Victorian architecture, and Frank's rendering of gingerbread detail invokes a warm and fuzzy feeling. I'd love to pull up a chair on that porch and spend an afternoon sipping iced tea -- or, better yet, a good single malt. From a technical perspective, I like the balance of light and shadow. The little bit of light that spills over into the shadowed portion of the shot is a nice touch. The framing appears to be a good choice in terms of illustrating the gingerbread detail without turning the shot into just another picture of a house. Lens choice seems to be just right. The slightly wider than normal 35 gives the shot a sense of expansiveness without excessive distortion. Nice work. Paul Stenquist - 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: Snap-in Focus in MZ/ZX-7?????
Original Message - From: "Jarosaw Brzeziski" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Snap-in Focus in MZ/ZX-7? I am sorry, but you must be wrong: if you use a non-AF lens, no AF body in the world is capable of giving an AF-assist light. I didn't mean AF-assist light - I mean a sign in the viewfinder + beep announcing that my subject is in focus... Artur PS: Please use correct English - light is uncountable, so you cannot use "an" before this word... - 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-S is comming to Poland
- Original Message - From: "Jarosaw Brzeziski" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MZ-S is comming to Poland Being Polish I beg you to use correct English: Sorry for that... Artur - 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: June Gallery Comments
Collin Brendemuehl wrote on PUG this months [ Collin, that's a great job commenting on every one of them! There were lots of images] [...] Arch/Whale by Frantisek Vlcek, Czech Republic Definitely eye-catching. Did it take you long to find the right angle to shoot? It looks like a tough one to compose. Thanks. And yes, it did take me longer to compose, and still I am not satisfied with the composition - I left too little free space on the left side. I should have made more composition bracketing, now I know :( Frantisek - 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: Snap-in Focus in MZ/ZX-7?????
- Original Message - From: Douglas E Harmon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Snap-in Focus in MZ/ZX-7? He's possibly confusing the terms AF Assist for AF Confirmation. A common confusion on the list. Actually I am:) Sorry for that... A note about the Snap-in, it doesn't work that great for low contrast subjects... Hmmm, perhaps this is the point, since I shoot a lot in darkness... And since I have owned my M 50/2 for a short time, I haven't been able to figure it out by chance:)) My fault - apparently I haven't known my camera well enough. Sorry and thanx Artur - 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-S IR film
Bill D. Casselberry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My opinion, FWIW --- just pick up any older functional body and use it for IR, as there is no need for fancy metering or any other camera features to achieve great results w/ IR film. In fact, automation is almost counter-productive. You will do just fine using exposure parameters explained in the film box and any body that holds the film flat is light-tight. Some bracketing and note-taking will quickly home in on excellent images. A few months ago Outdoor Photographer had a feature on a photographer who specialized in infra-red. He had some great shots in the magazine. Most of his work was done with a K1000. -- Mark Roberts - 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: Wide Angle Lens Dilemma
Len wrote: Remember that polarizers on wide angle lenses can give strange results because of the angle of view, especially on scenics or landscapes showing a lot of sky ... this is correct - you will get shades of blue-darkening across the wide expanse of sky = rather distracting ugly However, if you shoot w/ your light coming from behind you a strong skylight filter (#1b) will also tend to richen the blue of the sky - and do it evenly ;^) Bill - 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: More scanning successes
Dan Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Seriously, I'm quite impressed. I think you ought to put up a web page when you are done and embarass the hell out of Kodak with it. Hope you saved some of your before slides so you can do some side by sides. I agree. It sounds like a product that has great potential bus has had serious problems in execution. Put up a web page about the problems and your fixes. Incidentally, I went running this morning with two friends who both work at Kodak in digital imaging, but neither of them knows (or had even heard of) the RFS3600 scanner. Different groups within the company. I was hoping to have a word with someone with some involvement in this product. I'll keep asking around. -- Mark Roberts - 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 .
