Re: Aerial photography question
Anthony writes 'tele shots from above will flatten out whatever precious little modelling you might have'. If he means that the lens will change the perspective, he is wrong. If he means that haze will degrade the image he is right. Light scatter from moisture, or other nastier particles, increases, the longer the path to the subject and contrast will suffer. But a telephoto lens does not change perspective - although this might seem to be so. Trees in the distance, that might be miles apart seem bunched together in a picture taken with a 1000mm tele; or a picture down a long stretch of highway may seem to put cars, that may far apart, right next to one another. To demonstrate this, enlarge an area equivalent to that covered by the telephoto lens of a landscape taken with a normal lens of the same scene. You will find the perspective matches - so does the contrast. Of course you have to ignore the increase in grain and loss of sharpness. D Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002 - Original Message - From: Anthony Farr [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 6:43 AM Subject: Re: Aerial photography question Some good advice already, but hear's my 0.02c from personal experience. Avoid picture taking while the 'copter is in a hover because the vibrations are more extreme. Worst time of day is between 10am and 2pm standard time because there is no cross lighting to accentuate details. The best times are the first 2 hours and last 2 hours of daylight, and the morning is usually the most haze free. Get as low as the pilot will dare, because distance (and altitude) in aerial photography introduce haze. Tele shots from higher up will flatten out whatever precious little modelling you might have. Periodically look to the horizon to avoid airsickness, although I'm sure that helicopters don't induce airsickness like small 'planes do. Have NO LOOSE GEAR anywhere near open windows. Everything needs a strap or tether including your glasses if you wear them. Watch the weather reports for mountains in your area. The temperature at altitude will be closer to mountain temps than ground temps. I recall turning up to a job at a town at 1000m ALT where the temperature was pleasantly warm. However snow was forecast for 1500m and above, so I carried my ski parka with me, to the mirth of my associates. Ten minutes later I could have sold that parka for almost any sum I could name, but then I'd be freezing my own arse off :-) Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: Chris Brogden [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have a chance to do some aerial photography from a helicopter, and I was wondering if there were any tricks or not-so-obvious things that I need to know. I've heard that it's best to overexpose by a stop or two to prevent the camera's meter from being tricked by the brightness, but I'm not sure how accurate this is. Any thoughts or suggestions? I'll be using a Pentax body or two with some fast glass and a beanbag (do they help?), but I'll be bringing along a Canon Elan 7 with the 28-135 USM IS lens just to try the Image Stabilization. Any help or tips would be appreciated. Thanks! chris
RE: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review
Jeff, I too will be getting the 2450 in due time for my MF stuff. Currently this is the 35mm stuff (you know.. the Pentax LX stuff *smirk*) that I am scanning with the Minolta Dimage Scan Elite II. :) Cheers, Dave -Original Message- From: Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 11:18 PM To: David Chang-Sang; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review Dave, what do you use as a scanner? I have the same printer, but my negs won't fit into the HP S20. I need a 2450, soon! Jeff - Original Message - From: David Chang-Sang [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 11:13 PM Subject: OT: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review Seeing as how the PDML is not really fully back up (i.e. if you try to respond to this you'll probably only respond directly to me and not to the list) I figure I'll post an OT item: I snagged 25 sheets of Ilford Gallerie Pearl paper from Henry's in Toronto today (my sales guy gave me a bit of a break on it.. $18.00 CDN plus tax) - I was eager to see how it compares to Ilford's line of Multigrade RC photo paper (specifically MG IV .44 Pearl) Out of the box, weight wise, it's about the same as the MG IV. In my hands, I can't tell the difference save that the Galerie Gloss is 8.5x11 and the MG IV is 8x10. Instructions leave you with little doubt how to get the best results out of printing on your photo printer. I scanned in http://www.chang-sang.com/photos/bike_crop.jpg which was taken in July at a TOPUG meeting - HP5 plus I printed using the Epson 870 and adjusted as per instructions (1440 DPI and -6 magenta to reduce cast). From my standpoint, it is an awesome paper. It is now going to be the paper to print GOOD work on. Epson Heavyweight Matte will always be there.. as will their premium glossy paper but for Pearl, I'll be sticking with the Ilford Gallerie. Aaron did say he should have more in soon.. and compartively speaking, his prices for the 100 sheet box are a bit cheaper than Henry's. Aaron's is $79.99 for 100 sheets vs Henry's $22.99 for 25 sheets resulting in 0.80 per sheet vs 0.92 per sheet respectively. Henry's, as far as I know, does not carry the 100 sheet amounts. Cheers, Dave
RE: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review
