RE: RE: How did you start photography
Please continue, and tell us what Band/Venue Kerrang used? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] photography, I managed to get Kerrang magazine to print a b/w shot of mine. Fantastic. Your chest swells up and you want to show the whole world - who don't wish to listen I could continue, but feel it is only fair to let someone else take the stage.
RE: Vs: MZ-S durability
My opinion last time was that we basically have a choice. We can have a switch which is a two handed job to turn on, with safetys and such like, or we can have a switch which possibly gets knocked on by mistake. If Pentax made the switch harder to use, you can bet people here would be complaining that they miss shots with the extra time it took to turn the camera on. Every camera I have ever had 'could' turn on accidentally if the switch is knocked. OK perhaps the MZ-S is a little easier than some - mine has never done this. What I am more concerned about is the 'drive mode' switch. When I slide the camera into my bag, this often gets pushed to multiple exposure mode. That has cost me a few shots in the past and I try to check it whenever possible. Luckily I have only lost shots on that one occasion, but I live in fear of it happenning again. To be honest, Multi=exposure is so seldon used, that I would prefer it be swapped with the PF that controls the mode of the self timer. That way the switch would have Normal, Continuous, Timer and MLU Timer. If the switch got set wrongly then it would no longer be a big deal, like the metering - you can cope and the shot is not generally lost. I normally have MLU Timer set on the PF, and when I want the real timer for family shots, I can never remember which PF it is. Personally I don't care how difficult Multi-exposure is to activate, although its nice to have it on the camera. /RANT MODE OFF -Original Message- From: wendy beard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 12 September 2002 02:21 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Vs: MZ-S durability At 19:40 11-9-2002 -0400, you wrote: I am still griping about the MZ-S. I bought two at my lab (not my $$) and took them to Mali last January. I complained that when you put them in a back pack, the camera can turn itself on. (Well, actually, the switch is designed so that unintentional pressure against it can turn the camera on.) Several PDMLers lambasted me for having them in a backpack. Okay, they've been sitting in a box in my office for a couple of months without being touched. They are both in Pentax holster-type bags. And guess what? I looked at both of them today, and found one of them turned on. Some pressure through the soft case had turned the on/off switch to on. I know there are a lot of MZ-S defenders on the list. But a camera that unpredictably turns itself on strikes me as having a pretty fundamental flaw. Blast away... Joe It could just be the action of putting them in or pulling them out of the case/bag which turns them on. On my recent trip where I carried the MZ-S around in a backpack with its ever ready case on I found sometimes the switch had set itself to self-timer. Oddly, I didn't notice it trunng itself on. Still a nuisance though. Wendy --- Wendy Beard Ottawa, Canada mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] home page http://www.beard-redfern.com
Re: RE: How did you start photography
was to record my interests of camping, climbing, and attending deafening rock concerts. See! I *told* you he was a rock star! :-) Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh classified ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
RE: RE: How did you start photography
Wasn't he the one that played bass in Spinal Tap?? -Original Message- From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 12 September 2002 11:46 To: Pentax List Subject: Re: RE: How did you start photography was to record my interests of camping, climbing, and attending deafening rock concerts. See! I *told* you he was a rock star! :-) Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh classified ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: A list of lenses
yes, and.?? Peter
Re: Q1: Close-up lens effect?
Bruce Dayton wrote: Joe, I wonder if you would be better of with extension tubes? If you have the chart that accompanies them, that might be a good idea...! If not, I don't (offhand) know where to find the data... In fact, I have a very old set of (3) as-new Asahi M-42 thread 'S3' extension tubes, numbers I, II and III, that I culled from an old photo shop's 'goodies' box a long time ago. Nice leather case for them, etc., but of course, no literature! I have no idea what S3 refers to. Maybe when my on-order copy of 'The Pentax Way' shows up, there'll be something in there... Maybe Pentax would still have some literature? keith Bruce Wednesday, September 11, 2002, 9:14:32 PM, you wrote: WJ Hi Joe, WJ I don't know how to calculate closest distance, but the diopter of the closeup lens indicates where infinity focus would be in fractions of a meter. In other words, the WJ farthest you could focus with a +1 closeup lens is 1 meter, with a +2 it would be 1/2 meter and a +3 would be 1/3 meter and so forth. Hope this helps. WJ William in Utah. WJ 9/11/2002 3:47:42 PM, Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How does one calculate the effect of a close-up lens? (That is, so as to know what to order by mail.) The Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX that I picked up earlier this summer focuses only to six feet. I'd like to pick up a +1 or +2 close-up lens to carry with it. So how does one calculate what the closest and farthest focusing distances will be with a +1 or +2 lens and the Sigma at 200 mm.? If anyone knows the answer, could you let me know personally as well as reply to the list? I'm a no-mailer, and Mail-Archive.com seems to be losing messages these days. My e-mail is: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks, everyone. And thanks, Doug, for getting us no-mailers back on line. Joe
Re: SMC F 70-210 Vs. Takumar F 70-210
Steve Pearson wrote: Thanks all for the input. I think I am now more confused than ever. Has anyone actually answered my question? Do we now for sure that the Takumar F 70-210 does not have SMC coatings? My guess is that Pentax would actually engrave 'SMC' on ALL lenses that had that specific coating. It's almost a certainty that because of the widely recognized optical performance associated with that coating, they could charge more for one so marked, at least in my view... g Well, that's the lens I just purchased. So, I have to see just how good it is. It's my guess that if it ISN'T SMC coated, it still has a coating, and in 99% of the cases, you'd never see the difference in any of your output... Enjoy it! keith whaley = all snipped =
Re: Q1: Close-up lens effect?