The new FA 28-105 f/3.2-4.5 - First impressions
Dear list members, I got the FA 28-105 f/3.2-4.5 AL (IF) yesterday and here comes the votes from the swedish jury (oups sorry, an inter-euro joke). I won't comment on optical performance, since I haven't shot a single roll with it yet. * Design and build quality It's incredible small! It's amazing that Pentax has suceeded in designing a 28-105 lens with a 58mm filter thread and f/3.2 aperture! My Tokina 28-105 was a f/3.5-4.5 lens with 62mm filter thread. It's almost of the same size as the FA 28-80 f/3.5-4.5 - or just little bit bigger than the tiny 28-70 f/4 AL. It do extends quite much when zoomed out to 105, but at 28 it's hard to believe that this is a 28-105 lens. The zooming collar has the same design as on the 27-70 f/4 or the new 24-90. It's slightly heavier to turn than the 28-70, but it's more optics to move also... It's much lighter than my Tokina and balances very well on my MZ-bodies (5N and 10), even without the FG battery pack (which was a must with the Tokina attached). It has a plastic outside, but the lens mount is metal. It lacks the focusing window of past FA-lenses. Instead the distance info is printed on the outside of the focus ring (as on the FA28-80 f/3.5-5.6 and 24-90). The aperture ring is wide and easy to turn, much more pleasant than the tiny and stiff aperture ring on my Tokina. Sadly, the aperture numbers are not engraved on the ring - they're just printed and the paint may scratch off with time (but only time will tell). Overall, the lens feels solid. Nothing feels loose, nothing rattles. The focusing ring feels more damped than on the 28-70 f/4. I rate the build quality slightly higher than the 28-70 f/4. The lens hoods clicks easily into place and feels very good. When removing a plastic cover underneath, one gets a window so you can turn, for example, a polarizer without removing the hood. (something that's impossible with my Sigma AF 24 f/2.8 and it's clip-on hood). * Autofocus It sounds! Perhaps this has to do with the more damped focusing ring than the FA 28-70 f/4 or the Tokina 28-105. Maybe the sound will lower itself with time. But straight-out-of-the-box the whirr-sound is unpleasant. The AF speed seems slightly slower than the 28-70 f/4 (in bright conditions, this may change at lower light levels where the wider aperture of the 28-105 is likely to help the AF), but it feels quite secure. * Final conclusion A well made and compact lens that's well suited to travelling. I hope it performs as good as it looks. Mounted to my MZ bodies, the lens looks very nice indeed. I like it's silvery-finish with black lettering. It cost me 3085:- SEK and I bought it from Scandinavian Photo. Best regards, -- Roland Mabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.algonet.se/~rolamo - 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: Wide Angle Lens Dilemma
On 5 Jun 2001, at 15:43, Patrick Genovese wrote: First, let me thank all who replied to my post for the great feedback. Since I like using filters esp my circular polariser a non rotating front element is highly desirable. I know that the sigma 20mm and the 17-35 both have non rotating front elements. But don't couldnt find the relevant info on the Pentax 20mm and 20-35. Hi Patrick, The front of the Pentax SMCPA20f2.8 (including filter thread) doesn't rotate when focussing. It is a great lens (great contrast, high resolution and good flare resistance) but it is expensive (even used). 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: Filters for the SMCP-F Fisheye Zoom 17mm-28mm f/3.5-4.5
The fish-eye zoom has filter thread (sort of) but no rear gelatin filter holder. I strongly suspect that filters may cause vignetting with this lens; at least at the 17mm setting. Haven't really tried... Pål - Original Message - From: Eric Platt To: PDML Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2001 11:13 PM Subject: Filters for the SMCP-F Fisheye Zoom 17mm-28mm f/3.5-4.5 I'm wanting to get a wide angle zoom for landscapes and other such things and I came across these two lenses. The only thing at the moment that is stopping me is I love to use filters and I like the fisheye affect. Is it possible to get this in one package deal for a zoom? I was just wonderingabout the SMCP-F Fisheye Zoom 17mm-28mm f/3.5-4.5andif there is filters that are made for this lens. I am pretty sure that it has no internel filters but perhaps small filters to attachto the back maybe? If any one who owns this lens or who is familiar with it can get back to me I would appreciate the extra information. The other lens I am looking at getting if the filters for the 17mm-28mmcan't be done withis the SMCP-FA 20-35mm f/4 AL Is this a favorite for anyone out there in the pdml world?
