Re: 6x7 checkup
Bill, Sorry to hear about your parts camera. Doesn't sound like it will win any beauty contests. I just shot a wedding today entirely with my 67II. I have to agree about fitting your hand. The 67II grips are even better than the 67. You can really hold on to the camera well. Then when I picked up my MZ-S, I noticed how it didn't fit my hand quite as well as the 67II. Gotta love that format. Bruce Dayton Saturday, April 27, 2002, 4:48:37 PM, you wrote: WK Hey gang, WK Just got my $78 6x7 in the mail. It looks really beat up, and may WK not have been worth the price, but at least I have a parts camera. I'm WK trying to figure out how to test out the shutter, and everything else. WKCan anyone tell me how to tell if this is a MLU 6x7 or not? What am WK I looking for? WKMirror is stuck in the half-way-up position. No battery (I'm gonna WK go out to get one in a bit). Of course, no lens and no film and no WK prism. WKMy first thoughts? WOW, THIS is an SLR that's PERFECTLY sized to my WK hand. If this camera doesn't work, I'm defininitly going to wind up WK with a 6x7, or possibly 67II that does work. WK Illinois Bill WK - WK This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, WK go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to WK 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 .
zeiss lens for pentax k mount
i haVE a zeiss 28mm f2.8 lens for pentax and the image quality is awesome is thjere other zeiss lenses available for pentax - 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 and MZ-5n
On Sun, 28 Apr 2002, wendy beard wrote: Can anyone tell me of any obvious differences between the MZ-3 and the MZ-5n apart from the top shutter speed being higher on the 3? (and the price, of course) There's the same number of shutter speed marks on the dial, so the addition of 1/4000 on the 3 means that instead of going down to 2s like the 5n does, the 3 only goes down to 1s. That's from memory, but I think it's accurate. The 3 also syncs at 1/125 instead of 1/100. There might be some minor differences in addition to these, but these are the main ones. 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 .
Re: OT (Was: For Dave and Buddy ... )
If you don't want to seem insensitive, don't post insensitive comments ... you come across as a real jerk (I didn't want to appear insensitive, but I had to tell it like it is). Mishka wrote: don't want to seem insensitive (i was sorry to hear about Buddy), but just couldn't help myself Then you cross the Rainbow Bridge together... ...and the poor creature finally follows its owner to hell. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[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: K, A, M macro lenses...
K lenses are generally less common than M and A series lenses. - Original Message - From: Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2002 3:04 PM Subject: Re: K, A, M macro lenses... K and M has a *lot* better build in my view. A has better coating. If the design is the same (check the Boz's site -- I think they are), I can't see why K should be more expensive. well ok, lets say there are 3 100/4 lenses. One k, a, m each. I can understand A being priced at more because of the A feature. But is there a optical quality reason to price the K more than the M ? I can understand rarity factor but that plays only for collectors... - 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 .
LX Screen in MeSuper?
Hi, Just wondering if an LX screen will fit in an MeSuper? i assume the meter would definately be out. Thanks, Paul - 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 .
Barely sorta on-topic-ish if you squint at it just right: my day
I'm a few hundred messages behind at the moment. *Part* of the reason for that is that one band's busy season has begun, and another band got involved in a play. Anyhow, I was on stage (well actually _beside_ the stage, since it was too small to fit all nine of us, and was only a platform a couple inches tall anyhow) at the Southern Maryland Celtic Festival, noticing the occasional flash of a ps and catching glimpses of small digital cameras here and there, when all of a sudden I found myself staring into a HUGE EYE about four feet in front of me. It turned out to be the business end of a Nikon 28-70/2.8, with a funky hood on it, an F100 behind it (with a flip-flash bracket), and a fairly cute photographer behind that. She let me look at her camera afterwards. Now y'all may recall that I like the KX, K2, and H3, and say that the Super Program would be a little small for my hands if it weren't for the grip-thingie on the front of it, but I gotta say that my first impression picking up the F100 was, Hey, isn't this thing a little large? No, I didn't hold it up to my KX to compare, but it did occur to me that I was mentally comparing it to Tom's MZ-S that I'd seen three weeks earlier. I've got to admit that it seems to be a nice camera. We spent a little while talking cameras. She said she'd switched from Nikon to Canon a while back to chase some feature (I *think* it was autofocus speed??) and had recently moved back to Nikon because she wanted digital (her digital camera was in the shop, so she didn't have it with her). She mentioned what a Truly Great Camera the K1000 was, so I showed her the KX. She agreed that Pentax forward and backward lens compatibility between generations was a Very Good Thing, and said trap focus sounded really cool. We bitched about Kodachrome 25 going away. The band had a good set, we sold a bunch of copies of our CD, I hugged friends I don't see often enough, I had a little homebrew (a Scottish heavy ale brewed by the folks of Clan MacAthair; a little on the sweet side (positive attribute in my book) with a distinctly fruity flavour -- I liked it a lot), I got really sweaty and tired, and I got to listen to a bunch of other really good Celtic musicians. And I got to see lots of pretty women in styles of clothing I happen to really, really like. (Hmm. I could edit that line out, but hey, I have eyes and I have certain tastes, and I do rather enjoy seeing folks wandering around in 16th, 17th, and 18th Century Scottish attire.) I burned some film, but my attention was pulled in a lot of other directions most of the time. It'd be a great event to seriously photograph if I didn't have other things I have to pay attention to. That stage was under a tent with the back wall down and the other three walls open. White, so it was a metering issue. When I had some Tri-X loaded, I started thinking that a couple of musicians in another band would make cool silhouettes. Gonna have to see whether any of the frames I shot wind up being good for that. Then there was the ceilidh afterwards, fourteen miles away, which my band was hosting. So this has been a _long_ day for me, and I went and did tiring stuff after I got myself good and tired. But it was a good ceilidh -- people got into it, people danced, other musicians performed, and we ended with a big jam session. Halfway through I even remembered I had an FL-D filter in my bag. (Yeah, I was really awake, uh huh.) A certain flutist decided to run over and start tickling me while I was playing my guitar behind my head. Sheesh! Every try to keep on the beat while being tickled and trying to run away? A challenge. But I've got a gripe about fluorescent lighting other than the colour: I *really* wanted to shoot faster than 1/60. I was tired, and I wanted to use something longer than 50mm (I used the 85/2 there for the most part, but longer would have been better for several shots), so bumping the speed up a couple steps to help out with the camera shake issue would've been nice. *sigh* Of course, the really cool thing to photograph at the ceilidh would have been the Scottish dancing, but I had a guitar in my hands instead of a camera at that point. So that was my day: good music, good company, good audiences, good beer, good weather, photography geeking, some cute shots that I hope I held the camera steady enough for (three and a half rolls), a lot of potential photos I saw but didn't get, a big dose of sweaty exhaustion, and about three and a half hours of driving. And ten hours from now I'll be playing for a matinee performance of that play I mentioned. (The Taming of the Shrew, if anyone's curious. In the first wedding scene -- Act I scene III??? -- Catherine whacks me with her bouquet and knocks me over in the middle of a tune.) So for me 'tis off to bed; to sleep, perchance to ... oh, wait, that's the wrong play, isn't it? ;-) Good night! --
Gallery
http://www.geocities.co.jp/Hollywood-Stage/2802/LeicaPentaxlens.html
==
¥þ±¡²y¤J¡G¥@¬É¬×2002 http://worldcup.sina.com.hk
µ¹»·¤è¿Ë¤Í¶Ç¤WµLÅå³ß¡Ghttp://sms.sina.com.hk
·s®öÅ]ªk¦Ê¦h´Úºâ©Rµ{¦¡--«l·Ç¡I http://ifate.sina.com.hk
-
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 .
Another bargain!
Picked an ESII in not bad condition today, for A$55 including an SMC 50/1,4 and a Vivitar 2x converter, a couple of irrelevant flash guns and a close up lens #4, all in an aluminium case. Unfortunately, the lens had obviously been run over by a truck, as the barrel was oval rather than round. Somebody had tried to make it seem Ok by filling the barrel with oil, losing a couple of retaining screws in the process of disassembling it! I'll only keep it to practice taking it apart! It's all cleaned up now and the question I have is: does anyone know the equivalent current battery to replace the A76's I found in it? John Coyle Brisbane, Australia - 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: Another bargain!
S76, LR44,.. the list of compatible battery is long :) Just take the one you took to store and ask for an equivalent one. On Sun, Apr 28, 2002 at 06:53:17PM +1000, John Coyle wrote: Picked an ESII in not bad condition today, for A$55 including an SMC 50/1,4 and a Vivitar 2x converter, a couple of irrelevant flash guns and a close up lens #4, all in an aluminium case. Unfortunately, the lens had obviously been run over by a truck, as the barrel was oval rather than round. Somebody had tried to make it seem Ok by filling the barrel with oil, losing a couple of retaining screws in the process of disassembling it! I'll only keep it to practice taking it apart! It's all cleaned up now and the question I have is: does anyone know the equivalent current battery to replace the A76's I found in it? John Coyle Brisbane, Australia - 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 .
marker bid of a different kind.... (smc 50mm f1.2)
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1349304300 I remember someone here looking for 50/1.2 and that the last one went for much more than this. I dont need or particularly want this one. Whoever wants it can take it :) (err... not free ofcourse). Is there any place where pdml-ers have noted the lenses they are looking for and the price expected ? That would allow others to help out when they can. - 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 .