Actually, at the time I posted it Tom - hitting reply-all didn't work. Same thing happened to Frank, so I knew it wasn't a user problem :) When I said I was comparing it to MG IV - I was comparing the Gallerie Pearl to their line of REAL photo paper (i.e. NON inkjet - darkroom based photo paper). Hope this clarifies things, Cheers, Dave -Original Message- From: tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 12:52 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review -Original Message- From: David Chang-Sang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Seeing as how the PDML is not really fully back up (i.e. if you try to respond to this you'll probably only respond directly to me and not to the list) I figure I'll post an OT item: If you hit reply-all it seems to work ok. I snagged 25 sheets of Ilford Gallerie Pearl paper from Henry's in Toronto today (my sales guy gave me a bit of a break on it.. $18.00 CDN plus tax) - I was eager to see how it compares to Ilford's line of Multigrade RC photo paper (specifically MG IV .44 Pearl) I'm confused. Ilford makes both inkjet and conventional paper called Galerie. I'm guessing you were comparing the inkjet Galerie to conventional MG? tv
Gfathers and Johnstons
Anyone seen Mike Johnstons latest 'Sunday Morning'? http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-08-25.shtml
Re: RE: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review
David. I was at Henrys Newmarket and saw they had a sample pack of the 4 Ilford Glossy papers,for $8.99 so i snagged one to try this week.It sounds like Epson printers have more paper options than the Canon drivers,but hopefully there is not much difference between papers so the S800 won't get to confused Dave Begin Original Message From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 00:51:55 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review -Original Message- From: David Chang-Sang [mailto:david@chang- sang.com] Seeing as how the PDML is not really fully back up (i.e. if you try to respond to this you'll probably only respond directly to me and not to the list) I figure I'll post an OT item: If you hit reply-all it seems to work ok. I snagged 25 sheets of Ilford Gallerie Pearl paper from Henry's in Toronto today (my sales guy gave me a bit of a break on it.. $18.00 CDN plus tax) - I was eager to see how it compares to Ilford's line of Multigrade RC photo paper (specifically MG IV .44 Pearl) I'm confused. Ilford makes both inkjet and conventional paper called Galerie. I'm guessing you were comparing the inkjet Galerie to conventional MG? tv End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
All Signed Up
Well,after 35 minuites on the phone with the all powerfull automated voice mail(ar) i'm now going back to school before my daughter (she's getting tired of me saying that though) Signed up for the developing and dark room course last Friday.I 'v got one roll of FP4+ almost shot and will hopefully have another,and maybe a 120 roll of Tmax 100 to boot.I'm not sure if we get our fingers wet on day one but i'll have some exposed film to work with,just in case. Looking forward to joining the dark(room) force:) Dave Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Re: Flash trigger voltage Pentax cameras
I cannot answer your question Simon,but have one for you.How and with what do you measure these amounts.?? Dave Begin Original Message From: Simon King [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 07:53:07 +0800 To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' pentax- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Flash trigger voltage Pentax cameras Hi All, On the weekend I bought a flash (Achiever 821TZ) on impulse as I thought I could use it as a backup and/or a slave flash. I thought I'd check the trigger voltage before I put it on either of my cameras (a Program A and a MZ-6/ZX-L) When I checked it was 270v! I was amazed! On my other flash it's only about 4v. There's no way I'm putting it on my MZ-6, but my question is - would the Program A handle the hight voltage? I note that the manual states that flash units from other manufacturers may damage the electronic systems of your camera ... At 270v I wouldn't be surprised. Cheers, Simon End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Re: Flash trigger voltage Pentax cameras
Simon, FWIW I have an older Achiever flash (don't remember the model), GN is 28/meters and I always used it on my Program A (Program +) without problems. This unit must be at least 15 yrs. old. If you're interested I can dig it out and check the model. Ciao, Flavio
RE: The weekend is half over.
-Original Message- From: Rob Studdert Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 4:33 AM On 3 Aug 2002 at 22:14, Cesar Matamoros II wrote: Oh, did I mention it was the first shots with MY 31 Limited, So Cesar how were the shots from the 31mm? Completely on topic too. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html - Rob, Now that I am back in town I can go back and look at the photos with the 31. I recall that there was not a one that I was unhappy with. I was greeted at the house by my folks - last minute decision to visit, so the photos will have to wait... Catching up to all the news, more later, Cesar Panama City, Florida
RE: DSLR Pricing, Big lenses, Sherpas
-Original Message- From: Mark Roberts Sent: Friday, August 23, 2002 11:23 AM Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sigma 20-200 (2.8) Apologies, that should of course read 70-200. Cotty PS but a 20-200 2.8 *would* be intersting ;-) If you could carry it! But I'm sure Cesar Sherpa Matamoros would be willing to help out ;-) -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com - Mark, Somehow I can see you being the Sherpa supervisor again. How did the shots from the wedged ladder turn out. For the uninformed, I was doing the Sherpa tripod carrying duties down from McRae's peak at Grandfather Mountain and came to one ladder that ends in a wedge rock formation. I was photographed from above by Jerome (owner of the tripod) and from below by Mark. I never knew there were Paparazzi in the woods! Cesar Panama City, Florida
Re: MZ-S Manual PDF
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 13:02:17 +0400, Salikh Zakirov wrote: Doug, check whether this pdf is intended to be printed as a book: [...] 144 1 2 143 142 3 4 141 140 5 6 ... Nope. It's just backwards! front cover, inside of front cover, inside of back cover, 136, 135, 134, ... 2, 1, back cover! TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: MZ-S Manual PDF