Re: Stiff aperture rings
- Original Message - From: Pål Jensen Subject: Stiff aperture rings I've noticed that the aperture rings on my A 35/2.8 and A 24/2.8 are getting progressively stiffer. You almost need to use force on the 24mm. Is this normal..any remedies... I've had that happen on a couple of lenses. Unless you are mechanically gifted, send em off for repair. The lubricant used in the aperture mechanism does dry out over time. I have successfully fixed this problem on M series lenses, but the only time I tried to fix an A series, it blew up on me. I still have some of the parts on my desk, but I fear the poor thing will never work again. Collin Brendemuehl posted this a while back. He gives very lucid instructions for the procedure. Aperture Ring Maintenance. Precautions: Clean, flat area to work. Preferably not above carpet. Additional tools: Large plastic bag, magnet. Often the aperture ring will be jammed or jerky because 1) a spring under the A button is broken 2) the ring itself is stretched from use The aperture ring has a slot location on it where, when reached, frees the A pin. It can easily fly out when reached. The A pin component is actually 4 parts: #1 Spring #2 Pin #3 Base, sits under the spring and has a tab that extends inward to the interior of the lens. #4 Brace, the pin slides in place on this tab. Its arm reaches down into the aperture ring where a tab keeps it from coming out until the ring is turned to the release point. Removal of the aperture ring can be accomplished by: Step 1: Turning it until the pin/spring assembly comes out. It may fly out. You may want to do this inside a plastic bag with a magnet present to catch the parts after they're released. Step 2: Lift the ring off. You may encounter some resistance in various positions. Turn it carefully until you reach a place where it lifts off easily. Underneath the ring is a small bearing that hits the detents for the aperture settings. This bearing can be easily misplaced because it usually has a good amount of grease on it. Keep track of it, and the spring behind it, should there be a lack of grease and they fall out when the unit is disassembled. Also be certain to keep track of the A button. It's also easily lost. If a spring is broken, it can be repaired by: (a) 1) Drill out the spot where the melt mount dislodged 2) Fill in the hole with a small piece of plastic 3) Melt the plastic into place like the original. (b) 1) Drill out the spot where the melt mount dislodged 2) Screw the spring into place with a tiny screw. --This may be difficult to find as it needs to be fairly flat and fit under the aperture ring and still allow it to turn freely. Reassembly: When reassembling I use a thin piece of paper or Scotch tape on the detent bearing and springs so that the ring does not push against them and they break free or spring free and get lost. Slide the aperture ring into place with the A pin notch in place for remounting the pin assembly. Be certain to pull out your paper/tape spring and pin holders as needed so that you don't have extra material inside the ring. A Pin replacement: Then, with a tweezer put the base in place under the A pin spring location. Next, set the A pin spring into place. Then, holding it down with your finger, turn the aperture ring to lock it into place. RECOMMENDATION: THere's enough broken old 50/2 lenses out there for nothing, or a buck or two. Get one and experiment with it. You'll learn and have spare parts that you may need for the real repair job. (Like springs and bearings!) IDEA: If you want to make your camera Really Versatile, leave the detent bearing out. You'll have continuous aperture, just like those TLR and LF cameras! (Might be fun or useful to do with that second, extra lens.) Collin Brendemuehl William Robb Remember, the LX Gallery is coming up. Please see: http://pug.komkon.org/LX_Gallery/LX_Submit.html for more information. - 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: Filters for the SMCP-F Fisheye Zoom 17mm-28mm f/3.5-4.5
Sigma 17-35mm f2.8-4. Not for ya if you like to have filters on them. At most it will take is a UV or remove it for a CPL. With CPL and Lenshood, slight vigetting but I still love the extra 3mm and what i can get for 1/3 the price for a lens comparable to the canon equivalent. My 2 cents, Jason At 03:13 PM 6/9/2001 -0600, you wrote: I'm wanting to get a wide angle zoom for landscapes and other such things and I came across these two lenses. The only thing at the moment that is stopping me is I love to use filters and I like the fisheye affect. Is it possible to get this in one package deal for a zoom? I was just wondering about the SMCP-F Fisheye Zoom 17mm-28mm f/3.5-4.5 and if there is filters that are made for this lens. I am pretty sure that it has no internel filters but perhaps small filters to attach to the back maybe? If any one who owns this lens or who is familiar with it can get back to me I would appreciate the extra information. The other lens I am looking at getting if the filters for the 17mm-28mm can't be done with is the SMCP-FA 20-35mm f/4 AL Is this a favorite for anyone out there in the pdml world? Snail:Pobox 56-86, Taipei, Taiwan ROC Email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel:02-27136283, 02-27699236 HP:0930636190(Roc), 98322170(Sg) Aren't your pictures worth a Pentax ?