[no subject]
someone wrote: K and M has a *lot* better build in my view. A has better coating. If the design is the same (check the Boz's site -- I think they are), I can't see why K should be more expensive. --- Depending on the price range, the built quality of the A-lenses differ. Cheaper lenses (e.g. the A28/2) have plastic barrels while the more expensive ones have metal all-barrels. IMO there is not much difference in the built quality between the all-metal A-lenses and the M-lenses. Enjoy, Alexander Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.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: Thanks Ultra-Wide Anglers! (Now a few more questions...)
Jonathan wrote: #1)I was inspired to save up and hold out (look harder?) for a Pentax K18/3.5 until I learned its true focal length of 19mm. Where did you learn that? Mine seem awfully wide Can it take the Cokin P system without vignetting? The 18/3.5 can take it if you're careful with the alignment of the filter holder. If you cut the two outermost filter slots it should be no problem. #4)Speaking of f22, does anyone know how the A20/2.8 does at this aperture? Stan's lens comment site indicates the K18/3.5 is poor in this respect. The 18/3.5 isn't really that poor (you should have seen the results with my FA645 45/2.8 - that's poor). It suffers from soft corners at F:22. I have not used the 20mm lenses but I doubt that you will find any super wide angle that's not so-so at F:22 due to diffraction. Anyway, I recommend the 18/3.5. It is not that good wide open but it is excellent at mid apertures. A drawback for some will be the very warm color rendition. As you can probably tell, I'm leaning toward aquiring a 15mm ~and~ a 20mm to cover the ultra-wide range. I don't really want to do this, but it seems I have little choice. There dosen't seem to be a decent quality in between lens that can take the place of both. Well, I think the 18/3.5 qualifies... 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: Barely sorta on-topic-ish if you squint at it just right: my day
Hi Glenn, Great tale! More of it I say - and totally on-topic as far as I'm concerned. Sounds like you had a great time, and when the chips are down, that's just the sorta thing i like to read - inspires me to get off my lazy arse and grab the gear :-) Thanks a lot, Cotty PS Did you get the cute nikon girl's number?? ;-) ___ Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out the UK Macintosh ads http://www.macads.co.uk - 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 .
Scanner/format comparison website
Hi folks, This may be interesting to those of you looking at scanners vs format vs quality. It's a Japanese site, but there's enough English to be able to follow it - just: http://www.myalbum.ne.jp/cgi-bin/a_menu?id=fa268931 My sister's bloke pointed it out to me. He's a website designer and photographer (35mm, 645 and 5X4). Here's what he had to say after I quizzed him about scanners for 120 film (WRT the Japanese site): -- Lots of comparisons at http://www.myalbum.ne.jp/cgi-bin/a_menu?id=fa268931 Its a Japanese site where geek has taken same photo on 35mm, 6x4.5 and 5x4, scanned at different resolutions and put onto web site. For 35mm he uses Nikon SuperCoolscan 4000ED, med large format Canon D2400UF and Microtek ScanMaker 8700. All images are jpeg (highest quality) from original scans. The 5x4 scanned on Canon opens in photoshop to be a 227MB file !!!. 6x4.5 opens as 57MB and Nikon on 35mm at 4000 dpi 59MB - hence the Nikon and Canon on 6x4.5 are quite a good comparison - and Canon is shite in comaprison. Another comaprison is between Nikon at 2400 (35mm film) and Canon with both med format at 2400 dpi and 5x4 at 2400 dpi Canon 5x4 is sharpest, then nikon 35mm, then last, by a long way, the med format 6x4.5 on canon or microtek. However, the Dmax of Canon is less than the Nikon and there was, consequently, considereably more noise in the shadows of Canon scans. I am buying this scanner so I can scan my 5x4's but have to accept it is not up to scanning my 6x4.5's. Hence I still have no idea how to scan 6x4.5 and this is a huge problem as I am trying to get my on line photo library up and running. I may have to invest in a med format tranny scanner but I do not know which is any good - still researching. When I need a 6x4.5 scanned i still go to my local printers who have a drum scanner, I've had some awesum 200MB files off him which have been printed well onto large format display inkjet. There are flatbeds that scan trannies OK but they are top of the range microtek, Sintex, Linsoscan etc and all cost mor ethan a Nikon 8000. so why buy one of those - no one needs to scan paper at 2400 dpi - its texture is far too rough ! The ArtixScan 4500t from Microtek wil give adequate quality up to A3+ from 6x4.5 and, for me, would be better than Nikon 8000 as it does 5x4 - but it too is silly price. Nikon 8000ED sounds very good - has a Dmax of 4.2 and scannes at 4000 dpi. Havn't looked into Poloroid or Minolta yet but latter is not well respected and Pol are made by microtek (or visa versa.) HTH Cotty ___ Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out the UK Macintosh ads http://www.macads.co.uk - 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: Re: Re: Sorry OT:No more Buddy
Actually he did Jeff,sorry i forgot to add that. Dave Begin Original Message From: Jeff [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yea, that could be just as painful. Aaron didn't feel sorry about your cat? Bummer. Jeff. - Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail - 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: For Dave and Buddy ...
Thanks for sending that Shel.Very nice. Dave Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail - 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: Kodak Royal Gold 1000
I was hoping to try some this spring but its not available at the 2 stores i buy film from anymore.Only the RG 100-200 and 400 Dave Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail - 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: Scanner question
I've been using the HP ScanJet 5470 for a number of months now, and I really like the scans. It does a good job on slides and negatives 2400 x 2400, and for a relatively inexpensive scanner (less than $300), I think it does an awesome job. - 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 (Was: For Dave and Buddy ... )
Yeah and she didn't take long on the list to make my kill file as well. On Saturday 27 April 2002 10:33 pm, Shel Belinkoff wrote: If you don't want to seem insensitive, don't post insensitive comments ... you come across as a real jerk (I didn't want to appear insensitive, but I had to tell it like it is). Mishka wrote: don't want to seem insensitive (i was sorry to hear about Buddy), but just couldn't help myself Then you cross the Rainbow Bridge together... ...and the poor creature finally follows its owner to hell. -- Kenneth Archer, San Antonio, Texas [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: Another bargain!
Take your pick: 357, Type J, 228, 10L14, Rw22, RW42, G-13, G-13F, WL14, SR44W, 7, 541, 8008, D76, EPX76, F76, 576, GP76, MS76H. RS76, K576. On Sunday 28 April 2002 03:53 am, John Coyle wrote: Picked an ESII in not bad condition today, for A$55 including an SMC 50/1,4 and a Vivitar 2x converter, a couple of irrelevant flash guns and a close up lens #4, all in an aluminium case. Unfortunately, the lens had obviously been run over by a truck, as the barrel was oval rather than round. Somebody had tried to make it seem Ok by filling the barrel with oil, losing a couple of retaining screws in the process of disassembling it! I'll only keep it to practice taking it apart! It's all cleaned up now and the question I have is: does anyone know the equivalent current battery to replace the A76's I found in it? John Coyle Brisbane, Australia - -- Kenneth Archer, San Antonio, Texas [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: For Dave and Buddy ...
This is so beautiful it made me cry. Thank you for posting these comforting words. It's so sad to lose a beloved pet. My condolences to Dave and his family on their loss of Buddy. I lost my cat, Gus, a couple of years ago at age 2 due to a congenital kidney problem. But then, along came Francis, an orange tabby just like Gus, who really needed a permanent home and found one with us. While he is not Gus, he really filled a void for us. KL - 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: Re: Barely sorta on-topic-ish if you squint at it just right: my day
Cotty,i think he said it was 28702.8VBG Dave Begin Original Message From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] PS Did you get the cute nikon girl's number?? ;- ) Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail - 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: Re: Another bargain!
Duracell #303/357 should do it.Also replaces the LR44.The are not expensive,usually under $3.00 Can at Home Depot Dave Begin Original Message From: Nitin Garg [EMAIL PROTECTED] S76, LR44,.. the list of compatible battery is long :) Just take the one you took to store and ask for an equivalent one. Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail - 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 WON!!! at Ebay
Subject: Re: I WON!!! at Ebay - - Original Message - From: Cotty Subject: Re: I WON!!! at Ebay Does anyone ever snipe when there's no bids on an item?? g As much as I hate to have to admit it, I've taken to sniping in almost every situation. I'd lost a couple of things that I really wanted by someone who bumped it up by $1 at the last second, and that's when I decided to start sniping. And since you can get snipes for free, well it doesn't cost me anything (since you get free ones when someone signs up to get their free ones!). I've found that even when I only snipe on things, you can pretty much count on snipe bids at the end for anything really good. And I also learned early on that bidding on something attracts attention to it. So yes, I'd rather wait until the end and snipe...even if there are no bids on it. Dan Kirsch - 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: Re: MZ-3 and MZ-5n
Brendan.Did you put a grip on yours,or do they come with one.Thats why i backed off on the 5n,felt to small. Dave Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail - 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 (Was: For Dave and Buddy ... )
Mishka's comment about the rainbow bridge did make me smile. I think it was only offered in jest. Let's be honest, the rainbow bridge is a wee bit over the top. A bit of levity in response was not totally inappropriate or insensitive. Paul Ken Archer wrote: Yeah and she didn't take long on the list to make my kill file as well. On Saturday 27 April 2002 10:33 pm, Shel Belinkoff wrote: If you don't want to seem insensitive, don't post insensitive comments ... you come across as a real jerk (I didn't want to appear insensitive, but I had to tell it like it is). Mishka wrote: don't want to seem insensitive (i was sorry to hear about Buddy), but just couldn't help myself Then you cross the Rainbow Bridge together... ...and the poor creature finally follows its owner to hell. -- Kenneth Archer, San Antonio, Texas [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 . - 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 .