Thursday, September 12, 2002, 6:20:52 AM, Bruce wrote: BD Joe, BD I wonder if you would be better of with extension tubes? I don't think so. For some strange reason, ext. tubes didn't work well with my zooms. Throwing the focus totally off during zooming. Good light, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Pentax flashes / changing platforms
Rac This gets back to my point: if I am ill-informed it's because the Pentax system is a morass of tech details. (Nikon is also a morass when it comes to compatibility of older lenses with Rac certain bodies, another reason why Canon EOS appeals to me, one system without the hassles of semi-backward compatibility.) You think so. But read a good EOS faq, and you will see that the compatibility isn't that good either. Like the accessories changing (remote releases, for example), flashes changing, etc. Rac If I'm going to spend more $ on a body, then a new EOS becomes Rac attractive when you figure in the prices of new EOS lenses as opposed to Pentax AF offerings (see my previous Rac post). Well, you haven't obviously priced the good EOS optics. e.g. primes. Pentax offers the cheapest 1.4/50, 2/35 and 2/24 lenses from ANY brand in autofocus, and these lenses are among the best of any. EOS L zooms are about as expensive as from Pentax, or even more. Their primes are quite more expensive, the EOS 1.8/50 costs about as much as a 1.4/50 from pentax IIRC. Rac Could someone explain to me all the differences between all Type A Rac and Type B flash units in 25 words or less? Ok, I will try :) T flashes have analog TTL. They work on ALL pentax bodies. FT flashes have digital TTL, they work only on AUTOFOCUS bodies, but offer advanced features like second curtain synch, program mode,... Enough? Rac Of course, I bought the ZX-M, the camera that was more or less a replacement from the K1000. But unlike my old K1000, I have to worry if my Made In Japan Vivitar 283 flash is going to fry the Rac electronics in my ZX-M. So much for backwards compatibility. What a nonsense! The same flash will fry your EOS, and you aren't complaining. NO PENTAX FLASH will ever fry your electronics. BUT VIVITAR ISN'T PENTAX, dammit! It's a different maker! It's like saying that Nikon is crap because when you stick a Pentax flash on it it doesn't work! Rac I find it interesting that a couple of people on this list act touchy when I mention that Pentax ain't perfect. As I said before, no platform is. I think that the EOS one *might* be better for Rac me than staying with Pentax. Sorry if I called your baby ugly when I stated my ill-informed opinion. It's not about opinion, that's of course yours to make. It's about ill-worded statements like the one above about Vivitar flash. Good light, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: AF500 FTZ
Thursday, September 12, 2002, 10:17:24 AM, Shaun wrote: SC A couple of questions for all the learned Pentaxians out there. Firstly, is SC there an alternative power source for the AF500FTZ other than AA, the TR SC power packs or a quantum battery? All have their limitations, and I can't SC seem to come up with any other heavy-duty power source. What are their limitations? You could always rig up a big battery pack using e.g. industrial big NiMH cells of 5Ah (or even bigger capacity if you have the $)... SC presently for daylight fill flash on small birds etc on my z-1 with a lens IIRC, the Z-1 (not Z1p) doesn't have independent flash exposure compensation. Of all the Pentax _bodies_ so far, only the Z-1p (and perhaps the Japan only Z5p) has independent compensation for both flash and ambient exposure (on MZ-S, this is done on the flash 360fgz itself. I hope Metz will come up with an updated foot for MZ-S with exp.comp. on the foot) However, on all Pentax bodies capable of manual mode and exp. compensation (that is, Z-1, SFXn, MZ-5n,...), you can shoot in manual mode and set exp.compensation to e.g. -1 or -2, this way, only the flash will be affected and will act as fill in. You have to remember it during the metering though, as the metering is affected too, and either meter with handheld meter, or offset the set -1 e.c. during metering. Good light, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: Organ Myths -- The Finale? :)
Don't worry, your investment is secure. Pentax comes out with way more patents than products. A big announcement from Pentax might be that they will begin selling black Limited Edition lenses in the US. From: Brad Dodo [EMAIL PROTECTED] Had I known (if our speculations are correct :)) that there would be a higher model coming out shortly, I would never have bought the MZ-S or its accessories.
Re: Pentax flashes / changing platforms
Not quite - The Canon 50mm 1.8 standard lens is $150 CDN @ a number of retailers. The Pentax 50mm 1.7 standard lens is $270 CDN @ the same retailers. I too have been considering a switch so that's the reason for the price check on the items mentioned but I'm waiting it out till after Photokina :) Cheers, Dave Original Message: - From: Frantisek Vlcek [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 14:19:06 +0200 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pentax flashes / changing platforms snip Their (Canon) primes are quite more expensive, the EOS 1.8/50 costs about as much as a 1.4/50 from pentax IIRC. /snip mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .
Re: A list of lenses
Some folk were debating the existence of certain versions of 135mm; so I typed out that list. If you don't need it, don't read it. I delete most of the PDML messages without opening them. Perhaps you should be more selective? 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 2:41 PM Subject: Re: A list of lenses yes, and.?? Peter
Re: Vs: MZ-S durability
What can I say? This has rarely happened to me. Maybe, given your habits, this is a bad camera for you. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re[2]: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, Bruce Dayton wrote: You gotta try the 67II or 645nII. When you deal with that big viewfinder and big negative, suddenly the bells and whistles on the 35's suddenly doesn't seem quite so important. Talk about feeling like you got the top of the line... Also, you want to look like a pro? I've got one word for that: Darkcloth. -- http://www.infotainment.org The destructive character is cheerful. - Walter Benjamin
Vs: Vs: Favourite K mount normal lens poll
Interesting ;-) All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Päivä: 12. syyskuuta 2002 6:25 Aihe: Re: Vs: Favourite K mount normal lens poll On 11 Sep 2002 at 22:28, Raimo Korhonen wrote: Of the Voigtländer lenses the APO 125 f2.5 is the only one that has not performed well in a test at infinity - but as a macro it was superb (in Practical Photography IIRC). Neither did mine until I adjusted the factory mis-aligned infinity stop :-( Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
Vs: Need Info from MZ-S and MZ-L/6/7 users (was: Has the MZ-S already a new mount?)
I think that the exact value of the maximum aperture can be read by old cameras as well - even the analogue MF cameras do it. The pin for it has existed before any electronic contacts. But only the newer cameras can display it. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Päivä: 11. syyskuuta 2002 23:55 Aihe: Re: Need Info from MZ-S and MZ-L/6/7 users (was: Has the MZ-S already a new mount?) I vaguely recall this being discussed some time ago. It looks from your list that it is the newer lenses with odd maximum apertures that can be read by the MZ-S. I think the answer suggested before was that, since these lenses didn't exist when the 1p and 5n were released, their chips cannot recognize the odd apertures. To test this, I just put my FA 31 f1.8 on a PZ-1p. At wide aperture the reading goes from f2.0 to f1.7. It can't display f1.8, presumably because its chip doesn't have that aperture written into it? Joe
Re[2]: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
Rob, Do I have to state the obvious? Of course we want Pentax (or any other manufacturer for that matter) to make a flagship product, that would never become obsolete, or, for really finicky, would be 100% upgradeable over internet for free (including body mods), switch between digital and film at will, change its size and weight (and color) to suite the owner tastes, accept every lens every manufacturer has ever produced... you get the picture. And, yes, on top of that, be *really* affordable and never loose its value. It's *that* simle! Have I missed anything? Mishka -Original Message- From: Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 11:26:54 +0100 Subject: RE: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) This is just plain crazy. We keep hearing how Pentax is behind (technologically), and now you say they can only bring out something new every 2 years or so in order that some elitist attitude can be sated. Don't you want them to improve their products as much as possible, as fast as possible? If you had your way, when (I know - if) Pentax launch a small sensor 3-6MP D-SLR, they wont be allowed to bring out a full frame 11MP SLR for another 2 years! Get a grip man and just enjoy what you have for what it is - a camera, not a status symbol. If you want a status symbol go and buy a Leica. -Original Message- From: Brad Dobo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 12 September 2002 05:02 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) Hey Mishka, Of course I understand that, we'd all be in the dark ages if things didn't keep improving. :) All I ask (to the camera gods) is that I want to enjoy having the top Pentax, for a couple years anyhow. Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 11:53 PM Subject: Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) Brad, I hate to break it to you, but I'm pretty sure that a few years *after* the new flagship comes out, there will be a newer, even better one. And so on, and on, and on...