Re: Spotted on eBay
I saw one of these (or something very similiar) on the street recently. What I saw was certainly large enough to be more than 35mm format, and looked a lot more impressive than the picture suggests. If nothing else the owner/carrier looked the part - a bit like one of those French extreme sports participants who windsurfs in Antartica or base-jumps in Manhattan. Anyone have a spec. - 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: Filters for the SMCP-F Fisheye Zoom 17mm-28mm f/3.5-4.5
You can't use filters at all with the 17-28mm fisheye zoom. the front has a little build in hood and no facility to attach a filter, there is no rear filter holder either. It's still a fun lens. - MCC At 03:13 PM 6/9/01 -0600, you wrote: I was just wondering about the SMCP-F Fisheye Zoom 17mm-28mm f/3.5-4.5 and if there is filters that are made for this lens. I am pretty sure that it has no internel filters but perhaps small filters to attach to the back maybe? If any one who owns this lens or who is familiar with it can get back to me I would appreciate the extra information. - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Kalamazoo, MI [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - - - - - - - - - Photos: http://www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - -
OT: Garage Sales Heaven
Sometimes they're close. Today some goodies for anyone interested. The man passed away a year ago @ 96, and so left behind some treasures that his family is parting with. Mostly from the 50s early 60s, by all appearances.. Here are some things available. I'd rather some artist or budding artist in the PDML get 'em first. Some old toning chemicals Spot Kit. Crystal etching pen. Engraver's Photographer's Porportion Calculator (slide rule with marked uses) His journal of techniques, esp. for toning. Also some old Kodak docs. Burk James Luxor photo timer (can't tell if it's working or not) Flat head (about 6 round) for wood tripod. With brass fittings. Rec-O-Cut turntable, originally from a kit. With Shure (202 or 212) arm cart. Vacuum tubes -- TV ham. ( some other goodies that I'm not parting with, like an old, compact enlarger focusing aid) Colllin * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * - 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: Filters for the SMCP-F Fisheye Zoom 17mm-28mm f/3.5-4.5
Well you can tape filters in place :-) Actually on closer inspection what looks like filter threads aren't... Pål - Original Message - From: Mark Cassino To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2001 12:04 AM Subject: Re: Filters for the SMCP-F Fisheye Zoom 17mm-28mm f/3.5-4.5 You can't use filters at all with the 17-28mm fisheye zoom. the front has a little build in hood and no facility to attach a filter, there is no rear filter holder either. It's still a fun lens.- MCCAt 03:13 PM 6/9/01 -0600, you wrote: I was just wondering about the SMCP-F Fisheye Zoom 17mm-28mm f/3.5-4.5 and if there is filters that are made for this lens. I am pretty sure that it has no internel filters but perhaps small filters to attach to the back maybe? If any one who owns this lens or who is familiar with it can get back to me I would appreciate the extra information. - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Kalamazoo, MI [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - - - - - - - - - Photos: http://www.markcassino.com- - - - - - - - - -
MZ-S gripes
Some rethoric questions: - Is it a good idea to have the multiple exposure function on a switch that can easily be set accidentally? - Whats the theory behind having the exposure bar oriented vertically when exposure is controlled by horizontal movement; left - right? Pål - 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: Filters for the SMCP-F Fisheye Zoom 17mm-28mm f/3.5-4.5
- Original Message - From: Pål Jensen Subject: Re: Filters for the SMCP-F Fisheye Zoom 17mm-28mm f/3.5-4.5 Well you can tape filters in place :-) Actually on closer inspection what looks like filter threads aren't... How big is the rear element on that lens? The reason why I ask os because Pentax does have a rear filter holder (gels only) on the 45mm f4 (6x7). Is it possible to put one, or something like it onto the rear of the lens? It is really just a flat black painted piece of spring steel. William Robb Remember, the LX Gallery is coming up. Please see: http://pug.komkon.org/LX_Gallery/LX_Submit.html for more information. - 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-S gripes