sniping (was: Re: I WON!!! at Ebay)
William Robb wrote: Does anyone ever snipe when there's no bids on an item?? g Absolutely! Someone on the list recently published a URL to a study confirming that once a first bid has been placed, an item will draw more bidders. I've found this to be true, and for this reason often lurk until the final moments. As a seller, I haven't been very savvy, setting a wide difference between my starting price and my BIN price. The wide disparity has only encouraged buyers to avoid the BIN. Last week I was shopping for an MH-RA67 metal hood, the hood used on the 85/1.4 PKA and the 135/4 Macro in the Pentax 67 (or is it 645)? It sells for $54 at BH. There were three on EBay; two had BINs at $40. Bidding on all three began at $15 or $20. One auction would end on the 26th, the second on the 27th, the third on the 29th. A history search showed that the hood tends to linger unsold at $30 and $25. I thought about bidding $40 without BINning, hoping to get it for 40 or less. But one BIN had disappeared, and bidding on another was up to $26.50. I didn't want to spend the workday ahead worried whether I'd get one for less than the $40 I might have had. So the day before it closed, I nabbed it for $40. There was also a convenience factor: Among the three, it alone let me pay online for free. (I could pay online via BidPay for one of the others, but there's a $5 charge.) And shipping was just $4, versus $6 for the other two. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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:
On 28 Apr 2002 at 3:46, Alexander Krohe wrote: Depending on the price range, the built quality of the A-lenses differ. Cheaper lenses (e.g. the A28/2) have plastic barrels while the more expensive ones have metal all-barrels. IMO there is not much difference in the built quality between the all-metal A-lenses and the M-lenses. Both the the A28/2 that I sold and the one that I have currently have all metal engraved barrels, focus ring and aperture rings and are not inexpensive. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.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: OT (Was: For Dave and Buddy ... )
Let's be honest, Paul - *you* think Rainbow Bridge is over the top. Many people find it warm and touching. To poke fun of someone's sadness, or how they deal with grief or that sadness, is, as Mishka said, insensitive, and in so saying he/she/it knew it might offend or upset some people. Rainbow Bridge has been around for many, many years. It's helped unknown numbers of people get through the loss of their pets. IMO, it's no more over the top than some religious rites and rituals, and far less over the top than many. Paul Stenquist wrote: Mishka's comment about the rainbow bridge did make me smile. I think it was only offered in jest. Let's be honest, the rainbow bridge is a wee bit over the top. A bit of levity in response was not totally inappropriate or insensitive. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[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: Thanks Ultra-Wide Anglers! (Now a few more questions...)
On 27 Apr 2002 at 21:22, Jonathan Donald wrote: #1)I was inspired to save up and hold out (look harder?) for a Pentax K18/3.5 until I learned its true focal length of 19mm. That seems so close to 20mm, that I might as well just get the A20/2.8 which is [somewhat] cheaper, easier to find, and faster (but not as wide as I wanted). Does anybody know if the A20/2.8 is ~truly~ 20mm,... or is it 21mm or 22mmish? Can it take the Cokin P system without vignetting? Well the measured FL of the FA20f2.8 at the photodo site is 20mm if this is of any help? #2)How does one bodge a gelatin filter to the rear of a K or A 15mm/3.5? Has anyone ever tried to have the built in filters changed out at a repair shop? Thought about changing the filter sets in my 15f3.5, 16f2.8 and 28f3.5shift but decided that the money would be better spent one the new digital SLR :-) #4)Speaking of f22, does anyone know how the A20/2.8 does at this aperture? Stan's lens comment site indicates the K18/3.5 is poor in this respect. Elsewhere I remember reading that the K/A 15mm/3.5 is a bit soft wide open but sharp as hell down to minimum aperture. Does this reflect the experiences of the lucky PDMLers who own these lenses? Never use the A20f2.8 at f22 as the DOF is pretty broad unless you're at the minimum focus distance. The A15f3.5 is pretty sharp at f5.6. As you can probably tell, I'm leaning toward aquiring a 15mm ~and~ a 20mm to cover the ultra-wide range. I don't really want to do this, but it seems I have little choice. There dosen't seem to be a decent quality in between lens that can take the place of both. The combo of the A20f2.8 (at around US$375) and A15f3.5 (At around US$750) would be quite costly compared to the 18f3.5 (at around US$450). I haven't used the 18mm, from all that I have read it seems to please most of it's owners performance wise but it won't allow you to do what the two lens combo will at any rate. The AOV difference between 15 and 18mm is quite large. The 20mm is nice light compact lens whereas the 18mm is getting bulky. All depends on how much you are wishing to spend I guess, you could acquire all three? Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.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: OT (Was: For Dave and Buddy ... )
I have to agree with Shel here. Some people deal with death with a sort of black humour. I do sometimes as well, but I make sure that my audience knows where I'm coming from, and that they share or at least understand my perspective. That's pretty hard to do on a list like this, so I don't think it's appropriate. For many people, pets are indeed family, and the loss of one is no laughing matter, and not to be taken lightly. Dave, I haven't said it yet here, but I'm sorry for your loss. I'm a lifetime cat owner, and have lost many over the years, most recently about 18 months ago. It was a difficult time for both me, the surviving cat Patches, and especially for my kids. They only visit me alternating weekends, but they cried and cried when I told them about Sasha. The cat that my ex and I owned (it was really my cat) was left at her house for the sake of the kids. Phantom is a beautiful Devon Rex. He's now about 13 years old, and has recently been diagnosed with a bad heart and arthritis. It won't be more than a few months, and I know that we'll all be devastated. I went on more than I had intended, but for those of you who don't own pets, or don't feel the same as some on this list, some sensitivity is helpful in these matters. regards, frank Shel Belinkoff wrote: Let's be honest, Paul - *you* think Rainbow Bridge is over the top. Many people find it warm and touching. To poke fun of someone's sadness, or how they deal with grief or that sadness, is, as Mishka said, insensitive, and in so saying he/she/it knew it might offend or upset some people. Rainbow Bridge has been around for many, many years. It's helped unknown numbers of people get through the loss of their pets. IMO, it's no more over the top than some religious rites and rituals, and far less over the top than many. -- The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer - 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: Kodak Royal Gold 1000
I used to use this several years ago. I found it OK for a high-speed color film, basicly due to its Kodak color palatte rather than any grain-fineness issues. It is a rather grainy film. I tended to shoot it at 800asa (+1/3rd) to assure good saturation. However, I think that the Fuji 800asa films are more expedient in this asa-range, not to mention the perpetual bargains on 4-packs available w/ it. I still use +1/3rd stop and rate it at 640asa w/ good results. Its grain is definitely finer than the RG1000 and the extra exposure helps keep the negs well saturated. 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: Ulra Wide Options
Hi Jonathan, Have you considered the Pentax FA 20mm 2.8, I have one and it's an awesome lens? I hate to ask you this question, but here goes, Why get a great, expensive , sharp Ultra Wide, then put a plastic filter in front of it? Sincerely, Ryan Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2002 21:22:56 -0700 (PDT) From: Jonathan Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Thanks Ultra-Wide Anglers! (Now a few more questions...) Hello, Thanks to everyone who responded to my questions about a good, sub-20mm ultra-wide for Pentax. I only have the luxury of surfing on weekends, hence the belated reply. This week's discussions on favorite WA's and true focal length were quite informative (provocative?) #1)I was inspired to save up and hold out (look harder?) for a Pentax K18/3.5 until I learned its true focal length of 19mm. That seems so close to 20mm, that I might as well just get the A20/2.8 which is [somewhat] cheaper, easier to find, and faster (but not as wide as I wanted). Does anybody know if the A20/2.8 is ~truly~ 20mm,... or is it 21mm or 22mmish? Can it take the Cokin P system without vignetting? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.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: Re: MZ-3 and MZ-5n
Mine has the fg grip. I liked the MZ-M at first cause i was so small but once I got longer lenses I soon found I wanted a bit more weight nas size to the camera. --- David Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brendan.Did you put a grip on yours,or do they come with one.Thats why i backed off on the 5n,felt to small. Dave Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail - 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 . __ Post your ad for FREE! http://personals.yahoo.ca - 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: Sorry OT:No more Buddy
So sorry to hear about your cat, Dave. My thoughts are with you. --Amita Sorry to bother everyone,just a little down today.My favorite Cat,my best portrait subject and Little Buddy lost a battle with a car last night. He'll be sorely missed in this house hold. Dave http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/pages/odee1.ht m - 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-1 or PZ-1P as backup body?
I own a PZ-1p Now I need a backup body and the shop here in my town has a used PZ-1 for sale. Should I buy it, or should I look for another PZ-1p ? I don't know exactly the differences between the two bodies, but mainly I'm interested in the viewfinder. I read somewhere that screens of PZ-1 are different (darker). Is it true ? Is it disturbing ? What could be a reasonable difference in price between the two bodies ? Alberto - 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: K, A, M macro lenses...
William Robb wrote: In general, the K lenses are mechanically smoother than A lenses, and optically better than M lenses. Yep. Someone--Shel?--reported last year that many M lenses replaced the K's brass with aluminum, affecting smoothness of focus, especially in cold weather. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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: Thanks Ultra-Wide Anglers! (Now a few more questions...)
Now, something that you haven't mentioned that I find as a more usable combination is the F 17-35 fisheye and one of the 20's. The fisheye zoom is unique in that it zooms from almost 180 degrees to almost the same focal length of the 20mm rectilinear. At the 35mm end, it is about the same focal length as a 20mm keeping it ultrawide and you still have the fisheye on the 17 end. I am assuming that you really meant almost the same angle of view and about the same angle of view. I have also found that the drama of a minor fisheye can be stronger than a really wide rectilinear. Remember that both distort in some fashion. The rectilinear distorts by making object near the edge of the frame fatter. The lines stay straight but it still alters the look of objects. It makes objects looked smashed (shorter and wider). The fisheye does the opposite - objects retain relative proportions, but lines curve. That's a very good description of the comparative pluses and minuses of a rectilinear w/a versus a fisheye. Fred - 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-1 or PZ-1P as backup body?