Hi Michel, On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 07:44:21 +0200, Michel Carrre-Ge wrote: It is a bug of Acorbat when one adds several pages at a time in an existing document! I knew there must be a reasonable explanation. I thought Japanese read right to left, but I thought reversing the entire manual a little over the top. :-) TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: Flash trigger voltage Pentax cameras
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 07:16:26 -0400, David Brooks wrote: I cannot answer your question Simon,but have one for you.How and with what do you measure [flash voltages].?? 1) Get a volt meter, or VOM meter (Volts-Ohms-Milliamps). 2) Put fresh batteries in your flash and turn it on. 3) Put the black lead of the volt meter on the center contact on the bottom of the flash. 4) Touch the red lead to the other contacts on the flash, one at a time. At least one of them will show a voltage difference. It could range from a couple of volts to well over 200 volts. This voltage is present on the contacts of the flash when the flash is on and energized. IIRC, the camera dead-shorts these contacts to trigger the flash. I'm not sure how energy is used on the other contacts, like TTL, digital, etc. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: F*300mm f4.5 in Natl Geographic
It seems as though Steve Winter, a photographer for Natl. Geographic, has a Pentax F*300mm f4.5 mounted to an unknown(I can't tell what it is anyway) body in the July 2002 Natl. Geographic. No he doesn't. It's a Canon zoom lens. Most likely the 70-210/2.8 L-lens. Pål
Re: Aerial photography question
Yes, anyone with a pernicketty bone in their body knows that a lens's focal length has no direct bearing on perspective. But it is also true that each particular focal length requires its own particular distance to subject to maintain a constant subject reproduction ratio. So, while in theory and fact you are correct, in real world practice photographers use focal length choice as a tool for manipulating perspective. It's a win-win situation, you can enjoy your correctness, yet the erroneous belief that focal length and perspective are directly related still works successfully for the ignorant masses ;-) BTW I was in fact referring to the haze that distance introduces. The paragraph in question opened with this direct reference to haze, Get as low as the pilot will dare, because distance (and altitude) in aerial photography introduce haze.. Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: Dr E D F Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] Anthony writes 'tele shots from above will flatten out whatever precious little modelling you might have'. If he means that the lens will change the perspective, he is wrong. If he means that haze will degrade the image he is right. Light scatter from moisture, or other nastier particles, increases, the longer the path to the subject and contrast will suffer. But a telephoto lens does not change perspective - although this might seem to be so. Trees in the distance, that might be miles apart seem bunched together in a picture taken with a 1000mm tele; or a picture down a long stretch of highway may seem to put cars, that may far apart, right next to one another. To demonstrate this, enlarge an area equivalent to that covered by the telephoto lens of a landscape taken with a normal lens of the same scene. You will find the perspective matches - so does the contrast. Of course you have to ignore the increase in grain and loss of sharpness. D Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002
MP Review of the Kiron 70-210/4
Prompted by the recent thread on the Kiron 70-210/4 lens (titled Kiron 70-210 f/4 macro 62mm filter), I dug out a review on the lens, from Modern Photography for November, 1983. Specifications: 70-210mm f/4 Kiron Accepts 62mm filters; f/4 to f/22, 1/2 stop detents; min. foc. dist. 3 ft. 9 in. (1.15m); max. magnification 1:4 at 210mm; 6 in. long, 3 in. diam. (150 x 75mm); 29 oz. (830g); $359. [caption to photo] Twin rings on Kiron zoom, at pencil, are settable to predetermined focusing distances - great for sports and action shooting. Zoom lock, on zoom/focus collar, locks in focal length setting. Practical comments: Features include zoom locking switch which effectively prevents focal-length 'creep' while focusing. Close focusing achieved without switching to macro mode, continuous at all focal lengths; glossy black front barrel does not rotate, aiding special-effects filter use; bulk and finder brightness average for range. Field test slides: No noticeable distortion. Detail crisp, snappy and well rendered, especially at f/5.6 and smaller. Some underexposure noted at maximum aperture. Overall, above average performance for type, though macro performance was slightly below average. Tested resolution values at 70mm: Accept or Good at center; Excellent at corners. Tested resolution values at 135mm: Accept to Very Good at center; Good to Excellent at corners. Tested resolution values at 210mm: Very Good to Excellent at center; Good to Excellent at corners. Tested contrast values at 70mm: High at center; High at corners. Tested contrast values at 135mm: High at center; High at corners. Tested contrast values at 210mm: High at center; Very Low to High at corners. Tested focal length values: 72.42mm to 205.20 mm. Tested aperture values: f/4.11 at 70mm; f/4.16 at 210mm. Tested distortion values: 1.64% barrel at 70mm; less than 1% pincushion at 210mm. [Fred]
list update update