Re: A list of lenses
Thanks for the list of lenses. Interesting to see all the variations. Jim A. From: Dr E D F Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 08:28:16 +0300 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: A list of lenses Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 01:54:08 -0400 Pentax K mount lenses in production - 1981 Fixed focal length: SMC Fisheye 17mm f4.0 SMC 15mm f3.5 SMC 18mm f3.5 SMC M 20mm f4.0 SMC 24mm f2.8 SMC M 28mm f2.0 SMC M 28mm f2.8 SMC M 28mm f3.5 SMC M 30mm f2.8 SMC M 35mm f2.0 SMC M 35mm f2.8 SMC M 40mm f2.8 SMC 50mm f1.2 SMC M 50mm f1.4 SMC 50mm f1.7 SMC M 50mm f2.0 SMC M 85mm f2.0 SMC M 100mm f2.8 SMC M 120mm f2.8 SMC 135mm f2.5 SMC M 135mm f3.5 SMC M 150mm f3.5 SMC 200mm f4.0 SMC 300mm f4.0 SMC M* 300mm f4.0 (LD glass) SMC M 400mm f5.6 SMC 500mm f4.5 SMC 1000mm f8.0 SMC 1000mm f11.0 Reflex SMC 2000mm f13.5 Reflex Zooms: SMC M 24~35mm f4.0 SMC M 24~50mm f4.0 SMC M 28~50mm f3.5-4.5 SMC M 35~70mm f2.8-3.5 SMC M 40~80mm f2.8-4.0 SMC M 45~125mm f4.0 SMC M 75~150mm f4.0 SMC M 80~200mm f4.5 SMC 135~600mm f6.7 Macros: SMC M 50mm f4.0 SMC M 100mm f4.0 SMC M 100mm f4.0 bellows Shift: 28mm f.3.5 Don Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002
Re[2]: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Mike Ignatiev wrote: Have I missed anything? Made from cheese! -- http://www.infotainment.org The destructive character is cheerful. - Walter Benjamin
Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
Hey Rob, No, nothing personally, it's all right to have an alternate opinion and I like to debate. I'm obsessive by nature actually. No, the MZ-S will be no less capable if Pentax introduced a new system. That's obvious. You must realize that the bulk of my arguement is that I do want the latest stuff, not because it's better (or worse), just because I can, and want the bragging rights to go with this. That's why I want the MZ-S to be at the top of the pile for a couple years (more). You may think that's immature, that's fine. This next statement is going to get a lot of responses against it, yet I believe that it's true for most. Owning a type of camera is like the food chain. Large and medium format cameras are 'top', good 35mm SLR's are down a bit (then Canon and Nikon over other brands), and 35mm point and shoot (or disposible) cameras are lower. (I am leaving out digital and APS) I think that most 35mm SLR people believe themselves to be more a photographer, or better, than someone that shoots with a PS. Everyone here can deny this, but I'd know that most (not all) would be lying. Anyhow, this all goes back to what I was saying about myself, that I want to be at the top of the food chain (this time Pentax's) with my MZ-S. Brad Dobo (And actually, I really want a long(er) telephoto, but can't buy it new. I wish there were more Pentax stuff in the shops around here) - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 1:54 AM Subject: Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) On 11 Sep 2002 at 23:27, Brad Dobo wrote: As one Pentax customer, I would care. I bought the MZ-S because it was the latest and greatest sort of thing, it's only a camera and I didn't _need_ itI also bought the AF360FGZ for it, release cable, release timer (still waiting on it). Had I known (if our speculations are correct :)) that there would be a higher model coming out shortly, I would never have bought the MZ-S or its accessories. Hi Brad, Don't take anything I say too personally but it seems that you are obsessing just a little bit :-) As you know (I suspect that little voice whispering in your head is agreeing) the MZ-S will be no less capable when a new top line Pentax SLR comes out? I like to have the biggest and the best. Well you are only 27, you'll get cured eventually, I had my first Porsche at 25 (and my parents had nada to do with it), got a second so I had two for a while, got sensible ten years later, now I only own a Volvo :-) I don't collect any sort of equipment, and only get what I need (or just plain want). Stick around here for long enough and you'll be cured. I sell my old lens for better ones (and lose money on it definitely). I know a lot of people here are just the opposite, that's fine, but can you see it from my point of view? Well that's all fine and good but what makes you think that the newer stuff is always better? I also only dress with brand name clothes tooheh, flame me on that! :) No that's your very own problem (and far more serious than camera lust :-) I cannot speak for the LX or anything more than a few years old. The LX will remain a classic and will be favoured by some photographers until film becomes impossible to afford, you should really try one at some stage to see what we are on about. And although I do not have the financial means (without asking my parents who are rich but don't help me out :)) to switch to a different system or brand, if Pentax does come out with a higher spec model (so soon, mind you, I am not stupid and know that the MZ-S will not be the top forever), I will be more likely to jump ship with no problem to get the latest thing when I did have the financial meansit's not like I have Pentax tattooed on me. Hell, I could still stick with better new Pentax stuff. Call me vain, a wannabe, rich brat or whatever, because in some cases, I definitely am and proud! Proud doesn't mean you can't own gear that's not absolutely current. Anyhow, why are we spending so much time on this anyhow, we should be using our cameras? :) Good question, pass... Take it easy dude, don't stress so much. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
Well, that was a rude email. I dislike those that call me crazy, and no, I could care less if Pentax didn't come up with things as fast and much as possible. I can go to other brands if I want that. Get a grip? Again you are saying I'm out of reality, and perhaps (again) crazy. As I've said before, that's my preference. I don't care if you don't like it. As for status symbols, cameras are like that whether you like it or not. It's just like a car. Now you would probably say those people aren't 'real' or 'true' photograhers, so does that mean if I own a Porshe 911 and you have a Corvette, that I'm not a real driver? *sigh* Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 6:26 AM Subject: RE: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) This is just plain crazy. We keep hearing how Pentax is behind (technologically), and now you say they can only bring out something new every 2 years or so in order that some elitist attitude can be sated. Don't you want them to improve their products as much as possible, as fast as possible? If you had your way, when (I know - if) Pentax launch a small sensor 3-6MP D-SLR, they wont be allowed to bring out a full frame 11MP SLR for another 2 years! Get a grip man and just enjoy what you have for what it is - a camera, not a status symbol. If you want a status symbol go and buy a Leica. -Original Message- From: Brad Dobo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 12 September 2002 05:02 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) Hey Mishka, Of course I understand that, we'd all be in the dark ages if things didn't keep improving. :) All I ask (to the camera gods) is that I want to enjoy having the top Pentax, for a couple years anyhow. Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 11:53 PM Subject: Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) Brad, I hate to break it to you, but I'm pretty sure that a few years *after* the new flagship comes out, there will be a newer, even better one. And so on, and on, and on...