Alberto, Viewfinders in the PZ-1 and PZ-1p look identical. I cannot notice the 1/2 stop difference in screen brightness. In addition, I've used the brighter screen PZ-1p in the PZ-1 and had difficulties seeing any different results with slides. Some say that the PZ-1 exposes best for slides while the PZ-1p is best with print film. I think I see that after some use of the PZ-1p... or I was prejudiced to see it. I would guess you should pay 66% to 75% the price of the PZ-1p for the PZ-1. Most all of the features are there, but you will miss the faster 3 fps winding. A discount of 50% would be extraordinary. Regards, Bob S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I own a PZ-1p Now I need a backup body and the shop here in my town has a used PZ-1 for sale. Should I buy it, or should I look for another PZ-1p ? I don't know exactly the differences between the two bodies, but mainly I'm interested in the viewfinder. I read somewhere that screens of PZ-1 are different (darker). Is it true ? Is it disturbing ? What could be a reasonable difference in price between the two bodies ? Alberto - 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'v got the start now
On Saturday, April 27, 2002, at 04:12 PM, David Chang-Sang wrote: I may trip out that way tomorrow afternoon (if I get time) because I'm hunting for the same equipment :) Summer hours: closed on Sunday. Sorry, man, I'm catching up on my sleep. I did make a rare Saturday appearance today, tho'. Was it a deep amount of coin for the film developing equipment ? $20 tank and less than $30 in chemistry. -Aaron - 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 Re: Fw: Nondeliverable mail
On Friday, April 26, 2002, at 06:20 PM, Steve Larson wrote: Does that person start with M? s, don't say his name. It's like the Scottish play thing. -Aaron - 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: Sorry OT:No more Buddy
On Saturday, April 27, 2002, at 03:53 PM, Jeff wrote: Yea, that could be just as painful. Aaron didn't feel sorry about your cat? Bummer. Hey now! It was tough for me, cuz Dave had downright adorable pictures of him. Poor kitty, looked like my mom dad's cats. -Aaron - 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'v got the start now
On Saturday, April 27, 2002, at 03:58 PM, frank theriault wrote: Better check with Aaron. He told me earlier in the week that he's starting summer hours this weekend, meaning closed most Sundays. I guess now that the Sheridan students are gone for the summer, there's only us pdml'ers to bug him on weekends... g Yeah, in the summer there are a lot fewer people panicking over prints that must be handed in Monday morning at 8 am... We're also not open as late on Mondays and Tuesdays, and open at 9:30 instead of 9:00. -Aaron - 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: Why some need f/22 (was: Re: Thanks Ultra-Wide Anglers! (Now a few more questions...)
- Original Message - From: Mishka Subject: Re: Why some need f/22 (was: Re: Thanks Ultra-Wide Anglers! (Now a few more questions...) now that i think about it, i remeber i needed that a few times. once was last year when i was trying to shoot a waterfall and wanted to get a bridesweil effect -- i needed a long exposure and even 1/22 aperture was too large for that. Get a 4 stop ND filter. 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: zeiss lens for pentax k mount
Sunday, April 28, 2002, 8:28:03 AM, wayne wrote: wwaprhm i haVE a zeiss 28mm f2.8 lens for pentax and the image quality is awesome is wwaprhm thjere other zeiss lenses available for pentax None. And none at all. Sorry to disappoint you (but you shouldn't be since the *image quality* is awesome, which is after all all that's needed, unless you mean image as in image conscious, person's image :-) ), but your lens is probably a Sigma(*1)... Although it's said that Zeiss (west) cooperated with Pentax on the design of K mnt and other things as well, they never produced a lens in K mnt. Unless it's a post conversion by a machinist, though. What exactly does the front ring say? *1: Carl Zeiss Jena, the part of Zeiss which was left in the Eastern Germany after the WWII, producer of some excellent lenses too, in the 80s or so licensed the name CZJ to several makers of lenses, just like Carl Zeiss (the ex-western one) does now to Sony (and the Sony lenses aren't made by Zeiss anyway...). So Sigma, and also some importers in UK who held the name license, could stick a CZJ label on many lenses from whatever they chose... Just like now, when you can find a Carl Zeiss lens on sony digicam, Leitz lens on Leica Panasonic digicam, Canon lens on Canon G12, ..., but the lens IS THE SAME ONE... go figure :) Good light, Frantisek Vlcek - 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: Oldest lens on newest body?
Saturday, April 27, 2002, 7:00:35 PM, Mark wrote: ME Here's a question for you Old lens--new body. Who's put together pieces ME with the largest age difference? I am sure it can be beaten, but I have an early post-war Zeiss Jena (Olympia) Sonnar, converted to K-mount, on my LX (3rd gen). How's that for bragging about equipment ;-)) ? Now, the ultimate one would be MZ-S (or later, MZ-D...) with a Petzval Portrait lens... more than hundred fifty years!!! Anyone owns a Petzval? Should need only a simple adapter or gluing... ;) Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek - 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: Ebay posts
T Rittenhouse wrote: I think that it is only common courtesy not to step in someone else's puddle. If you are not interested leave it alone. (small snip) The two exceptions are: 1. If you are the seller, and a regular member of this list. (If you don't contribute here, but just sign up to tout your Ebay auctions, I personally, consider you to be a spammer). 2. If the item is in the category of outrageous, or wierd and not likely to be bid on by anybody in their right mind, but good for a laugh. ($25,000 BIN for instance). Ciao, Graywolf I strongly ditto :) annsan http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto - 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: Why some need f/22 (was: Re: Thanks Ultra-Wide Anglers! (Now a few more questions...)
I have this filter now. Didn't have then. But I agree that this is a much better option than stopping down that much. And as for the slower film -- it was a cloudy day and the only roll I had was the one (400) in my camera. now that i think about it, i remeber i needed that a few times. once was last year when i was trying to shoot a waterfall and wanted to get a bridesweil effect -- i needed a long exposure and even 1/22 aperture was too large for that. Get a 4 stop ND filter. 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 .
f:22, K18/3.5 warmth, 20mm bee's nest...
Can't say for A, Why would you want to use 1/22 in the first place? I am just curious. I know that f22 sounds like an overkill, (especially with wide angle lenses), but I frequently use every inch of the DOF available to me. I am a botanist, and I like to make environmental portraits of very small plants. I often photograph my subjects at close distances, and try to maintain sharpness in the background at the same time. Here in northern Arizona, there is almost always something picturesque I wish to include behind what ever botanical jewel I happen to be photographing. Where did you learn that? [K18/3.5 actually being 19mm] Mine seems awfully wide It was right here on PDML last week (sorry, I havent gotten to know the posters on a first name basis so I cant give credit here). The 18/3.5 can take it [the Cokin P system] Thanks, this is good to know, and pushes me in favor of this lens considerably. It would seem to be the most filter friendly of the bunch, in spite of the fact that it cant take 58s directly in the front threads. The 18/3.5 isn't really that poor Anyway, I recommend the 18/3.5. A drawback for some will be the very warm color rendition. Is it possible that this is a sample variation? Have other owners noticed this? One poster on Stans lens comment site said it was identical to his K20/4 in respect to color rendition with the skylight filter selected (or maybe the K20/4 is warm too?). At any rate, I dont think the warm cast would bother me much. Well the measured FL of the FA20f2.8 at the photodo site is 20mm if this is of any help? Have you considered the Pentax FA 20mm 2.8, I have one and it's an awesome lens? I simply named the A20/2.8 because I prefer MF enough to foot the extra cost, and as far as I know, they are optically identical. If it is a true 20mm, it makes it pretty comparable to the K18/3.5 or 19mm or whatever it is. I hate to ask you this question, but here goes, Why get a great, expensive , sharp Ultra Wide, then put a plastic filter in front of it? Good point and well taken. I dont like Cokin filters either (I tried these when I first got into photography), but I use the system to hold singh-rays ND grads and their ilk. I dont have many P filters (only two now actually), but when I do pop for singh-ray or lee filters, it would be nice if my choice of an ultra-wide lens could use them. Thanks again for the suggestions/comments -Jonathan- Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.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: Why some need f/22 (was: Re: Thanks Ultra-Wide Anglers!(Now a few more questions...)
I might get the name wrong. What i meant is the effect you get when you set a really long exposure (1s+) and get the water washed out (kinda like a veil) rather than stopped in action. I rarely have film slower than 100 and often even that is too fast if I want to have a reasonable (1/8) aperture on a wide lens. Of course, ND filters are much better (if you have them in your bag -- I didn't at that time) What's that? Could you not use a slower film? Mishka wrote: a bridesweil effect -- i needed a long exposure and even 1/22 aperture was too large for that. -- Shel Belinkoff - 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: Barely sorta on-topic ish if you squint at it just right: my day
I agree with everything Cotty said: an excellent day, and thanks for sharing it with us. You didn't let the Nikon girl get away, did you? Pat White - 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 (Was For Dave and Buddy...)