Pål Jensen wrote: Some rethoric questions: - Is it a good idea to have the multiple exposure function on a switch that can easily be set accidentally? Not sure, but I'd think you'd notice the motor drive not advancing if you accidently set it. - Whats the theory behind having the exposure bar oriented vertically when exposure is controlled by horizontal movement; left - right? Maybe they decided they needed a horizontal orientation for the focus point selection display, and couldn't fit the exposure bar along the bottom too. I didn't think about it until you brought it up, so I guess it didn't bother me. 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: The Beatles and an Asahi Pentax camera
There is often a advertising deal made by producers with vendors. That is why so often everyone in a movie is driving the same brand of car. The auto maker has cut a deal with the producers. One such deal that I remember is a comedy of Coca Cola trying to break into the Soviet market. In the vary last scene the lead in the story gets a soda from a machine and holds it up showing that it is a Pepssi Cola. I understand that Pepsi paid a million bucks to have that scene in the movie. --Tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Saw the film A Hard Day's Night in the cinema the other day (remasterized copy). All around the movie is Ringo Starr carrying a black and beauty Asahi Pentax screwmount camera. In fact, in a moment, Paul's grandfather tells him to enjoy the life, to go outside, and what he does is to go out to take pictures. The camera appears a lot, with the logo showing very clearly. Maybe a subliminal advertising pop method? : - ) - 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: Flash Diffusers Geekness
Under current international copyright law someone always owns the copyright. Just who that is seems to vary from country to country as Bill Robb and I discovered a while back in a rather long discussion on this list. The Library is not violating copyright, no more than you are when you lend a friend a book. Once you buy a copy of a copyrighted item you own that copy, you can do what ever you please with that copy except make more copies. --Tom aimcompute wrote: But if the work is not copyrighted, how can it be copyright infringement? From what I understand the work belongs to the corporation not the individual(s). In that case one could argue that taking a picture of virtually anything is copyright infringement because it is someones handiwork... Just a question I have wondered about... Public Libraries have to be the biggest, most blatant violators of the spirit of the copyright laws. I appreciate them, but the authors artists are potentially losing billions of dollars because of this sort of communism. Tom C. - Original Message - From: Nicholas Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 1:04 PM Subject: RE: Flash Diffusers Geekness --- Peifer, William [OCDUS] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does this sound like it may work? Any other suggestions? It sounds like something along the lines of copyright infringment, even though there is no artist's name it is still someone's handiwork. Nick __ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.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 . - 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: Copyrights was: Flash Diffusers Geekness
Well, Tom, there is the law and there is reality. It would cost far more than it is worth to sue people for making copies for their own use, not to mention the difficulty even finding out about it. If you run off a couple of thousand copies to sell then you are probably in trouble. The rub that copyright owners (especially software copyright owners) never seem to get is did they lose a sale or would the (c) violator just have done without their product is they had to pay for it. We all have to make such decisions for ourselves, I guess. --Tom aimcompute wrote: Just to keep this thread going... I know this has been discussed over and over again... and that many of you are familiar with the law, where I am not. In my mind at least I (could be rationalizing, I admit) there is a difference between a technical copyright violation and being immoral. I guess I say this because, for one, if there was not room for interpretation in the law, there would not be the hundreds of infringement lawsuits, some won by the copier. I think a lot depends on what is done with the copy and how the original artist feels about it. I go off topic here somewhat (what's new?). Technically, if I make a copy of a CD and use it for myself, that is unauthorized copying of copyrighted material, right? I don't write Paul McCartney or Apple records when I want to make a second copy of an album for my personal use.I don't think this is wrong to do and would do it w/o hesitation. I think the law believes this is fine as well, regardless of the copyright warning. I suppose we could split hairs and wonder if it would be wrong in the instance that my wife wanted one in her vehicle and I wanted one in mine. We are two separate people so I suppose I should have bought it twice. The copy in her car is a bootleg