Hi troops, First off, my apologies for the transition glitches. Nothing like a live fire exercise, eh? To address some concerns: 1.) I've just changed the variable to force replies to be addressed to the list itself, instead of the original author. It should go into effect in a few moments. (I hope...) 2.) This is different software (SmartList, for those keeping score), and silly me tried to make it act like majordomo. When I dumped the nomail addresses into the accept file, I didn't realize that the accept file is just a duplication of the dist (subscriber list) file. Duh. Also, the nomail file was full of old addresses that I had never cleaned out. My bad. 3.) It is possible to set up a new nomail list, but I haven't done it yet. When I do, I will notify the list. In order to make certain which addresses are current, I plan to do a mass mailing for verification. 4) Sorry I wasn't able to respond to each of the thousand emails I got asking me what was going on. I was (understandably, I hope) sort of busy sticking fingers in the dike. 5.) I hope you were able to get some good photos. Carry on, then DougList Guy
Re: F*300mm f4.5 in Natl Geographic
Darn. Wrong again. I looked at it long and hard and even compared it to Boz's pics. Guess I need a magnifying glass. Robert From: Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: F*300mm f4.5 in Natl Geographic Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:21:42 +0200 It seems as though Steve Winter, a photographer for Natl. Geographic, has a Pentax F*300mm f4.5 mounted to an unknown(I can't tell what it is anyway) body in the July 2002 Natl. Geographic. No he doesn't. It's a Canon zoom lens. Most likely the 70-210/2.8 L-lens. Pål _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
Re: list update update
Doug, Congratulations! For such a major move, the glitches I saw are negligible. I was worried for a while yesterday, not being sure what's going on, but now I see what happened and that you've done one hell of a job! Best, Mishka P.S. I did take some pictures meanwhile -- that probably explains why I have missed the previous announcement G -Original Message- From: Doug Brewer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 10:46:19 -0400 Subject: list update update Hi troops, First off, my apologies for the transition glitches. Nothing like a live fire exercise, eh? To address some concerns: 1.) I've just changed the variable to force replies to be addressed to the list itself, instead of the original author. It should go into effect in a few moments. (I hope...) 2.) This is different software (SmartList, for those keeping score), and silly me tried to make it act like majordomo. When I dumped the nomail addresses into the accept file, I didn't realize that the accept file is just a duplication of the dist (subscriber list) file. Duh. Also, the nomail file was full of old addresses that I had never cleaned out. My bad. 3.) It is possible to set up a new nomail list, but I haven't done it yet. When I do, I will notify the list. In order to make certain which addresses are current, I plan to do a mass mailing for verification. 4) Sorry I wasn't able to respond to each of the thousand emails I got asking me what was going on. I was (understandably, I hope) sort of busy sticking fingers in the dike. 5.) I hope you were able to get some good photos. Carry on, then DougList Guy
RE: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review
-Original Message- From: David Chang-Sang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] When I said I was comparing it to MG IV - I was comparing the Gallerie Pearl to their line of REAL photo paper (i.e. NON inkjet - darkroom based photo paper). Are your saying you like your inkjet prints better than your wet prints? You didn't make any specific comparison, but you said It is now going to be the paper to print GOOD work on. tv
Re: list update update
Yep. :) Dave Begin Original Message From: Doug Brewer [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5.) I hope you were able to get some good photos. Carry on, then DougList Guy End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
RE: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review
Basically.. 1) MG IV RC paper - I only use it in the one darkroom I rent (I consider going to wet but haven't yet - hmm.. that rhymes don't it) which happens to be a dry darkroom (i.e. no trays.. a machine process). Yes technically it could still be called wet because chemicals are involved but I never see them.. even when the print gets spit out of the machine. 2) The weight and texture between the two papers (MG IV and Gallerie Pearl Inkjet) is nearly identical to my hands and eyes. 3) I don't necessarily like the inkjet prints over the wet prints because they're different beasts in my eyes. The inkjet, until they get the blacks correct and can create true BW will always lend itself better to say.. sepia or a blue-grey version of BW as compared to doing things the old fashioned way (in the darkroom). The reason I say that I would use the paper for good work was mainly due to costs - ink and paper - which can add up when doing full bleed (or close to it) 90% coverage. If I break down the costs: 100 sheets Ilford Gallerie Pearl - $79.99 CDN 100 sheets Ilford MG IV Pearl - $29.99 CDN Darkroom time - $10.00/hour Inks - Epson Color - $29.99 CDN - Epson Black - $36.99 CDN I guess I'd have to do a more in depth analysis to find out if the extra cost of the Gallerie Pearl is offset by not having to pay for darkroom time :) Cheers, Dave Original Message: - From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 11:46:31 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Ilford Gallerie Pearl - Quick Review -Original Message- From: David Chang-Sang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] When I said I was comparing it to MG IV - I was comparing the Gallerie Pearl to their line of REAL photo paper (i.e. NON inkjet - darkroom based photo paper). Are your saying you like your inkjet prints better than your wet prints? You didn't make any specific comparison, but you said It is now going to be the paper to print GOOD work on. tv mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .
Re: list update update
Thanks for doing all of this work. The more I learn about computers, the more amazed I am that anything works at all . . . Steven DesjardinsDepartment of ChemistryWashington and Lee UniversityLexington, VA 24450(540) 458-8873FAX: (540) 458-8878[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: list update update
In a message dated 8/27/2002 11:54:48 AM US Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thanks for doing all of this work. The more I learn about computers, the more amazed I am that anything works at all . . . May I add a non-secular AMEN? Ed
Re: list update update
- Original Message - From: Doug Brewer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: list update update nomail file was full of old addresses that I had never cleaned out. My bad. 3.) It is possible to set up a new nomail list, but I haven't done it yet. When I do, I will notify the list. In order to make certain which addresses are current, I plan to do a mass mailing for verification. There was also my old address in that file and I suddenly began to receive double postings. I tried to unsubscribe (in a normal way) using that old address, but it prooved unsuccessful. How can I do it? Artur
Re: Aerial photography question
Sorry Anthony, to go on being pernickitty, but how does distance introduce haze? D Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002 - Original Message - From: Anthony Farr [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 5:43 PM Subject: Re: Aerial photography question Yes, anyone with a pernicketty bone in their body knows that a lens's focal length has no direct bearing on perspective. But it is also true that each particular focal length requires its own particular distance to subject to maintain a constant subject reproduction ratio. So, while in theory and fact you are correct, in real world practice photographers use focal length choice as a tool for manipulating perspective. It's a win-win situation, you can enjoy your correctness, yet the erroneous belief that focal length and perspective are directly related still works successfully for the ignorant masses ;-) BTW I was in fact referring to the haze that distance introduces. The paragraph in question opened with this direct reference to haze, Get as low as the pilot will dare, because distance (and altitude) in aerial photography introduce haze.. Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: Dr E D F Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] Anthony writes 'tele shots from above will flatten out whatever precious little modelling you might have'. If he means that the lens will change the perspective, he is wrong. If he means that haze will degrade the image he is right. Light scatter from moisture, or other nastier particles, increases, the longer the path to the subject and contrast will suffer. But a telephoto lens does not change perspective - although this might seem to be so. Trees in the distance, that might be miles apart seem bunched together in a picture taken with a 1000mm tele; or a picture down a long stretch of highway may seem to put cars, that may far apart, right next to one another. To demonstrate this, enlarge an area equivalent to that covered by the telephoto lens of a landscape taken with a normal lens of the same scene. You will find the perspective matches - so does the contrast. Of course you have to ignore the increase in grain and loss of sharpness. D Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002
RE: Aerial photography question
Don Williams wrote: Sorry Anthony, to go on being pernickitty, but how does distance introduce haze? Hi Don, I think Anthony was just referring to the fact that you've got a longer path of hazy air you're looking through when you shoot from a greater distance. Bill Peifer Rochester, NY
Re: Aerial photography question
- Original Message - From: Dr E D F Williams Subject: Re: Aerial photography question Sorry Anthony, to go on being pernickitty, but how does distance introduce haze? The haze is always there, but as distance from camera to subject increases, it becomes more of a problem. William Robb
RE: F*300mm f4.5 in Natl Geographic
You can tell by the black tulip hood. His loss... -Original Message- From: Robert Woerner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: August 27, 2002 11:09 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: F*300mm f4.5 in Natl Geographic Darn. Wrong again. I looked at it long and hard and even compared it to Boz's pics. Guess I need a magnifying glass. Robert From: Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: F*300mm f4.5 in Natl Geographic Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:21:42 +0200 It seems as though Steve Winter, a photographer for Natl. Geographic, has a Pentax F*300mm f4.5 mounted to an unknown(I can't tell what it is anyway) body in the July 2002 Natl. Geographic. No he doesn't. It's a Canon zoom lens. Most likely the 70-210/2.8 L-lens. Pål _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
RE: list update update
And thanks for all the hard work, Doug. Oh yeah, nice picture in Mike Johnston's column, too -Original Message- From: Doug Brewer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: August 27, 2002 10:46 AM Hi troops, First off, my apologies for the transition glitches. Nothing like a live fire exercise, eh?
Re: Are zoom lenses as good as primes?: The FA 645 33-55/4.5
Is it any cheaper that Provia 100F? i use provia 100F in 120, but not 35mm, as its to expensive here, about $18au a role. I might buy a role and give it a try. Paul - Original Message - From: Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 9:46 AM Subject: Re: Are zoom lenses as good as primes?: The FA 645 33-55/4.5 That has been my experience with RSXII 100 as well -- great film, as good as Provia 100F - Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 6:20 PM Subject: Re: Are zoom lenses as good as primes?: The FA 645 33-55/4.5 Pål, I'm curious about the Agfa film. I have never shot the RSXII 50, but have shot the RSXII 100. I did not see an obvious difference between it and Provia 100F on my 67.