Re: Re[2]: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
Yes I do strive to, but I don't understand this 'Darkcloth'. And while I strive, I don't take good pictures, I'll admit that, but I wanna look good doing it. Again, that's my personal preference that should not be attacked. Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Brad Dobo [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 8:52 AM Subject: Re[2]: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, Bruce Dayton wrote: You gotta try the 67II or 645nII. When you deal with that big viewfinder and big negative, suddenly the bells and whistles on the 35's suddenly doesn't seem quite so important. Talk about feeling like you got the top of the line... Also, you want to look like a pro? I've got one word for that: Darkcloth. -- http://www.infotainment.org The destructive character is cheerful. - Walter Benjamin
Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
On 12 Sep 2002 at 9:34, Brad Dobo wrote: Hey Rob, No, nothing personally, it's all right to have an alternate opinion and I like to debate. :-) (And actually, I really want a long(er) telephoto, but can't buy it new. I wish there were more Pentax stuff in the shops around here) You haven't learned that it's not the size that counts it's what you can do with what you have? :-) Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
Re: Pentax flashes / changing platforms
I think Chris's point here is that Pentax has so far created only two partially incompatible bodys intentionally. These body's by the way were intended for beginners who didn't have a previous investment in Pentax equipment. They are still way ahead of Canon and Minolta who abandoned their old lens mounts when they went auto focus, and Nikon who have more than a few incompatibilities in their line. So lets set the record straight you would rather buy into a system who's manufacturer has in the past said in effect F**k the users, they'll replace all their equipment when we say so, to one who at least tries to retain backward compatibility, and usually succeeds. I'm sure if Pentax created a new system with a new mount entirely from scratch it would be at least as consistent as the Canon EOS system, at least for a while. At 01:48 AM 9/12/2002 -0400, Ray wrote: Christopher Lillja on Wed, 11 Sep 2002 06:18:36 wrote: Full aperture metering simply means that the camera meters as it should, producing a correct exposure or reading without having to stop down. All current major SLRs work this way, including Canon. There are only a handful of K mount bodies (ie. ZX30, ZX60) that don't support all K mount lenses to the full extent of capabilities shared by both the camera and lens. I meant to say open-aperture. See the ZX-50 info from pentax.com below. I had stated: But is that any worse that a particular Pentax body that claims to be compatible with K mount lenses but only at full aperture metering or whatever it's called? Chris observed: This is one of the most ridiculous, ill-informed statements I've ever seen on this list. ThanX. I try my best. I admit I used the wrong term, full aperture metering, when I should've said open aperture metering -- whatever THAT is. I remember glancing at an instruction manual for one of the lower-priced Pentax bodies -- it might've been the ZX-50 -- and from what I could decipher from the semi-translated text it sounded as if the camera could only use a K mount lens set at its maximum aperture, such as f2 on my 50mm, for the Av setting. Please correct me if I'm wrong. This gets back to my point: if I am ill-informed it's because the Pentax system is a morass of tech details. (Nikon is also a morass when it comes to compatibility of older lenses with certain bodies, another reason why Canon EOS appeals to me, one system without the hassles of semi-backward compatibility.) Could someone explain to me all the differences between all Type A and Type B flash units in 25 words or less? Below I've pasted info from the Pentax Website on their lower-priced bodies, that handful that you mentioned. I don't think I'm ill-informed when I say that that Pentax has abandoned backwards compatibility with K mounts with its affordable AF models. If I'm going to spend more $ on a body, then a new EOS becomes attractive when you figure in the prices of new EOS lenses as opposed to Pentax AF offerings (see my previous post). ZX-50: Usable Lenses: Pentax FA, F, A, M and K lenses. (When the aperture ring is set at other than the A position, aperture-priority at open-aperture or unmetered manual are available.) ZX-60: Usable Lenses: Pentax KAF2- and KAF-mount lenses. ZX-30: Usable Lenses: Pentax KAF2, KAF and KA-mount lenses. When the aperture ring is set at other than the A position, shutter release is locked. Of course, I bought the ZX-M, the camera that was more or less a replacement from the K1000. But unlike my old K1000, I have to worry if my Made In Japan Vivitar 283 flash is going to fry the electronics in my ZX-M. So much for backwards compatibility. I find it interesting that a couple of people on this list act touchy when I mention that Pentax ain't perfect. As I said before, no platform is. I think that the EOS one *might* be better for me than staying with Pentax. Sorry if I called your baby ugly when I stated my ill-informed opinion. Ray
RE: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
Sorry, I didn't mean to be rude, and I never even hinted that you werent a true photographer. But... What you said WAS crazy. Almost everyone else wants Pentax to advance and catch up with their competitors. You say you can go to other brands if you want fast development - yes, this is why pentax is losing more and more high end marketshare to these brands. But as I said, you can go to other brands that suit YOUR preferences for a static range of status symbols - Leica do that very nicely. You could buy their top of the range and not be superseded for many years to come. Pentax does not really have the brand cachet (much as we might want it to) in 35mm to fit your requirements. For Pentax to survive, they need to innovate - so the course you want is not really suitable. -Original Message- From: Brad Dobo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 12 September 2002 14:41 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) Well, that was a rude email. I dislike those that call me crazy, and no, I could care less if Pentax didn't come up with things as fast and much as possible. I can go to other brands if I want that. Get a grip? Again you are saying I'm out of reality, and perhaps (again) crazy. As I've said before, that's my preference. I don't care if you don't like it. As for status symbols, cameras are like that whether you like it or not. It's just like a car. Now you would probably say those people aren't 'real' or 'true' photograhers, so does that mean if I own a Porshe 911 and you have a Corvette, that I'm not a real driver? *sigh* Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 6:26 AM Subject: RE: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) This is just plain crazy. We keep hearing how Pentax is behind (technologically), and now you say they can only bring out something new every 2 years or so in order that some elitist attitude can be sated. Don't you want them to improve their products as much as possible, as fast as possible? If you had your way, when (I know - if) Pentax launch a small sensor 3-6MP D-SLR, they wont be allowed to bring out a full frame 11MP SLR for another 2 years! Get a grip man and just enjoy what you have for what it is - a camera, not a status symbol. If you want a status symbol go and buy a Leica. -Original Message- From: Brad Dobo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 12 September 2002 05:02 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) Hey Mishka, Of course I understand that, we'd all be in the dark ages if things didn't keep improving. :) All I ask (to the camera gods) is that I want to enjoy having the top Pentax, for a couple years anyhow. Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 11:53 PM Subject: Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) Brad, I hate to break it to you, but I'm pretty sure that a few years *after* the new flagship comes out, there will be a newer, even better one. And so on, and on, and on...