Forgive me if I wax philosophical. One of the (IMHO) problems with society today is a lack of civilization. We are not becoming a kinder gentler world, even though we have the means and communications to do so. Rather, we are becoming less sensitive to the needs and comfort of those around us. In a free society you have the right to say what you want. The cost of that is (IMHO) that we need to act with a goodly level of self restraint and self discipline in what we say and to whom. Death is a very personal thing. The comments made were cruel in my opinion. They served nothing but perhaps a chuckle from the writer upon writing. There is enough cruelty in the world, why add to it unnecessarily? Would you have been upset or angry if similar things had been said at a family member's funeral? Those who own pets often consider them as integral parts of the family. I'll end this post with two quotes. One was a motto from a company I worked at for a short time. The other, which is slightly vulgar,I do not know the source of. The ultimate form of human maturity is a willingness to take complete responsibility for oneself (United consumers club) Opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one and they are most appreciated when to themselves under cover (unknown) PS; I realize the irony of expressing opinions in this post. BUTCH Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself Hermann Hesse (Demian) - 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: (2): Vivitar Series I, 19-35.
No,sorry Jeff,Henrys downtown. Dave - Original Message - From: Jeff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2002 3:51 PM Subject: Re: RE: Vivitar Series I, 19-35. You mean Downtown camera? I'll give them a try Jeff - Original Message - From: David Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2002 3:44 PM Subject: Re: RE: Vivitar Series I, 19-35. I have received some nice 'discounts' from downtown for the D1. Tamron 35-105 f2.8-list $700.00 my cost-$600.00 Nikon 35-70 f2.8-list $800.00 my cost-$650.00 Nikon 80-200 f2.8-list $1095 trade Tamron for it-my cost $575.00 I thought those were fair discounts. Dave(who seems to buy used Pentax from list members than stores)Brooks Begin Original Message From: David Chang-Sang [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sat, 27 Apr 2002 15:33:49 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Vivitar Series I, 19-35. I've actually gone LOOKING for this one (as it does appear on Henry's website) in the downtown store but I've been told that it doesn't exist (yet it's on their website)... As for their used items; you guys all know my story of the deep discount compared to their list prices... 90mm Sigma f2.8 Macro for K-A mount - was listed at $329.99 - got it for $180.99 - even better since the lens produces nice macro images. Cheers, Dave -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Brendan Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2002 3:04 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Vivitar Series I, 19-35. Henrys always tends to inflate the prices on their used items. --- Jeff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I believe Henrys has one for $300 CDN. That seems steep. I'll check around. Jeff - Original Message - From: David Chang-Sang david@chang- sang.com To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2002 1:51 PM Subject: RE: Vivitar Series I, 19-35. Based on what I've seen online - Ebay - it usually goes for around $135.00 USD - but I'm not sure how much you could get it for if you hunted some used stores in the area (Toronto) Cheers, Dave - 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 . __ Post your ad for FREE! http://personals.yahoo.ca - 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 . End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail - 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: Kodak Royal Gold 1000
Actually when i could not find RG1000 for the indoor show last weekend,i bought a roll of Fuji 1600.All iin all,i was impressed.They were of obvious quality thet low light would bring but i showed them to Aaron and he thought the grain was not to harsh. These are just for the kids to see their good/bad points to help for futures shows I though for sure 1600 would be very grainy but pleaently suprized(so i bought 2 more rolls) Dave - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2002 11:54 AM Subject: Re: Kodak Royal Gold 1000 In a message dated 4/27/2002 9:55:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Has anyone tried this? I found it VERY grainy. Tried to take existing light shots at a Stars-On-Ice show with it 2 yrs ago and found that in addition to large grain structure that the colors were very wishy-washy. The vibrant reds of some cast members became maroons and flesh tones were pale and unactractive. Regards, Bob - 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: Epson 1650
Thanks for that info.I have ordered one and hope to have it soon. Dave - Original Message - From: Andreas [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2002 12:45 PM Subject: Epson 1650 Hi, for those who are interested in buying a flatbed scanner for slide scanning, I put a short comment of my experience with the Epson Perfection 1650 on my site. http://home.wtal.de/DrBig/ Have a nice day Andreas - 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 (Was For Dave and Buddy...)
Butch Black wrote: The ultimate form of human maturity is a willingness to take complete responsibility for oneself (United consumers club) I don't know about the rest of you, but the writings of the United Consumers Club have long served as a source of inspiration for me vbg Paul - 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: 28mm Super Takumar f3.5 M42 / Screw Mount
David.I sent you a mail,did you get it.Id be interested. Dave - Original Message - From: David Chang-Sang [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 8:27 PM Subject: FS: 28mm Super Takumar f3.5 M42 / Screw Mount Well.. Before I drop this puppy up on Ebay I'll offer it here. Asking $30.00 US plus shipping Pics of the lens found here: http://www.chang-sang.com/ebay/pentax1_big.jpg http://www.chang-sang.com/ebay/pentax2_big.jpg http://www.chang-sang.com/ebay/pentax3_big.jpg Lens is in KEH LN- condition. No haze, fungus, scratches etc. Aperture blades are clean and dry and snapp-happ-happy! :)Comes with original caps (no case though). Email me off list if you're interested. No replies by Sunday April 28 and this baby goes the way of Ebay :) Cheers, Dave - 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 .
New toy
Brand new Winder MX in box for the equivalent of $70. I love it already - it came in handy during photographing children feeding an elaphant in a circus. ukasz - 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 .
I think I went a bit to far Printing
33 attempts and 25 usable prints later I just stripped the locking screw on the Omega B-22. The screw was already on it's way out and I've been told it was a common weak part but it broke just as I was ready to print one of the best pics I took during Stan's TPDML visit. Just plain bad timing on it's part. Now I have to call up calssic enlargers and get another for $35, at least I have an excuse to get another lens board and maybe a nice 50mm F2.8 Nikkor to. __ Post your ad for FREE! http://personals.yahoo.ca - 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: f:22, K18/3.5 warmth, 20mm bee's nest...
Jonathan Donald wrote: The 18/3.5 isn't really that poor Anyway, I recommend the 18/3.5. A drawback for some will be the very warm color rendition. Is it possible that this is a sample variation? Have other owners noticed this? One poster on Stans lens comment site said it was identical to his K20/4 in respect to color rendition with the skylight filter selected (or maybe the K20/4 is warm too?). At any rate, I dont think the warm cast would bother me much ... Many wide angle pentaxes seem to give a quite warmish color impression on slide film. I have the 18mm lens; and yes, it produces quite warmish colors, but I do not find it's colors much warmisher than those of the FA*24/2 or the A35/2 (guess you would not notice a difference in a slide show). The images produced by the 18-er are very contrasty. The weak point is: wide open, particularly at shorter distances there is a distinct lack of sharpness at the edges of the image. I would recommend the the 18-er. Enjoy, Alexander Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.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: Why some need f/22 (was: Re: Thanks Ultra-Wide Anglers! (Now a few more questions...)
Sunday, April 28, 2002, 6:19:33 PM, Mishka wrote: M Thanks Paul, M That didn't occur to me. Seriously. M I thought more along the DOF line, and 20mm should have everything in focus M way before f/22. With the F/Calc, I computed, using a circle of confusion for APS film size (because the COC formulation is for 20x30cm prints, and I do bigger than that, so I need smaller COC), that I get DOF from 1m to infinity if I focus my 20mm at 2m and set f/8. I generally shoot this in good light forgetting about focus altogether (which is good as the lens is M42 used via adapter, and at f/8 I can't focus anyway due to dark view). But if I shoot something critical, and have time, I focus even with such DOF, as it will show. Good light, Frantisek Vlcek - 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-1 or PZ-1P as backup body?
Alberto, I am sure you have read up on this, but if you shoot lots with flash and ambient combined, the PZ-1 cannot do the easy flash compensation of PZ-1p. Just a note. 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: Why some need f/22 (was: Re: Thanks Ultra-Wide Anglers! (Now a few more questions...)
Sunday, April 28, 2002, 8:21:23 PM, William wrote: WR - Original Message - WR From: Mishka WR Subject: Re: Why some need f/22 (was: Re: Thanks Ultra-Wide WR Anglers! (Now a few more questions...) now that i think about it, i remeber i needed that a few WR times. once was last year when i was trying to shoot a waterfall and WR wanted to get a bridesweil effect -- i needed a long exposure and even WR 1/22 aperture was too large for that. WR Get a 4 stop ND filter. Or get a camera that can do perfect-registration multi-exposure. Generally, shooting flowing water, I got much nicer results using several shorter exposures than one long exposure, because the water still looked like water, unlike the long exposure's water. It's about diff. tastes :) Good light, Frantisek Vlcek - 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 .
New toys
Aaargh! Get a nice new toy in - and it bloody disappears before I have a chance to play. Gone - Arsat 300mm F2.8. Gone - Helios 85mm F1.5. Gone - Cokin Creative flash. I hate my job.:) Just in today, another 35mm F2M, even nicer, and a 100mm F4 Bellows Lens boxed with case (minty). Kind regards Peter - 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 old digital/film debate
I just got off the phone talking to my wife who is out to Utah attending a couple of weddings. She told me that the one she went to last night was shot by a husband/wife team. They have gone fully digital and are selling off their film gear. They told her that they have blown up to 30 X 40 and get better quality than MF. They asked her if I had any interest in buying their 35mm gear. My hunch is that they haven't really seen the quality of MF for comparison. Be that as it may, the dogs seem to be eating it. That is, their clients are satisfied with what is coming off the digital equipment. Me, I'll stick with 6X7 for awhile. I am amazed out how detailed things are - nothing like my coolpix 990 images. Texture and tonality are amazing. The digital just looks clean and non-jaggy but no subtle tones and detail is missing. If you never saw the detail, you don't realize it. Anyway, it sounds like the revolution is going on in the wedding arena, which will make for some inexpensive MF equipment being offered up soon. Bruce Dayton - 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: Enlarging Lens for 6x7
On Fri, 26 Apr 2002, Aaron Reynolds wrote: Nope, you saw one with a metering prism on it. You have to turn it on, I think. Dunno, I don't have one. Another giveaway is that it sticks out on the left, over the shutter speed dial. The non-metering prism does not, and makes the camera appear more symmetrical. Then it was the metering prism. Oh well, next time I go down, I'll have to give it another shot.. Good plan. You can always upgrade your body when you have a pile of 67 glass. That's about it, plus part of the reason I'm doing this is to go with 6x7 and not 6x6. While I have no problem with square images, most of what i'll do will probably be cropped into a rectangle anyhow, so why bother mucking about with 6x6? Woohoo! Did an engagement fall through or something? If so, hopefully the camera will not end up being a reminder of that. About two years ago, I think. I try not to think abou;it, but yeah it did. The camera will end up being a reminder of how much better off I am with someone who isn't evil. :) Unless it's a good kind of reminder. See above, but all I know is all teh bills I've got piled up all over, this money must be spent ono me, and on something frivilous and not bills or expenses or anything. My money, I suffered for it. :) -- http://www.infotainment.org The destructive character is cheerful. - Walter Benjamin - 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: Thanks Ultra-Wide Anglers! (Now a few more questions...)