Re: Tokina 300mm F2.8
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 09:07:46 +1000, you wrote: Hi Gang, Has any ever used or actually own a manual focus Tokina 300mm F2.8 SD lens? I am interested in some comments on these thingy's. It is an excellent lens in every respect - build quality and optical quality and ease of use are outstanding. I've had two of them, and both were great. I use mine with the Pentax 1.7x AF Adapter a lot - it makes a great autofocus 510mm/f5 lens. With a little practice you can handhold it from 1/250. -- John Mustarde www.photolin.com
RE: Flash trigger voltage Pentax cameras
How and with what do you measure [flash voltages].?? Simple, put your tongue on the trigger and shoe spring (you may have to suck), charge up the flash and then guess the voltage before you pass out. :-) OK - Not really. I just hung a multimeter over the two terminals once the flash was charged. Simon -Original Message- From: Doug Franklin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 27 August 2002 9:20 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Flash trigger voltage Pentax cameras On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 07:16:26 -0400, David Brooks wrote: I cannot answer your question Simon,but have one for you.How and with what do you measure [flash voltages].?? 1) Get a volt meter, or VOM meter (Volts-Ohms-Milliamps). 2) Put fresh batteries in your flash and turn it on. 3) Put the black lead of the volt meter on the center contact on the bottom of the flash. 4) Touch the red lead to the other contacts on the flash, one at a time. At least one of them will show a voltage difference. It could range from a couple of volts to well over 200 volts. This voltage is present on the contacts of the flash when the flash is on and energized. IIRC, the camera dead-shorts these contacts to trigger the flash. I'm not sure how energy is used on the other contacts, like TTL, digital, etc. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
RE: Tokina 300mm F2.8
Thanks John, that is precisely the combination I am looking at using on my z-1. I also have a 1.7x that I am busting to try. Cheers Shaun -Original Message- From: John Mustarde [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 28 August 2002 10:27 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Tokina 300mm F2.8 On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 09:07:46 +1000, you wrote: Hi Gang, Has any ever used or actually own a manual focus Tokina 300mm F2.8 SD lens? I am interested in some comments on these thingy's. It is an excellent lens in every respect - build quality and optical quality and ease of use are outstanding. I've had two of them, and both were great. I use mine with the Pentax 1.7x AF Adapter a lot - it makes a great autofocus 510mm/f5 lens. With a little practice you can handhold it from 1/250. -- John Mustarde www.photolin.com
Re: Are zoom lenses as good as primes?: The FA 645 33-55/4.5
Where I am buying, it's USD$1.99/roll of 120. It's expired (a few months), but so far the slides look pretty good. - Original Message - From: Paul Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 8:18 PM Subject: Re: Are zoom lenses as good as primes?: The FA 645 33-55/4.5 Is it any cheaper that Provia 100F? i use provia 100F in 120, but not 35mm, as its to expensive here, about $18au a role. I might buy a role and give it a try. Paul - Original Message - From: Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 9:46 AM Subject: Re: Are zoom lenses as good as primes?: The FA 645 33-55/4.5 That has been my experience with RSXII 100 as well -- great film, as good as Provia 100F - Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 6:20 PM Subject: Re: Are zoom lenses as good as primes?: The FA 645 33-55/4.5 Pål, I'm curious about the Agfa film. I have never shot the RSXII 50, but have shot the RSXII 100. I did not see an obvious difference between it and Provia 100F on my 67.
Re: Flash trigger voltage Pentax cameras
Anyone knows if Sunpak 522 can fry LX? I don't have a voltmeter and not willing to experiment... And if those two can work together peacefully, does it do TTL with LX? Best, Mishka - Original Message - From: Simon King [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 8:29 PM Subject: RE: Flash trigger voltage Pentax cameras How and with what do you measure [flash voltages].?? Simple, put your tongue on the trigger and shoe spring (you may have to suck), charge up the flash and then guess the voltage before you pass out. :-) OK - Not really. I just hung a multimeter over the two terminals once the flash was charged. Simon -Original Message- From: Doug Franklin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 27 August 2002 9:20 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Flash trigger voltage Pentax cameras On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 07:16:26 -0400, David Brooks wrote: I cannot answer your question Simon,but have one for you.How and with what do you measure [flash voltages].?? 1) Get a volt meter, or VOM meter (Volts-Ohms-Milliamps). 2) Put fresh batteries in your flash and turn it on. 3) Put the black lead of the volt meter on the center contact on the bottom of the flash. 4) Touch the red lead to the other contacts on the flash, one at a time. At least one of them will show a voltage difference. It could range from a couple of volts to well over 200 volts. This voltage is present on the contacts of the flash when the flash is on and energized. IIRC, the camera dead-shorts these contacts to trigger the flash. I'm not sure how energy is used on the other contacts, like TTL, digital, etc. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: Are zoom lenses as good as primes?: The FA 645 33-55/4.5
It seems that roll film in Australia is very expensive. I expected the price to fall with the GST, but it didn't. Bob - Original Message - From: Paul Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is it any cheaper that Provia 100F? i use provia 100F in 120, but not 35mm, as its to expensive here, about $18au a role. I might buy a role and give it a try.
Re: Are zoom lenses as good as primes?: The FA 645 33-55/4.5
I think I pay about $8.50au for a 120 roll of Provia 100F, i don't so much mind that, but $18au for a roll of 35mm is a little rich for my blood :) Paul - Original Message - From: Bob Rapp [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 10:52 AM Subject: Re: Are zoom lenses as good as primes?: The FA 645 33-55/4.5 It seems that roll film in Australia is very expensive. I expected the price to fall with the GST, but it didn't. Bob - Original Message - From: Paul Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is it any cheaper that Provia 100F? i use provia 100F in 120, but not 35mm, as its to expensive here, about $18au a role. I might buy a role and give it a try.
Re: Flash trigger voltage Pentax cameras
My Sunpak flashes are 7 volts so that should not be a problem. I am not sure about TTL, but IIRC it doesn't. On Tuesday 27 August 2002 07:41 pm, Mishka wrote: Anyone knows if Sunpak 522 can fry LX? I don't have a voltmeter and not willing to experiment... And if those two can work together peacefully, does it do TTL with LX? Best, Mishka -- Kenneth Archer, San Antonio, Texas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Digital vs.FILM: will digital cameras lose the war?