Re: NEW PENTAX PATENTS!!!: The gobbledegook and my humbletranslations...More...
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002 16:23:04 +1000, Anthony Farr wrote: Whoa! You're counting your chickens before they hatch. From the qoute you've supplied it seems like Pentax have found a means to multiplex the data streams of 3 in-lens-devices (eg. power zoom motor, focussing motor and IS system) through one connection which is presumably the power-zoom contacts that we already know about from the Z/PZ series. I really don't think so! These contacts only supply POWER to the lens (power-zoom) and that power could be used by any 'device' in the lens that needs it. (Which is why these contact are so large and rigid) The intelligence needed to CONTROL the devices is thrue one of the other smaller pins in the lens mount. One of those is a serial (digital) interface that can carry information about anything the lens and body agree upon. Apparently (my guess, that is) there is some method of inhibiting a device from acting in response to received data if that data was intended for a different kind of device. This doesn't imply that more PZ lenses are in the offing, only that a means has been found to prevent your current PZ lens from inappropriately zooming when it receives a signal intended for the focussing device or IS device of an as yet unreleased lens. IS and USM can use the same power-source, and I don't see a reason why anymore pins would be needed to exchange information. They just need to expand the protocol on that serial connection, and if the engineers at pentax deserve that name, they will have designed it to be expandable. Regards, JvW (Electronics Engineer and programmer :-) -- Jan van Wijk; http://www.dfsee.com/gallery
Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
Brad Dobo wrote: Yes I do strive to, but I don't understand this 'Darkcloth'. And while I strive, I don't take good pictures, I'll admit that, but I wanna look good doing it. Again, that's my personal preference that should not be attacked. Brad, I admire you for your chutzpah! Again, you veer from the norm, freely admitting, with a big smile on your face, that you're not a really good photographer, yet you don't care, it's just the 'getting there' that matters. I think that if you never DO get there, that wouldsn't matter, either, so long as you're onboard for the trip! grin Since most photogs are nowhere as free and loose with their opinions and even the most rank of amateurs won't admit he's anything less than a budding Ansel Adams or, Saints preserve us, even a Peter Gowland (!), you're a breath of fresh air. Someone who's honest! No, folks should not attack you for admitting you're less than perfect. You're totally right. Good luck in your trip down photography's fantasy lane. Others should do half so well... keith whaley
Re: Re[2]: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
Depends on what the plan is. Personally I'd just pack a couple of zooms and travel light. (Unless I were going for after dark street photography, then it would be a couple of moderately fast small primes). At 09:53 AM 9/12/2002 -0400, you wrote: On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Brad Dobo wrote: Yes I do strive to, but I don't understand this 'Darkcloth'. And while I strive, I don't take good pictures, I'll admit that, but I wanna look good doing it. Again, that's my personal preference that should not be attacked. I'm not attacking you, I have the largest ego of anyone I know (just ask me, I'll tell you!), and I know I adore to be in the spotlight as much as I abhor it... And what I was saying is that nothing gets attention faster than a wooden field camera on a tripod, bellows extended, and your head under the darkcloth. Instant chick magnet! Alright, I lie, its not a chick magnet. That said, I'm off too NYC tomorrow, and I'm trying to decide if I have the ability to carry another couple of pounds of Pentax 35mm kit.. Someone should tell me its a good idea, and my shoulders can take it. -- http://www.infotainment.org The destructive character is cheerful. - Walter Benjamin
Re[2]: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Peter Alling wrote: Shouldn't he be using a view camera with that or just drape it over his head while looking thought the viewfinder of the MZ-S? Oh, well, that'd be a REALLY small darkcloth.. perhaps a darktissue? -- http://www.infotainment.org The destructive character is cheerful. - Walter Benjamin
Re[3]: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
Nah.. simpler: dark cloth (or, sky mask) and a BFG900. In NYC *especially* :) -Original Message- From: Peter Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 09:39:13 -0400 Subject: Re[2]: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) Shouldn't he be using a view camera with that or just drape it over his head while looking thought the viewfinder of the MZ-S?
RE: SMC F 70-210 Vs. Takumar F 70-210
You forgot to mention that most but not all Super Multicoated Takumar's allowed open aperture metering with Spotmatic F and ES cameras. While most Super Takumar's did not. (Although there were exceptions). At 02:02 PM 9/12/2002 +1000, John wrote: Hi Keith: Here's my understanding of the various combinations of Takumar, SMC etc: Takumar was the original name for the non-auto diaphragm lenses of the 1950's - 60's. Some of these were pre-set diaphragm lenses, with an additional control ring. You focussed these at full aperture, then stopped them down for exposure (and for metering with the Spotmatic and later). Auto-Takumars were introduced with semi-automatic diaphragms, where you opened up the aperture for focussing, and the camera closed it on pressing the shutter release Super-Takumars were introduced with the fully auto-diaphragm mechanism when the Spotmatics, SV's and S1a's were produced, beginning about 1963-4. Lenses of 200mm and over continued to be produced with no automatic diaphragm, and remained designated as Takumar or Tele-Takumar, whether pre-set or manual diaphragm. (Source: 'Asahi Pentax Guide', Focal Press, tenth edition, August 1967) Super-Takumar, then, does not necessarily refer to the coating used. Super-Multi-Coated coatings were introduced in 1971, and the lenses were Bagdad Super-Multi-Coated in full. Pentax lenses were coated prior to this, but part of the marketing of the SMC was that it was more efficient for less thickness of coating - test reports at the time said it blew away competitive coatings, and IIRC, had been either jointly developed with, or licensed to, Carl Zeiss, who designated it as T* coatings, or something similar. These seven-layer coatings, according to the LX brochure, reduced the loss of transmitted light to 0.2%, compared with 1-2% for conventional coatings. It was with the change of mount to the bayonet that Pentax lens were designated Pentax rather than Takumar, and the SMC abbreviation replaced the full text. I have a brochure for the original K series release in which all of the new lenses are named SMC Pentax with the suffix Shift, Macro, etc., where appropriate. The generally physically smaller lens range introduced for the M series was designated SMC Pentax-M. The LX brochure lists both SMC Pentax-M and SMC Pentax lenses, and I am not sure whether the non-M ones are new introductions or a continuation of the K series: for example the SMC Pentax 15/3.5 appears in both brochures, but