Jonathan, There are other 17 and 18mm choices out there: 1. Ricoh made an XR Rikenon 18/2.8. A couple months ago one was on German EBay. It sold March 10 to a European PDMLer for just 156 Euros (about $120). It resembles the Pentax 18/3.5 but uses a 67mm filter (vs. 58). I have a photo of it; it looks like a serious lens. But almost impossible to find; the German one was one of two I've seen. 0.25m close focus, 348 g, 76mm wide, 71mm long; 11 elements in 9 groups, multicoated. 2. Since 18mm is something of a specialty lens, you may decide you don't need the K mount. If so, you might consider the Pentax SMC 17/4, or the highly regarded Sigma XQ 18/3.5 in screwmount with a YS adapter. It was also sold by Ritz as the Quantary Tech-10. 72mm filter size. I have a photo or two of the Sigma, if you're interested. It sells for $175 to $275 when you find it online. I'm reasonably sure this was different from the Sigma that was rebadged as the Spiratone, Vivitar, and Tokina. 3. Before introducing the ATX 17/3.5 PRO in AF, Tokina sold the ATX 17-AF, the same optics but not as well built. Unlike the PRO, it was offered in K mount! And even if the focal length was fudged 1mm, you're still in the 18mm ballpark. Collected comments: Average Overall Rating: 4.33 out of 5 stars with 3 review(s) Submitted by Arnon Hubara , Date Reviewed: 1/14/01 12:10:37 AM Professional photographer from Helsinki Finland. With 11-20 years experience in Outdoor photography. Price Paid: $350 Purchased At: helsinki Strengths: The lens I own produces excellent images. Sharpness and contrast is very high thanks to the aspherical element. Weaknesses: The lens I own is AT-X non pro, it's mechanism is very weak and causes a lot of problems. Other Products Used: Pentax-A 15mm 3.5 Nikon 20mm 2.8 Customer Service: It was repaired once by Tokina's representative, good service. Twice by an independent, excellent service! Review Summary: Boasts excellent optical quality specialty comparing to it's very low price. Produces far better images than the much more expensive Pentax that I had before. However due to mechanical problems I intend to exchange it with the Pro model which is optically identical. The rating I submit is only for the non pro lens. 4 stars value, 4 stars overall. Submitted by Alberto Baffa , Date Reviewed: 4/29/00 4:56:16 PM Intermediate photographer from Lecce, Italy . With 6-10 years experience in Outdoor photography. Strengths: Very good construction quality and - surprise! - good (never said) resistance to ghost and flares! Weaknesses: on the plastic mount of a Minolta HTsi it sometimes fail in monitoring shutter opening (just a stupid problem); you have to be used with a bit of distortion (but it's a 17...) Other Products Used: no one so wide Review Summary: I falled in love with super wide angles shoot, and decided to got this Tokina for the 17 vs price; I took my first three rolls from the lab two days ago (superia100, ultra100 and Ekta100vs): no vignetting with polarizer and, believe me, I am very very happy. TIP!: choose this or another prime super wide, and not a zoom like 17-35 or similar: very close focus is ESSENTIAL (imho) to got smart pictures with this focal length. 5 stars value, 4 stars overall. As reviewed by Ken Welsh , Date Reviewed: 4/21/00 1:36:48 PM Professional photographer from Dublin, County Dublin Eire. With 21+ years experience in photography. (Note: This review is apparently for the PRO version) Strengths: Exceptionally well built. My sample offers extremely sharp optics. Have duped some shots up to 6x9cm Weaknesses: I'm happy. Other Products Used: 20mm Nikon f4 and 20mm Nikon AF f2.8 Customer Service: No problems, so far (3 years) Review Summary: My sample is a bargain alternative to much more expensive marquee optics. I have two other ATX Tokina lenses which are also excellent: the 28-70mm f2.6-F2.8 and the 100-300mm f4. The only bad luck I have had with Tokina ATX lenses is with the f2.8 20-35mm. My tests - on a tripod - showed the edges to be soft. I sold it. 5 stars value, 5 stars overall. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 old digital/film debate
I think the wedding photographer comments below say a lot about their previous MF workflow. I've seen showcase Lightjet prints that originated as 35mm chromes, medium format chromes, large format chromes, and Nikon D1x direct digital captures. If they're done right, images sourced from medium format and large format chromes will completely blow away digital sources in smooth tonality, detail, and lack of artifacts. That said, I bet that it's a lot easier for a wedding photo business to put together a good digital workflow than an equally-good chemical workflow. I'll look forward to picking up some good, cheap 67 or 645 gear when I have the spare bucks --Mark -Bruce Wrote- I just got off the phone talking to my wife who is out to Utah attending a couple of weddings. She told me that the one she went to last night was shot by a husband/wife team. They have gone fully digital and are selling off their film gear. They told her that they have blown up to 30 X 40 and get better quality than MF. They asked her if I had any interest in buying their 35mm gear. My hunch is that they haven't really seen the quality of MF for comparison. Be that as it may, the dogs seem to be eating it. That is, their clients are satisfied with what is coming off the digital equipment. Me, I'll stick with 6X7 for awhile. I am amazed out how detailed things are - nothing like my coolpix 990 images. Texture and tonality are amazing. The digital just looks clean and non-jaggy but no subtle tones and detail is missing. If you never saw the detail, you don't realize it. Anyway, it sounds like the revolution is going on in the wedding arena, which will make for some inexpensive MF equipment being offered up soon. Bruce Dayton - 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 old digital/film debate
- Original Message - From: Mark Erickson Subject: Re: The old digital/film debate I think the wedding photographer comments below say a lot about their previous MF workflow. I've seen showcase Lightjet prints that originated as 35mm chromes, medium format chromes, large format chromes, and Nikon D1x direct digital captures. If they're done right, images sourced from medium format and large format chromes will completely blow away digital sources in smooth tonality, detail, and lack of artifacts. That said, I bet that it's a lot easier for a wedding photo business to put together a good digital workflow than an equally-good chemical workflow. I'll look forward to picking up some good, cheap 67 or 645 gear when I have the spare bucks Key words though are wedding photographer. Fine detail is the enemy of the wedding photographer. I know when I was in the game, I didn't take a picture without a Softar on the lens, ever. If digital capture allows them to get better results (such as built in softening via lack of captured fine detail), more power to em. One issue that comes to mind for me is copyright. If the photographer cannot produce an original negative to prove ownership, can he enforce copyright on the image? William Robb --Mark -Bruce Wrote- I just got off the phone talking to my wife who is out to Utah attending a couple of weddings. She told me that the one she went to last night was shot by a husband/wife team. They have gone fully digital and are selling off their film gear. They told her that they have blown up to 30 X 40 and get better quality than MF. They asked her if I had any interest in buying their 35mm gear. My hunch is that they haven't really seen the quality of MF for comparison. Be that as it may, the dogs seem to be eating it. That is, their clients are satisfied with what is coming off the digital equipment. Me, I'll stick with 6X7 for awhile. I am amazed out how detailed things are - nothing like my coolpix 990 images. Texture and tonality are amazing. The digital just looks clean and non-jaggy but no subtle tones and detail is missing. If you never saw the detail, you don't realize it. Anyway, it sounds like the revolution is going on in the wedding arena, which will make for some inexpensive MF equipment being offered up soon. Bruce Dayton - 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 .