and I'm a renegade (I secretly wonder if I AM a renegade). If I copy that CD for someone else and give one to them, depriving the original artist (regardless of how wealthy they are) of royalties, I think that is technically wrong. Of course the artist and recording companies know that happens and do they care? I don't know. It's possible that by introducing a friend to an artist, the result may be more sales for the artist, though having lost one sale, because of the copy. If I copy the CD and then try to sell the copies, then I should go to jail. Now what if I lend a CD to a friend, knowing that they are going to copy it? Am I the lawbreaker or am I an accessory? I don't know how I feel about that. What if instead, the friend went to the library and checked out the CD? What if they then recorded it at home? Are they breaking the law? Is the library? Did the library KNOW they were going to copy it? What does the library THINK people do with it when they take it home? Do I, as a taxpayer, and therefore indirectly a partial purchaser/owner of everything in the library, have the right to make that copy? I don't know, I could argue that I do... I again say that the very existence of libraries violates the SPIRIT of the laws intentions in a major way. Thousands and hundreds of thousands of sales, millions (when all instances of borrowing are combined), are lost because people have free access to the same instance of copyrighted material. One can wonder whether those borrowers would have purchased the item themselves, if they did not have easy access to it through a public institution, created and funded by the same government that creates and enforces copyright laws. Should I feel sorry for the artist when I go to the library? The fact remains that I am depriving the artist of a sale, whether I borrow it and read it, or whether I borrow it and copy it, right? It seems we live in a very dichotomous society. Making a copy is illegal, but industry government, bends over backward to sell products and provide opportunities to make that copying as easy as pie. Libraries have copy machines. They also have signs saying Don't copy material that is copyrighted. I think we'd all be hardpressed to find anything in the library that WAS NOT copyrighted, though I am sure there must be something. I suppose that if I hung a photo in an exhibition, or let's say it's my photo hanging on a restaurant wall, I would prefer to sell the photo, as opposed to have someone come take a picture of it. I would probably be flattered if someone came and took a picture. In some sense, though, just hanging the picture on the wall is providing hundreds of people the opportunity to experience the work without having to personally pay for it. Let's say I had a business card in the picture frame, hoping to sell copies of the picture. OK, THEN I'd really be torqued if I found out the restaurant was letting people take the print out of the frame and go down to their friendly photo lab and make a copy. Getting back more on topic... When the painting in
Re: June PUG comments for M.Lidaka, S.Larson
Jaume wrote: Steve Larson's 'Cinderella's Castle' A really nice idea. The illumination of this castle-toy is perfect for 'night shots'. I have problems with my scanner (HP Photosmart S20) with dark pictures like this one, that is why I guess that the digital conversion of your picture is not 'fair' with the original. I would enhance this picture giving more detail to the darker parts of the castle, showing more of its structure (that's what I guess is better in the original). Maybe slides and their low latitude are too contrasy for shooting this without any other light source. The lights are burned and still there are very dark parts of the picture... just an idea. Fun interpretation of this months theme. Thanks for your contributions, Jaume Jaume, Thanks for taking the time to comment, I do appreciate it. Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California - 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: June Gallery Comments
Collin Brendemuehl wrote: I made a couple earlier, but wanted to do the whole thing this time. My perspective on photographic art: There seem to be two basic kinds of art -- art that evokes feelings and art that speaks. Some that feel seem to have little feeling, while others can make us rejoice or cry at their mere presence. Some that speak only communication details, while others stimulate the mind to greater thoughts. The finer art pieces excel at either of these, and sometimes, but rarely, at both. I'm impressed with how creative everyone got with angles and lighting this month. Hi Collin, It`s really nice of you to take the time to comment on all the images. Thanks! Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California - 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 .