the SMC Pentax 30/2.8 only appears in the LX list The Takumar Bayonet range, introduced as a budget range in the later '80's, did not carry the SMC tag at all, and, while my example of the 28/2.8 is optically good, it undoubtedly would be prone to more flare than the M-series, which looks like a totally different design. HTH John Coyle Nicholas John Consultants Brisbane, Australia On Thursday, September 12, 2002 2:02 AM, Keith Whaley [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: Hi Rob, You've brought up an interesting point. Well, to me anyhow! g By your statement ...I assume that the Takumar doesn't employ SMC coatings, you made me wonder why you would assume such a thing. So I checked all my M-42 Takumar lenses, and some do indeed include the SMC coating, so just because it's a Takumar is not necessarily associated with SMC coating or not. At least going by what's engraved on the front bezel: . Super-Takumar 1:1.4/50 - looking at the front lens I see evidence of numerous (11 or 12?) colored reflections, so it is definitely coated, but no SMC on the lens bezel. This is my only 50mm lens with so many coating reflections! . Super-Takumar 1:3.5/135 - only 4 reflections, but obviously coated. Not SMC. Will it be less contrasty and subject to flare? I love this lens for it's build and compactness. Shall I not use it because of it's diminished contrast? I think not... . SMC Takumar 1:1.4/50 - 6 reflections. My Spotty F's always-attached normal lens. Compare with the topmost listed 1.4/50 - are these two different designs, or does the Super-Takumar have more coastings than the SMC version? . Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 1:1.4/50 - 6 reflections, just like the one above. There are obviously build differences, if only in how the SMC is spelled out or abbreviated, and rubber vs. metal focus rings, etc. . Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 1:2.5/135mm - Only 3 reflections on this lens, yet it's SMC. Different design than the f/3.5 version? How interesting... What's the difference between a plain Takumar (is there any such?), a Super-Takumar? Is the coating change all that takes place in a SMC Takumar the only thing that makes it different from a Super-Takumar? If all this is too boring or elementary for you folks [smile] maybe someone lead me to a site that describes the differences? Thanks to all, keith whaley Rob Studdert wrote: On 10 Sep 2002 at 23:54, Steve Pearson wrote:
Re: Re[2]: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Peter Alling wrote: Depends on what the plan is. Personally I'd just pack a couple of zooms and travel light. (Unless I were going for after dark street photography, then it would be a couple of moderately fast small primes). Well, I've got a few hours to kill before a party (my friend is having her birthday party in teh Port Authority bowling alley, to me, that's genius), so I figured to haul the Graphic up (I wouldn't wish the torture of having to be with me when I've got it) and bop around the park a bit. Considering the pack is already up to 30-40#, I'm leery to add anything else. Although, I'm taking a look at a virtual tour through the park to actually SEE the statues I haven't seen since I was about 10, and I think I'm compelling myself for the ZX-5n, A50 and 28-70. However, there will be NO battery grip with me... every ounce counts! -- http://www.infotainment.org The destructive character is cheerful. - Walter Benjamin
Re: Re[2]: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
On Thursday, September 12, 2002, at 08:25 AM, Mike Ignatiev wrote: Rob, Do I have to state the obvious? Of course we want Pentax (or any other manufacturer for that matter) to make a flagship product, that would never become obsolete, or, for really finicky, would be 100% upgradeable over internet for free (including body mods), switch between digital and film at will, change its size and weight (and color) to suite the owner tastes, accept every lens every manufacturer has ever produced... you get the picture. And, yes, on top of that, be *really* affordable and never loose its value. It's *that* simle! Have I missed anything? Mishka I'll take two, please. Dan Scott
Re[2]: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
Actually, I had envisioned it looking more like a burnoose but hey. At 10:08 AM 9/12/2002 -0400, you wrote: On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Peter Alling wrote: Shouldn't he be using a view camera with that or just drape it over his head while looking thought the viewfinder of the MZ-S? Oh, well, that'd be a REALLY small darkcloth.. perhaps a darktissue? -- http://www.infotainment.org The destructive character is cheerful. - Walter Benjamin
Re: NEW PENTAX PATENTS!!!: The gobbledegook and my humbletranslations...More...
On 12 Sep 2002 at 16:01, Jan van Wijk wrote: I really don't think so! These contacts only supply POWER to the lens (power-zoom) and that power could be used by any 'device' in the lens that needs it. (Which is why these contact are so large and rigid) It would be exceedingly easy to implement a modulated serial control signal on top of the power so I think so :-) Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
Re: Pentax at Photokina - where to watch?
Oh ya forgotI could see a new brand of digital binoculars that Pentax already has using the IS :) Good thing I didn't buy one, or I'd be pissed! :) Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 10:42 AM Subject: Pentax at Photokina - where to watch? In anticipation of Photokina, where would listers recommend to keep an eye on? Are there any decent news sites or official sites that one could check regularly in the run up to announcements about new gear? What's your take on this? Cheers, Cotty Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh classified ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
RE: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
-Original Message- From: Brad Dobo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Oh, I'm well aware that Pentax doesn't know or care what Brad Dobo really wants :) We all know that feeling! I wonder if they do notice the PDML...? No, If you look at your example of Porshe: A couple of years ago they brought out a new update to the 911, a few months later they brought out a convertible version, then a targa top, then a super turbo, then they revise the body shape on the standard model and on and on. Going by what you said, they should not have done this because it reduces the status of the guy who bought the original. Very few companies can afford the luxury of operating this way, Pentax is not one of them. I disagree here, the 911 has been around for quite some time, and I see the 911 diffent options as I would see the BG-10 battery grip or any other MZ-S related option. Except that you cant just add the convertible option to your hard top! When the GT2 came out, the 911 turbo and 922 carrera were no longer the flagship - this is exactly like what you describe in my mind. Perhaps if the base unit was a convertible and you could just add a hard roof, spoilers, wheels etc that would be like the BG-10. Again sorry if you see this as an insult, but I have to be honest too. Nope, don't see it as an insult, as long as we are civil and respectful, we can debate this until the MZ-S becomes 'obsolete' :) Pheeew, I don't want to upset anyone - this is quite an interesting debate.