Latest Darkroom Acquisition Good Photos
While out photographing this afternoon my trusty electronic helper sniped the high bid on a LN 35mm Negatrans for the Beselers ... neat! This'll speed up the making of proof prints, and will be a fine compliment to the medium format Negatrans that came along with the dichro enlarger. Next up, a couple of Speed Easels. (Just thought I'd join the My New Toys party). BTW, this morning was great light for photographing ... slightly overcast sky, subtle shadows - Sunny 16/f5.6 light. Mid day got way too bright and contrasty, so I ducked into a movie theater and caught a matinee. When the show was over the sun had moved on and left the entire west side of the street in open shade, so I burned another roll on my way to the subway. All told, it was essentially three subjects and three rolls on the streets of Berkeley. Hope you all had a good day with good light and were able to make some good photos. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[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: Latest Acquisition
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1347280318 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: Latest Acquisition
Hey, that's Super! And you got it from Grimes, too. He's the man! Good catch, Mr. Wheatfield. William Robb wrote: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1347280318 -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/darkroom-rentals/index.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: The old digital/film debate
On 28 Apr 2002 at 17:20, William Robb wrote: One issue that comes to mind for me is copyright. If the photographer cannot produce an original negative to prove ownership, can he enforce copyright on the image? Hi Bill, Interesting question. I figure that firstly information including the time and date that the shot was taken is embedded in the digital file. It can be edited with some share ware tools however there are plenty of ways that you can be dishonest with film too. I suppose that if you provided a set of sequential thumb-nail images from the remainder of the shoot that would clinch it in a legal battle? One interesting exclusion in the current crop of digital cameras is that even though they write all manner of information into the file at the time of capture none provide an option for the camera owner/authors name to be embedded in the file. I wonder when this will become an option? Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.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: The old digital/film debate
Bruce, you're right, the dogs are eating it - I'd really like to see what sort of 30 x 40 this couple is getting (mainly because I wouldn't want a 30 x 40 hanging anywhere in my place... but I'm sure this may be the preferrence for some folk) because, unless they're using Genuine Fractals and 6mp sensors - 30 x 40 from some digitals would look only so so compared to a 6x7 or 6x9 neg that was blown up to the same size. This being said, there have been many folks recently dumping their MF cams for D-SLRs. As recently as a month and a half ago I was in a local camera store that asked me if I would ever shoot a wedding digitally - while I don't have much experience with wedding photography (only done 2 of them) - I told them flat out no. The way I look at it is this way - With the cost of a new D-SLR body and lenses (because we all know Pentax doesn't have a D-SLR right now) and extra battery pack - I could buy a decent NEW 645 system and maybe even a new 67 system - or - I could buy any number of used systems and lenses and still have a chunk of change leftover for film etc. If the couple still wants digital images - I'd grab the negs, run out to Aaron's lab and have him scan, burn and print. The options are available. Don't get me wrong - digital is great - I've used digital cameras since 1997 - but seeing as how the options and costs would allow a photographer to go about digital so many ways - I would hold off on the D-SLR purchasing until the dust settles a bit. Just my 2 cents (FWIW - in the U.S. about 1.35 cents) Cheers, Dave -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bruce Dayton Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2002 5:46 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: The old digital/film debate I just got off the phone talking to my wife who is out to Utah attending a couple of weddings. She told me that the one she went to last night was shot by a husband/wife team. They have gone fully digital and are selling off their film gear. They told her that they have blown up to 30 X 40 and get better quality than MF. They asked her if I had any interest in buying their 35mm gear. My hunch is that they haven't really seen the quality of MF for comparison. Be that as it may, the dogs seem to be eating it. That is, their clients are satisfied with what is coming off the digital equipment. Me, I'll stick with 6X7 for awhile. I am amazed out how detailed things are - nothing like my coolpix 990 images. Texture and tonality are amazing. The digital just looks clean and non-jaggy but no subtle tones and detail is missing. If you never saw the detail, you don't realize it. Anyway, it sounds like the revolution is going on in the wedding arena, which will make for some inexpensive MF equipment being offered up soon. Bruce Dayton - 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: Latest Acquisition
- Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff Subject: Re: Latest Acquisition Hey, that's Super! And you got it from Grimes, too. He's the man! Good catch, Mr. Wheatfield. Thanks Shel. When I saw it was Grimes selling it, I couldn't help myself. 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: The old digital/film debate
- Original Message - From: Rob Studdert Subject: Re: The old digital/film debate On 28 Apr 2002 at 17:20, William Robb wrote: One issue that comes to mind for me is copyright. If the photographer cannot produce an original negative to prove ownership, can he enforce copyright on the image? Hi Bill, Interesting question. I figure that firstly information including the time and date that the shot was taken is embedded in the digital file. It can be edited with some share ware tools however there are plenty of ways that you can be dishonest with film too. I suppose that if you provided a set of sequential thumb-nail images from the remainder of the shoot that would clinch it in a legal battle? Hmm, Is time and date enough? Do any of them imbed something like the cameras's serial number, or some other identifier that is unique to the camera? This could make for an interesting legal debate. Fortunately, I am not a lawyer. William Robb One interesting exclusion in the current crop of digital cameras is that even though they write all manner of information into the file at the time of capture none provide an option for the camera owner/authors name to be embedded in the file. I wonder when this will become an option? Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.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 . - 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 PZ-1p
The AF500FTZ is by far the best flash for the money. If you spend the little extra for it, you will not be dissapointed. I remember seeing someone on the list selling their's for about $210 if I'm not mistaken in the last few days. But to be fair, the first flash that I had for my pz1p was the older af280t. It worked okay for most of what I needed. The 500 has more than double the power of the 280 though and sometimes I cannot see how I got along without it. Also, after my 280t bit the dust (parts are apparently hard to come by, something to keep in mind), I bought an af330ftz out of necessity. I could not afford that 500 at that time, I knew that I did not want another 280t since I could not get them repaired, and I had shoots rapidly approaching. The 330 is also a good flash. While it is close to the same power rating as the 280t, that zoom head really makes a difference. I now still have my 330 as backup and for use when I need a second light. Here's a short list of reasons of why I personally like the 500ftz: 1... more power. It eats batteries (I've switched to NiMH, works great), but the extra power is ~definetly~ worth it. 2... bounce and swivel head. I avoid direct on-camera flash whenever possible. This is one of the shortcomings of the 330. 3... more manual settings, and display of distance data in manual mode. The 330 only has two manual settings (1/1, and 1/32, i think), the 500 has half power increments from 1/1 down to 1/32. Also, an incredibly useful feature that I only recently managed to discover is that the flash will display the correct exposure distance based on your power setting, zoom position, and given aperature (obviously only works with A lenses or newer). I'm often shooting wrecks and fires at night and the reflective tape on the firemen's uniforms would always throw the TTL exposure off. I tried everything; plus one stop flash exposure compensation, setting the iso lower than the given film speed... it always underexposed. So I decided that the only option was to memorize some guide numbers and work the math out in my head, although with my math skills and being under pressure on scene I was not too hopeful. So I respond to a fire about two weeks ago at about 3am... I hop out, mounting my Tokina 80-200/2.8 my 500ftz flash. As I'm walking to the scene I switch the flash to manual mode and to my surprise a distance figure pops up on the display of the flash. I play with the power, zoom, and aperature settings and watch the distance read-out change. Needless to say all the photos from that fire came out well exposed. :) 4... Slave flash. I honestly never thought I'd use thie feature much. Anyway, I got really tired of taking simple, boring mug shots of people for feature stories (ie- soccer all-area team and mvps, etc). So I started caring a small lightstand with one of those adapters on top to fit a shoe mount flash and umbrella. I use the flash on my pz1p turning the flash comp all the way down (-3 stops?) to trigger the 500. I've done two assignments for the paper in this manner and the photos have been very well received (specially by parents). I can post a couple of examples later if anyone's interested. There you have it. If you need the features, the 500 can't be beat. -- Nick Wright http://www.wrightfoto.com/ -- From: Michelle Schrag, Tim Goering [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Flash for PZ-1p Date: Sun, Apr 28, 2002, 6:58 PM Looking for recommendations for a general purpose flash for PZ-1p. I guess AF500FTZ would be best but I wouldn't mind spending less. Is there something wrong with the 400FTZ ? I see several for sale at KEH. 3rd party units? Sunpak, Sigma? Thanks Tim - 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: LX motor drive - question
The biggest issue with the NiCd packs is not overcharging (a full charge is 16 hours) Other post says 6 to 10 hours. 16 would be a max ? but with having to wait until they are dead to recharge them, or rigging a device to discharge them before you charge them. Because of memory building ? My best advice would be to buy the NiCd pack, use it w/o worrying about the NiCd battery life, and they when they die, replace the NiCd cells with NiMH cells. NiMH ??? Almost any battery shop can build or order the cell packs...I can give you specs if you need them. James, I have 2 dead power packs and I want to have them repacked. Could you give me the specs ? It could be usefull to the guy (have only seen guys in there...) who will do the job. Thanks, Andre -- - 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 old digital/film debate
On Mon, Apr 29, 2002 at 10:28:28AM +1000, Rob Studdert wrote: One interesting exclusion in the current crop of digital cameras is that even though they write all manner of information into the file at the time of capture none provide an option for the camera owner/authors name to be embedded in the file. I wonder when this will become an option? I guess this is easier done in post-processing instead of by the camera. - 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: Latest Acquisition
Nice buy. It should make a great landscape lens on the 4x5. I'm jealous. Paul William Robb wrote: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1347280318 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 . - 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: Update on 'dead' 6x7
Put a roll of film in the camera. The 6x7 shutter won't fire unless there is film in the camera. There's a workaround, but you ought to just try running a roll through it, and see how the transport mechanism and shutter perform. Paul William Kane wrote: Ok, Here's the 'update' on my cheap 6x7: I finally (after 1 day) got the required 6v battery. Upon placing the battery in the compartment, I found that the shutter button no longer fires the shutter. The mirror is in the ready position. When I originally got the camera the film advance was kind of sticky, now it's extremely smooth. My guess is that something uncoupled inside the camera body. I may try to go in myself and see what I can find. I have a digital copy of the 6x7 repair manual, but if anyone has any clues, I'd appreciate hearing from you. If I can't find the problem I may send it to KEH for an estimate. Anyone have any ideas on a good place to send it other than KEH? [It is the 6x7 without MLU] Thanks, 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 . - 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 old digital/film debate
On Sun, Apr 28, 2002 at 10:11:59PM -0400, Mishka wrote: Whatever you hide into your image, unless it is showing on the print, it can be removed simply by re-JPEG-ing it. Digital watermarking is more involved then that. Simple re-JPEG-ing (like the sound of it :)) wont work without degrading image quality. But still, its relatively easy to remove 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: ME Super LEDs
Yep ... don't do that g. I don't think there's anything that can be done about it. I don't think I ever encountered the problem, but, in all honesty, I rarely, if ever, photograph the sky. I tend to keep my cameras focused on more earth-bound subjects. What's up there that's so interesting, anyway? Welcome to the list, though. Maybe some has a solution or a suggestion, but I doubt it. tedshaw wrote: Greetings - I've just joined the list and am delighted to see the useful info. I have an ME Super and an MG. Both cameras have coloured LEDs for displaying the shutter speed in the viewfinder. The problem is that I'm having a very difficult time seeing the lights when viewing a bright scene like the sky. Can anyone tell me if there is a fix for this? -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[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: The old digital/film debate
On 28 Apr 2002 at 22:11, Mishka wrote: Whatever you hide into your image, unless it is showing on the print, it can be removed simply by re-JPEG-ing it. And if it does show on a print, it is not hidden. As far as the image tags are concerned, *anyone* can overwrite them. If your customers are honest, a simple agreement (or an inobtrusive watermark) will do. If they are not, there's not much that can be done. Take a look at music and software copyright protection -- it exists only in people's minds. Everyone knows that there is no absolutely effective anti-piracy solution however once a copyright abuser is caught the proof that any form of identification applied by the copyright holder has been tampered with or removed gives more clout to the copyright owner in the case of pursuance of damages. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.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: The old digital/film debate
Rob, See, you are assuming that there's an a priori knowledge of who is the owner an who infringes. Although it is often true in case of software, books and music, I think it is more vague in case of photographs. There're no negatives, just two (almost) identical image files. If I am an abuser, I may argue just as well that *you* have tampered with *my* identification g Oh well, I am not a lawyer. Lucky for me. - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2002 10:30 PM Subject: Re: The old digital/film debate On 28 Apr 2002 at 22:11, Mishka wrote: Whatever you hide into your image, unless it is showing on the print, it can be removed simply by re-JPEG-ing it. And if it does show on a print, it is not hidden. As far as the image tags are concerned, *anyone* can overwrite them. If your customers are honest, a simple agreement (or an inobtrusive watermark) will do. If they are not, there's not much that can be done. Take a look at music and software copyright protection -- it exists only in people's minds. Everyone knows that there is no absolutely effective anti-piracy solution however once a copyright abuser is caught the proof that any form of identification applied by the copyright holder has been tampered with or removed gives more clout to the copyright owner in the case of pursuance of damages. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.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: Why some need f/22 (was: Re: Thanks Ultra-Wide Anglers! (Now a few more questions...)