But haven't we gotten used to a rather poor quality nowadays? I recently looked at the BW prints of my grandfather and I was amazed what quality they had 50 years back. 4x6 inch prints where you would need to go really close to see all detail. I think the present concept of 10 lines per mm for prints is really poor. I like holding pictures closer to see if there are additional details and am often disappointed with the quality (especially color) my Ritz Camera locally uses a scanner and digital laser processor. it outputs ontp photographic paper at about 300 dpi. the dots are visible to the naked eye. Herb
RE: Off to see Paul
Grrr I would have made it had it not been for an evil loss of our soccer team.. which of course had to be followed up by an evening of drowning our sorrows. *sigh* Maybe another time as long as Paul's hanging out in Hogtown. Cheers, Dave -Original Message- From: frank theriault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 4:45 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Off to see Paul Hi, As some of you may recall, Paul Stenquist is in Toronto this week on business. I'm off to meet him at a local pub in a couple of hours - always nice to meet a new face from the list! Dave Chang-Sang may make it (but I'm not holding my breath...), but unfortunately, other Toronto folks aren't going to be in the area. Since Paul's been off-list during his trip, any messages to pass on to him? Anyone want me to collect money or other debts on your behalf? vbg Full report later this evening or tomorrow... regards, frank -- The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: Are zoom lenses as good as primes?: The FA 645 33-55/4.5
Paul, Have you thought about rolling your own. I think the savings is about 50%. I bought a Watson loader and am planning on buying the long rolls and spooling my own. DX coding may be a problem for some and the lab recognition for others. Bob - Original Message - From: Paul Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 11:14 AM Subject: Re: Are zoom lenses as good as primes?: The FA 645 33-55/4.5 I think I pay about $8.50au for a 120 roll of Provia 100F, i don't so much mind that, but $18au for a roll of 35mm is a little rich for my blood :) Paul
Re: Are zoom lenses as good as primes?: The FA 645 33-55/4.5
Hi Bob, I roll my own B/W, but not colour. I actualy just had the unfortunate experiece of buying some new film cannisters recently and two of them scratched the film really badly, 3 big strips down the film. They must have had something in the felt from the factory where they were made. They were actualy metal ones this time and i usually use platic ones. Also missing the last few frames really bugs me :) My local shop actualy has DX codes 100ISO cartrides. I've actualy got a 3 bulk loaders at the moment, two of which i'm going to put on ebay soon. Paul - Original Message - From: Bob Rapp [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 11:25 AM Subject: Re: Are zoom lenses as good as primes?: The FA 645 33-55/4.5 Paul, Have you thought about rolling your own. I think the savings is about 50%. I bought a Watson loader and am planning on buying the long rolls and spooling my own. DX coding may be a problem for some and the lab recognition for others. Bob - Original Message - From: Paul Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 11:14 AM Subject: Re: Are zoom lenses as good as primes?: The FA 645 33-55/4.5 I think I pay about $8.50au for a 120 roll of Provia 100F, i don't so much mind that, but $18au for a roll of 35mm is a little rich for my blood :) Paul
Some mistakes in life can be corrected
Just got my hands back on my old 85mm, F2 after selling in to a friend a while back when I needed funds to buy a the 15mm. He has not been using it much so he sold it back to me for the same price I sold it to him ( $175 Cdn) a steal at both ends. Anyway, no matter what some people write about the lens, I like it and plan to put it through its paces this weekend. Also picked up a 50 F1.7 from him... Vic
RE: Server went fubar?
And somehow, having been unsubscribed for a good number of months, I'm magically back on the list :) I'm glad it wasn't just me! I, too, unsubbed a couple of days ago, only to find myself back on the list. But my computer's been acting weird, so I thought it was me...
Re: Some mistakes in life can be corrected
This is the same guy who has the mint 135-600 F6.7 lens complete with metal box. He's looking to sell it for about $1,200 Cdn. I am now considering buying it more as a collector lens than a user. This thing is HUGE, but it is certainly interesting. The autofocus version just happens to be in a store nearby for $9,000. It's not the same lens by any stretch of the imagination, but it would be interestingto own... Vic
RE: Thanks Cesar
-Original Message- From: Christian Skofteland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 7:20 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Thanks Cesar On Tuesday 27 August 2002 15:38, Cesar Matamoros II wrote: -Original Message- Eleanor's (LX) seemed pristine, especially next to my original one. Cesar; ANY LX would look pristine next to yours.. ;-) BTW, I got a new MX that has actually been refurbished, talk about pristine! Christian Christian, I guess there is no need to bring my MX out next time. Though I still need a part for it. But ol' faithful, the original LX will be with me, it not only makes any LX look good, it makes any camera look pristine. It just adds to the enjoyment knowing I can take it anywhere in any condition and it will continue to perform. César Panama City, Florida
Re: Digital vs.FILM: will digital cameras lose the war?