RE: How did you start photography
I suppose it's my turn. This post will accomplish two things. One is to state how I started in photography and the other would be to answer another post of how and why I came upon the Pentax brand. Here goes: Back in the 80's the photography bug bit me. Being naive about photography I simply marched into a store and purchased the first camera I saw - a Minolta (can't remember if it was the x370 or x700) - and proceeded to burn film like crazy. After a few weeks I received as a gift a Nikon A4004s from my then girlfriend - now my wife. The Minolta was returned for a refund. It was a big mistake now that I realized it. The Nikon functioned pretty much like a point and shoot camera and not a compositional tool. I used it alright but just for snapshots at weddings, parties, etc. I never really got into photography the way I wanted to. Then last year while viewing the photos taken from our recently concluded trip it hit me big time - I have to learn the art of photography. Shortly after that I enrolled in a photography class. But I didn't want to use the Nikon since it is mainly auto focus and I wanted to learn the hows and whys of photography from a manual camera. So I went the ebay way and bid for and won an auction for a Canon A-1. I didn't know about the Pentax line then. My wife must be my lucky charm because soon after acquiring the A-1 she walks up to my cubicle (we work together) and hands me not only one but two pristine condition K1000s complete with 50mm/f2 lenses and one 24mm/f2 Vivitar lens. Their department was switching to digital. That is how I came upon the Pentax brand. Being curious about this brand of camera I typed in Pentax in Google and lo and behold I came upon all these neat information about the Pentax line. In short since August of last year I have acquired an ME Super, sold it, and re-acquired another. I have also added to my collection an MX and a Spotmatic, a handful of lenses, filters, teleconverters, and in a few days a couple of form fit cases courtesy of a fellow PDMLer. The K1000s are long since gone but I'm pretty sure they are being put to good use. My decision to use Pentax was partly influenced by comments I read from a product review website, comments from the PDML and it's members and largely in part to the quality of photos I get from the Pentax cameras I have been using. I'm still learning the art of photography. For me (and I guess for a lot of folks) it is a constant learning process done by trial and error method. I try something and the negative or print will give me the answer. It's fun and it's an escape from the pressures of family, work, etc. I will never put down my Pentax. Well maybe I will but only after someone prys it off my dead hands. The Nikon and the Canon are still with me and they get used once in a while but my Pentax cameras are my constant companions and will always be my go to equipment. The simplicity of these cameras and the quality of images I get are second to none. I hope you enjoyed reading my rather long post. Thank you and have a nice day. Francis M. Alviar Irvine, CA __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! News - Today's headlines http://news.yahoo.com
RE: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
In fact, anyone who sells products in the same marketplace IS competing with them - doesn't pentax outdo them in some market segments? We maybe don't expect or want pentax to go gung ho for the professional journo/sports photog market with the consequences that may be involved in an impossible task, but most people here seem to want them to do better than they are currently as far as I understand thousands of posts. They will possibly never catch up with C* and N* in brand perception, but they need to move forward as they are becoming les and less visible in the SLR market as things stand. I do praise and embrace the MZ-S, but I will be more than happy if they bring out even better products... -Original Message- From: Brad Dobo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 12 September 2002 15:49 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) Ok. This point I make only, I have seen many posts that Pentax cannot compete with Nikon and Canon, like Minolta tried. So do we or don't we want Pentax to try? I thought the majority position was no. Then we should all praise the MZ-S and embrace it :) No hard feelings, I may have read your email wrong too. Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 9:49 AM Subject: RE: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) Sorry, I didn't mean to be rude, and I never even hinted that you werent a true photographer. But... What you said WAS crazy. Almost everyone else wants Pentax to advance and catch up with their competitors. You say you can go to other brands if you want fast development - yes, this is why pentax is losing more and more high end marketshare to these brands. But as I said, you can go to other brands that suit YOUR preferences for a static range of status symbols - Leica do that very nicely. You could buy their top of the range and not be superseded for many years to come. Pentax does not really have the brand cachet (much as we might want it to) in 35mm to fit your requirements. For Pentax to survive, they need to innovate - so the course you want is not really suitable. -Original Message- From: Brad Dobo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 12 September 2002 14:41 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) Well, that was a rude email. I dislike those that call me crazy, and no, I could care less if Pentax didn't come up with things as fast and much as possible. I can go to other brands if I want that. Get a grip? Again you are saying I'm out of reality, and perhaps (again) crazy. As I've said before, that's my preference. I don't care if you don't like it. As for status symbols, cameras are like that whether you like it or not. It's just like a car. Now you would probably say those people aren't 'real' or 'true' photograhers, so does that mean if I own a Porshe 911 and you have a Corvette, that I'm not a real driver? *sigh* Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 6:26 AM Subject: RE: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) This is just plain crazy. We keep hearing how Pentax is behind (technologically), and now you say they can only bring out something new every 2 years or so in order that some elitist attitude can be sated. Don't you want them to improve their products as much as possible, as fast as possible? If you had your way, when (I know - if) Pentax launch a small sensor 3-6MP D-SLR, they wont be allowed to bring out a full frame 11MP SLR for another 2 years! Get a grip man and just enjoy what you have for what it is - a camera, not a status symbol. If you want a status symbol go and buy a Leica. -Original Message- From: Brad Dobo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 12 September 2002 05:02 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) Hey Mishka, Of course I understand that, we'd all be in the dark ages if things didn't keep improving. :) All I ask (to the camera gods) is that I want to enjoy having the top Pentax, for a couple years anyhow. Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 11:53 PM Subject: Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) Brad, I hate to break it to you, but I'm pretty sure that a few years *after* the new flagship comes out, there will be a newer, even better one. And so on, and on, and on...
Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
Brad wrote: I find this interesting, we have excitement and fear and all sorts of things because of the speculation on Pentax. Pal, you seem to know a lot. And your idea scares me :) I don't know this for a fact. It's speculation or belief. I would think that Pentax would have to come up with a new top of the line camera to go with these lenses that we speculate about. Isn't that a bit out of character? Wasn't the PZ-1p the flagship since 1995? Would they put a better (I know, not necessarily better, LX and all :)) camera out than the MZ-S so soon? That's why I don't think we will see anything with KAF3 mount soon... Pål
Re: Pentax flashes / changing platforms
Ray wrote: This gets back to my point: if I am ill-informed it's because the Pentax system is a morass of tech details. (Nikon is also a morass when it comes to compatibility of older lenses with certain bodies, another reason why Canon EOS appeals to me, one system without the hassles of semi-backward compatibility.) This is not a valid argument. Canon EOS is compatible. So is Pentax FA. Below I've pasted info from the Pentax Website on their lower-priced bodies, that handful that you mentioned. I don't think I'm ill-informed when I say that that Pentax has abandoned backwards compatibility with K mounts with its affordable AF models An so did Canon; on all bodies, not only the cheap ones. You cannot use older Canon FD lenses on EOS bodies. All Pentax cameras can use FA lenses like Canon with their EF lenses. Pål
Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
Shaun wrote: Perhaps another flagship so soon would appear foolish, however, it may be an expedient way of recovering some of the development cost that went into the stalled MZ-D. Sell the converted (i.e. us) a new 'flagship' SLR essentially based on a digital SLR design that didn't fly, while all the while having other development plans. This is pretty much what some of us were being told by insiders about the MZ-S awhile back. The decision to make a film camera (MZ-S) of the digital prototype came out of the blue, apparently delayed other slr developments to much internal dismay. Pål
Re: Need Info from MZ-S and MZ-L/6/7 users (was: Has the MZ-S already a new mount?)