Some of my Grandfather Mountain stuf online
http://www.robertstech.com/g_father.htm A few select items from my trip to North Carolina. -- Mark Roberts - 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: Medium Format to 35
Well, it boils down to the fact that the size of the lens has to do with the size of the image it has to make. When the image size has to get bigger, the lenses get larger, they become harder to make without defects, and more expensive. That's also why TV cameras and some digitals can have these ridiculously fast zoom lenses with huge ranges - because the sensor is so tiny compared to a 35mm frame. Sure you could build a lens like that to cover a 35mm frame, but it would be the size of a 55 gallon drum and cost a million bucks. Todd At 07:15 PM 6/9/01 +0200, you wrote: William wrote: This is just plain wrong. Your reasoning is logical, but is drawn from an incorrect assumption. Exactly what assumption is incorrect? Anyway, the fact remains that most MF and LF lenses are significantly worse than comparable 35mm system lenses for whatever reason. The Pentax FA645 75/2.8, which is tested as equal or better than the 80mm Carl Zeiss for the Hasseblad - hardly a piece of crap by MF standards, is performing in a way that can only be compared to the cheapest consumer zoom for the 35mm system. Jostein Øksnes example with the A645 120/4 Macro, a lens that tests better than Carl Zeiss 120 Macro for the Hasselblad, turned out as significantly worse than the Pentax-K 135/2.5. The differences were so big that they were clearly visible on a scanned image on a web page. Pentax doesn't make many MF lenses that compare well to their K-mount lenses and apparently neither does Carl Zeiss. Some of us have learnt the hard way that MF lenses on 35mm camera is only a last resort. I intended to base my system on using my MF lenses on my K-mount body but have dropped that idea. Jostein (he can probably correct me if my memory is off base) was of the same opinion but I convinced him that the A645 120/4 Macro might be good enough to give it a try. He borrowed(?) from the distributor the said lens (heralded as one of the best MF lenses ever BTW) and tried it on a K-mount body and found that the results was below par and presumably returned the lens. Its widely believed out there that larger format lenses are generally worse (all thing equal) than comparable lenses for smaller formats. It is said that lenses for the smallest format have the highest resolution (like the lens for the Minox). I'm not saying this belief is true but it would have been nice with some data that can explain the visible inferiority of MF lenses on 35mm bodies that some of us clearly and undisputably observe. Pål - 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: Medium Format to 35 (WAS: Digital MZ - MR 52 projet still in the air ???)
On 9 Jun 2001, at 19:47, Pål Jensen wrote: When designating equal lenses (MF and 35mm) I was thinking of overall performance. Eg the two lenses projects the same information content (total number of lines for instance) but on circles with different size. I think that this is where our perspectives differ, in my dialogue I was referring to the absolute LPPMM on film, ie referring to comparison of the absolute resolution a MF lens and 35mm lens of the same FL over the same area of film. I'd put the Pentax 43f1.9 LTD up against the Mamiya 7 43f4.5 (virtually symmetrical optical design) on on the same strip of film any day, and I'd say that you would have a difficult time deciding which was best (maybe the 24x65mm image would give the M7 the edge :-) By the same token I would guess that the Pentax 45mmf4 for the 67 wouldn't stand a chance up against the Pentax 43mm LTD, I found that it was far less resolute than the SMCPA50f1.2 in my testing. 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: MZ-S gripes
--- Pål_Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some rethoric questions: - Is it a good idea to have the multiple exposure function on a switch that can easily be set accidentally? I would say no. - Whats the theory behind having the exposure bar oriented vertically when exposure is controlled by horizontal movement; left - right? Perhaps, over and under exposure? Nicholas Wright __ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.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: MZ-S gripes
On Sun, 10 Jun 2001 00:50:01 +0200, Pl Jensen wrote: Some rethoric questions: - Is it a good idea to have the multiple exposure function on a switch that can easily be set accidentally? Possibly not. - Whats the theory behind having the exposure bar oriented vertically when exposure is controlled by horizontal movement; left - right? There are quite a lot of dyslectic people in the world. Many only slightly, but they have to think about which way is left and which is right. Very few (if any) people get confused about up and down. Just my thoughts. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon - 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 .