Which means that I can ac heave higher quality with my cheap film scanner and even cheaper HP Printer. This is very sad. At 09:23 PM 8/27/2002 -0400, you wrote: But haven't we gotten used to a rather poor quality nowadays? I recently looked at the BW prints of my grandfather and I was amazed what quality they had 50 years back. 4x6 inch prints where you would need to go really close to see all detail. I think the present concept of 10 lines per mm for prints is really poor. I like holding pictures closer to see if there are additional details and am often disappointed with the quality (especially color) my Ritz Camera locally uses a scanner and digital laser processor. it outputs ontp photographic paper at about 300 dpi. the dots are visible to the naked eye. Herb
Re: Digital vs.FILM: will digital cameras lose the war?
Damn spell checker. At 11:27 PM 8/27/2002 -0400, I wrote: Which means that I can ac heave higher quality with my cheap film scanner and even cheaper HP Printer. This is very sad. At 09:23 PM 8/27/2002 -0400, you wrote: But haven't we gotten used to a rather poor quality nowadays? I recently looked at the BW prints of my grandfather and I was amazed what quality they had 50 years back. 4x6 inch prints where you would need to go really close to see all detail. I think the present concept of 10 lines per mm for prints is really poor. I like holding pictures closer to see if there are additional details and am often disappointed with the quality (especially color) my Ritz Camera locally uses a scanner and digital laser processor. it outputs ontp photographic paper at about 300 dpi. the dots are visible to the naked eye. Herb
Re: Some mistakes in life can be corrected
In a message dated 8/27/2002 7:16:08 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The autofocus version just happens to be in a store nearby for $9,000. Do you mean the 250-600 f5.6? I didn't know there was an autofocus 135-600? -Brendan MacRae
HTML Test
Title: Message Can we now send HTML email to the list?
RE: HTML Test
Title: Message It would seem we can. Now that's a worry -Original Message-From: Simon King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 28 August 2002 12:02 PMTo: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'Subject: HTML Test Can we now send HTML email to the list?
Re: HTML Test
Title: Message i think the problem is that some members cant receive HTML mail or dont wish to d/l larger emails. - Original Message - From: Simon King To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 2:11 PM Subject: RE: HTML Test It would seem we can. Now that's a worry -Original Message-From: Simon King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 28 August 2002 12:02 PMTo: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'Subject: HTML Test Can we now send HTML email to the list?
Re: HTML Test
- Original Message - From: Simon King [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 10:01 PM Subject: HTML Test Can we now send HTML email to the list? Yes, but it is still bad manners 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: Some mistakes in life can be corrected
i own the screwmount version (same lens) and its OUTSTANDING! Grab it for that price, you wont be sorry. BTW, It sold for $2000 U.S. way back in the 70's. I paid $1000 U.S. for mine but the screwmount version is more collectable I would think... JCO -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 10:13 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Some mistakes in life can be corrected This is the same guy who has the mint 135-600 F6.7 lens complete with metal box. He's looking to sell it for about $1,200 Cdn. I am now considering buying it more as a collector lens than a user. This thing is HUGE, but it is certainly interesting. The autofocus version just happens to be in a store nearby for $9,000. It's not the same lens by any stretch of the imagination, but it would be interestingto own... Vic
Re: Fw: Pentax 645N custom functions
Hi! The following is what Pål wrote long ago about the 645n custom functions. Antti-Pekka Here are the 645n custom functions: FUNCTIONS: 1) Half Stop Time Exposures Allows you to change shutter speeds in 1/2 stop increments instead of full stop increments 2) Program Shift Allows you to shift exposure by 1/2 stop increments instead of 1/4 stops in program mode. 3) Manual Shutter Speeds In Bulb Mode Allows the photographer to program specific shutter speeds from 4 seconds to 500 seconds (1/2 stop increments) in bulb mode. 4) Half Stop Autoexposure Bracketing Allows you to adjust autobracketing to the following order: 1/3 stop, 1/2 stop, 1 stop (instead of 1/3 stop, 2/3 stop, 1 stop). 5) Adjusting Autobracketing Order Changes the autobracketing order from Normal, Under, Over to Under, Normal, Over 6) Roll And Frame Counter Counts the rolls (from 1 to 99) along with frames shot on a particular assignment in the viewfinder and imprints it on the film (w/data imprint function on). 7) Descending Counter The exposure counter in the LCD panel will tell you how many exposures you have left instead of how many you have taken. 8) Meter Shut-Off Time Change Changes the auto power shut-off from the normal 10 seconds to either 5, 20, or 30 seconds. The bad news is that the custom functions needs to be set at a Pentax service center. It cost the same whther you want one function or all. I have not yet found out how this work. Ie. how to set shutterspeeds in half stops (does the click stops on the shutter speed dial change to half stops - or maybe the up/down buttons are used?), how do you do program shift?, can you change between normal B setting and programable B setting if this custom function is activated- if so how? - and how do you program the duration of the exposure? --- * Antti-Pekka Virjonen * Fiskarsinkatu 7 D * GSM: +358 500 789 753 * * Computec Oy Turku* FIN-20750 Turku Finland * Fax: +358 10 264 0777 *
Re: Are zoom lenses as good as primes?: The FA 645 33-55/4.5
It seems that roll film in Australia is very expensive. I expected the price to fall with the GST, but it didn't. Of course not. :( regards, Alan Chan _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