If you can shoot at f22, either increase your shutter speed or decrease your film speed. I don't believe I have ever had to shoot at f22... In a message dated 4/28/02 10:38:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: With f/22, you can use the lens in brighter light even though your camera is loaded with fast film. Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why would you want to use 1/22 in the first place? I am just curious. - 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: Kodak Royal Gold 1000
In a message dated 4/28/02 10:57:00 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That goes without saying. Anyone serious about photography should not bother with this fast film. A good 400 speed film is as fast as you need to go, even with that you're giving up colour and sharpness. Has anyone tried this? I found it VERY grainy. Tried to take existing light shots at a Stars-On-Ice show with it 2 yrs ago and found that in addition to large grain structure that the colors were very wishy-washy. The vibrant reds of some cast members became maroons and flesh tones were pale and unactractive. Regards, Bob - 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: Why some need f/22 (was: Re: Thanks Ultra-Wide Anglers! (Now a few more que
I doubt you really even got F22 at 2000 of a second. Chances are the reflection from the snow was throwing your meter off and you really needed to open up 2 or 3 stops to hold the whites in the snow. I'll bet you got blue snow or difficult to print negs. It's extemely rare in nature that there is that much light in the sky In a message dated 4/28/02 11:29:00 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have hit F22 and 1/2000 a few times with the MZ-M, once trying to take pics through a planes window over northern Ontario to get snow fields and many times trying lake pics on very bright sunny days, it does happen in nature. I hit F22 and 1/4000 just last week once trying to get the CN tower's refelction in another building, the film was 200 kodak gold. - 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: Why some need f/22 (was: Re: Thanks Ultra-Wide Anglers! (Now a few more questions...)
Guys: what speed of film are you using. It really should not be an issue if you're using a slow speed, high saturation film. 100asa or less... In a message dated 4/28/02 11:49:01 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: now that i think about it, i remeber i needed that a few times. once was last year when i was trying to shoot a waterfall and wanted to get a bridesweil effect -- i needed a long exposure and even 1/22 aperture was too large for that. - 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: Why some need f/22 (was: Re: Thanks Ultra-Wide Anglers! (Now a few more que
Was the exposure actualy correct though? I hit F22 and 1/4000 just last week once trying to get the CN tower's refelction in another building, the film was 200 kodak gold. - 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: Why some need f/22 (was: Re: Thanks Ultra-Wide Anglers! (Now a few more que
Brendan said: I hit F22 and 1/4000 just last week once trying to get the CN tower's refelction in another building, the film was 200 kodak gold. This makes no sense at all. Using the Sunny 16 rule, the vase exposure would have been 1/250 @ f16.0. Figuring some added brightness, add a stop. But then you've added FOUR more stops of brightness to the scene. I'm guessing that some spectral highlights affected your metering. Was the result properly exposed? -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[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: The old digital/film debate
I thought that with wedding photos, the customer has the copyright, unless he signs an agreement granting the right to the photographer. As for copying, wedding and sports photographers here in Victoria stress that they don't give out proofs anymore. They either print up a digital 'contact sheet' with 20 or so images on it, or project the images on a large TV with a Fotovix when the customer comes. Pat White - 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 .
M49 Filters for Pentax
I just saw this on Ebay, and opted to BIN for $24 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1349523214 8 Russian M49 Filters.. yellow-1.4x; yellow-2x, yellow-green-1.4x; yellow-green-2x; Orange-2.8x; blue-1.4x; br red-8x, dark-4x. Having just priced the filters locally after deciding to start BW, these are worth a try (8 for the price of 1). 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 .
Re: Re[2]: The old digital/film debate
- Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton Subject: Re[2]: The old digital/film debate I'm starting to feel like the days of charging by the print are changing. It used to be that the labor cost was buried inside of the cost of the resulting prints. Because of the ease of duplication (scanning) and the acceptance of crap by the customer, once they get their prints, you will rarely see any more orders. So it might be better to charge an hourly rate or at least charge for your time separate from the print prices. What do you guys think? I think the government of Canada is on the right track. The link pertains to the music industry, but could as easily apply to another lobby group, such as the PPAC. http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/tariffs/proposed/c09032002-b.pdf FWIW, for those in Canada, this tariff is set to go into effect fairly soon. Objectors must submit their case by May 8, 2002, and abide by the provisions set out on the first 6 or so pages of the document. Objection is futile, however. 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: M49 Filters for Pentax
I just saw this on Ebay, and opted to BIN for $24 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1349523214 8 Russian M49 Filters.. yellow-1.4x; yellow-2x, yellow-green-1.4x; yellow-green-2x; Orange-2.8x; blue-1.4x; br red-8x, dark-4x. They have 2 types of yellow-green (1.4X and 2X) but no green. I'd like to see the curves... Yellow-green is my favorite black and white filter. They used to call it the universal filter. Andre -- - 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: M49 Filters for Pentax
- Original Message - From: James Adams Subject: M49 Filters for Pentax I just saw this on Ebay, and opted to BIN for $24 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1349523214 8 Russian M49 Filters.. yellow-1.4x; yellow-2x, yellow-green-1.4x; yellow-green-2x; Orange-2.8x; blue-1.4x; br red-8x, dark-4x. Having just priced the filters locally after deciding to start BW, these are worth a try (8 for the price of 1). Unfortunately, the Russian M49x0.75 thread size is not compatable with the industry standard M49x1.0 that is used by the camera manufacturers. Ah well, you can always get your lenses rethreaded. 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: The old digital/film debate
On 28 Apr 2002 at 23:01, Mishka wrote: Rob, See, you are assuming that there's an a priori knowledge of who is the owner an who infringes. Although it is often true in case of software, books and music, I think it is more vague in case of photographs. There're no negatives, just two (almost) identical image files. If I am an abuser, I may argue just as well that *you* have tampered with *my* identification g Oh well, I am not a lawyer. Lucky for me. As you may have seen in my initial response to Bill, if there were any argument I would simply present the series of images into which the pilfered image fits, I rarely shoot a single image of any one scene fortunately. Otherwise I agree it's difficult to prove who the owner is but there is always a way :-) Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.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: The old digital/film debate
- Original Message - From: Pat White Subject: Re: The old digital/film debate I thought that with wedding photos, the customer has the copyright, unless he signs an agreement granting the right to the photographer. That seems to depend on what country you are in. 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: Why some need f/22 (was: Re: Thanks Ultra-Wide Anglers! (Now a few more qu
I didn't take the pic, there was glare on the building that caused the cameras meter to jump to that reading and I'm not experienced enough to know how I should have compensated, I just don't shoot if I see sun glare. I did snap another one on the old Molsen building in BW reflected off the Alliance Atlantice building that was right since there was no glare involved. --- Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brendan said: I hit F22 and 1/4000 just last week once trying to get the CN tower's refelction in another building, the film was 200 kodak gold. This makes no sense at all. Using the Sunny 16 rule, the vase exposure would have been 1/250 @ f16.0. Figuring some added brightness, add a stop. But then you've added FOUR more stops of brightness to the scene. I'm guessing that some spectral highlights affected your metering. Was the result properly exposed? -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[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 . __ Post your ad for FREE! http://personals.yahoo.ca - 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 .