Recommendations for Light/Flash Meters
Hi Friends, I would like to hear recommendations from you guys out there on the most suitable light/flash meter for me. I have been using the MZ-7 for about a year and would be upgrading in a month or two with the MZ-S. I mainly do outdoor landscape and portrait shots and occasion still lifes. I do both Slides and B W. I sometimes encounter harsh weather conditions in country i am in and the weather hasnt been good recently. So i decided to get one lightmeter that can last me for years to come. I am not a professional but a serious amateur. There is also a possibility of going further into it. I travel a lot and probably need a light meter. Of course there are reviews and places where i can get more information on light meters but i just need to hear comments from you guys before i commit, why? because this list is one of the best i have seen around. if there is need for me to provide more information for you to comment upon, please let me know. Cheers, Jason Kiew - 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:Back-packs for photo gear
Hi Team, I am interested in looking at some photo oriented back-packs to use for both short or extended treks into bush. I need it to be weather proof and have provisions for easily attaching a tripod. I have a brochure on the LowePro AW series packs they seem to fit the bill however I would be glad to hear from listers with experience and other suggestions. 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 .
Pentax spare parts contacts
Hi Team, I need to purchase some spare parts for some of my older A series lenses. The local Australian Pentax distributors have told me that the parts that I am after are no longer available however I suspect that these comments are more likely due to their reticence to enquire about the components. If anyone has a good contact for Pentax parts I would appreciate their contact details. 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: Medium Format to 35 (WAS: Digital MZ - MR 52 projet still in the air ???)
Pål Jensen wrote: Isaac wrote: It's easy, you can't change a lens' illumination angle. Coverage of a lens is defined by its illumination angle, not the size of the circle of illumination. If what you say above is true, I should be able to shoot 8x10 film with my SMC 50mm f1.4, and I can't... The angle of illumination is set by the design of the lens, along with its resolution, distortion, etc... The resolution of a given area inside of the circle of illumination, at a given size (i.e. at a given focusing distance) will remain constant no matter what size of film you project that image onto. If you change the focusing distance (increasing the size of the image circle), the resolution can indeed go down, but for other reasons involving the reproduction ratio... As you point out, the larger formats rarely need to have as high a resolution, so the designers do not put the extra expense into the lenses typically, but it is theoretically possible to design a lens for 8X10 that will have as good a resolution inside of 24x36 as a good 35mm lens. I certainly agree but was not exactly what I meant with my admittedly rather bad example. When designating equal lenses (MF and 35mm) I was thinking of overall performance. Eg the two lenses projects the same information content (total number of lines for instance) but on circles with different size. These lenses will then have the same resolution and be equally sharp on the finished product; eg a 8X10 print. This what I mean with the same quality. An MF lens with the same l/mm as a 35mm system lens can resolve a hell of lot more information in total than the 35mm system lens simply due to the larger area of the MF lens. Or in another way, a MF lens doesn't need the same resolving power as a 35mm lens to appear equally sharp on a reproduction of a certain size. Right, but that's not what the thread is about... I think... We were talking about the lenses, not how much the film can resolve. If you take in the same angle of view in both 35mm and medium format, odds are that the medium format image will contain more information just because of the density of info on the bigger neg. I thought that we were talking about putting a medium format lens on a 35mm body. In that case the medium format lens will resolve the same as it ever did, just over a smaller area. If a lens have a certain l/mm it will be constant regardless of format. But I won't say that l/mm are equal comparable issues when comparing 35mm and MF lenses. For the same angle of view a MF lens and a 35mm lens with the same l/mm the MF lens resolves a hell of a lot more in finished photograph because theres a hell of a lot of more mm's on a MF negative/positive. Hence, whats constitutes a good MF lens is something different than whats a good 35mm lens. But not if they're both on a 35mm body... Once again, you are right about there being fewer resolution demands put onto a medium format lens (for the same amount of enlargement) when taking medium format pictures, but a lens' performance does not decrease just because you switch cameras. A lens will always perform the same weather its on a 35mm camera or medium format camera. Theoretically, if you wanted to see how your MF lens performs on 35mm, just crop out a 24x36 area from the center of your image... This is probably the core of the issue. As you say it is possible to design a LF lens to be equally good as a 35mm but I wonder if it is common or even viable on a consistent basis. No on both counts I'm afraid... I only jumped in because it sounded like you were saying that a lens' performance would somehow decrease just by switching cameras. I think we both agree that in practical terms MF optics just aren't as good over a 24x36 area... Isaac - 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 .