Sorry that I don't have any info on the MZ-6, but I think you're barking up the wrong tree. All FA lenses can transmit the exact aperture. Whether or not the camera use it depends on the camera. Probably also reported apertures transmitted from the lens varies with the price of the lens. Eg,. Canon non-L lenses set aperture in 1/4 stops while the L-lenses use 1/12 of a stop. So the differences in accurate apertures is probably a function of whats coded into the lens CPU. I don't believe that the MZ-S has FA3 mount. The specification sheet says KAF2 and I cannot find any reason why they would spread desinformation. I wouldn't hold my breath for KAF3 mount to be shown at Photokina either (I would love to be proven wrong though). When or if such a mount appears, my guess is that it will for a new series of cameras. Pål - Original Message - From: Rüdiger Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 10:49 PM Subject: Need Info from MZ-S and MZ-L/6/7 users (was: Has the MZ-S already a new mount?) Hallo, I need some help. The MZ-S displays also odd aperture values like 1.9, 1.8, 3.2 in the viewfinder. The Z1p and the MZ-5n shows instead 2, 1.7, 3.5. The min and max aperture values of a lens were transmited by the contacts of the KA-mount. A lens from 2.8 - 22 has a certain pattern of the 6 pins. It is not possible to transmit values like 1.9 in that way. So there have been a change in the protokoll of the 7th pin which transmitted the focal lenth and the distance of F/FA lense. It must also transmit the exact aperture value. For that there must be a change in the lense and in the camera. I have the question which lense and since when transmitted the exact values and which camera can read it besides the MZ-S. I have tested some lenses with odd apertures with the MZ-S. But some lenses are missing. (see list) I'm also interessted if the new bodies like the MZ-6/L can read the new protokol. Here is my list with a lot of ??? in order of the lens and camera appearance. K-mount F/FA lenses with odd aperture values which can/cannot transmit exact aperature values: FA 3.5-4.7 28-80 PZ since 1991no F4.7-5.6 80-200 black since 1994?? FA 3.8-5.6 28-200 since 1996no FA 1.9/43 since 1997yes FA 4.7-5.6 80-200 silversince 1999 ?? FA 1.8/77 since 1999yes FA 4.7-5.8 100-300 since 2000?? A 1.2/50 for LX2000 since 2000?? FA 1.8/31 since 2001 ?? FA 3.2-4.5 28-105 since 2001yes Cameras which can/cannot display the exact aperature values: Z-1p 1995 no MZ-5n1997 no MZ-7/MX-7 1999 ?? MZ-S 2001yes MZ-L/MX-6 2001?? MZ-60 2002?? Can you please fill in the lists at the questionmarks Thanks Rüdiger Neumann P.S: It is interesting, that this protokol which was already in a lens since 1997 (1.9/43) was used the first time ?? in a camera in 2001.
RE: Pentax at Photokina - where to watch?
IS in a loupe, now that really would be something. I am sure there must be a Pentax patent for an image processing device that converts poorly focussed and exposed images intelligently into perfect shots. Introducing the new Pentax 'Rose-tinted spectacles'!!! -Original Message- From: Brad Dobo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 12 September 2002 16:00 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pentax at Photokina - where to watch? Yes, I'd like to know that as well. I hear they are putting the IS and USM into their amazing new zoom spotting scopes only. Or is it the new loupe?. :) - Original Message - From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 10:42 AM Subject: Pentax at Photokina - where to watch? In anticipation of Photokina, where would listers recommend to keep an eye on? Are there any decent news sites or official sites that one could check regularly in the run up to announcements about new gear? What's your take on this? Cheers, Cotty Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh classified ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: Pentax flashes / changing platforms
I'm an EX canon FD user I find Pentax's backward compatability the best of all the systems out there. You only showed us the 3 exceptions and they are the bottom of the barrel entry level cameras, Nikon and Canon both do the same with their low end cameras, why is Pentax being singled out as abandoning backwards compatability when they have strived so hard to keep it with only a few ( and expected ) exceptions. Ray wrote: Below I've pasted info from the Pentax Website on their lower-priced bodies, that handful that you mentioned. I don't think I'm ill-informed when I say that that Pentax has abandoned backwards compatibility with K mounts with its affordable AF models __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
We're meeting at Photokina
Raim0, Dario and I will be getting together at Photokina. We're meeting at the Pentax stand at 11:00 on Saturday 28 September. Anyone else planning on being there? The more the merrier! Cheers, Pat Temmerman (MZ3_fella) _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
Program Plus
What sort of price can I expect to pay for a Super Program? I'm asking because I saw Super Program (body) in Vancouver yesterday for $125CDN(+taxes). I already have a couple of ME's, ME Supers and a Program Plus (SMC Pentax-A 1:2 50mm). Is there any advantage adding a Super Program body to my working collection? Like the ME/MES/Program Plus I expect it has the brighter viewing screen and easier focusing. James
RE: Program Plus
Sounds like a good deal- I paid about $90US for mine, but it needed mirror and back foam, ended up costing more like $135 all said and done. Taka -Original Message- From: James Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 11:34 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Program Plus What sort of price can I expect to pay for a Super Program? I'm asking because I saw Super Program (body) in Vancouver yesterday for $125CDN(+taxes). I already have a couple of ME's, ME Supers and a Program Plus (SMC Pentax-A 1:2 50mm). Is there any advantage adding a Super Program body to my working collection? Like the ME/MES/Program Plus I expect it has the brighter viewing screen and easier focusing. James
Re: Program Plus
TTL Flash Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: James Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 11:33 AM Subject: Program Plus Is there any advantage adding a Super Program body to my working James
Re: Program Plus
another Pentax :-) --- Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: TTL Flash Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: James Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 11:33 AM Subject: Program Plus Is there any advantage adding a Super Program body to my working James __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Re[2]: Need Info from MZ-S and MZ-L/6/7 users (was: Has the MZ-S already a new mount?)
kinda feels good looking at cameras built back when the men were the real men, etc (including those furry green creatures from a-centauri). transmitting exact aperture in infinitesimal increments with any lens. kinda like LX. man, I love the progress! :) Mishka -Original Message- From: Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... Probably also reported apertures transmitted from the lens varies with the price of the lens. Eg,. Canon non-L lenses set aperture in 1/4 stops while the L-lenses use 1/12 of a stop. So the differences in accurate apertures is probably a function of whats coded into the lens CPU.
Re: Has anyone used sigma AF 24/2.8 on pentax?
And a reply on my own question, which, unfortunately has not yet been answered... I'd also like some comment on the SMC Pentax FA 20-35 f4 AL? (overal performance, build, such things) ThankS!! Rod. - Original Message - From: Rodelion [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 09:28 Subject: Has anyone used sigma AF 24/2.8 on pentax? G'day y'all. And? Have you? I know this lens is neat, but I've heard something about that the effective aperture on a pentax mount is only 3.5? And what about vignetting, really that bad? thanks, Rod.
Re: RE: Program Plus
James. Thats a good price.If its in good shape i'd grab it. I bought a used one earlier this year and although it does not suite my needs for the action shots,i is great for any portrait landscape etc i need to do.It has only seen bw since June and they look great. 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
Vs: Need Info from MZ-S and MZ-L/6/7 users (was: Has the MZ-S already a new mount?)
I think that the exact value of the maximum aperture can be read by old cameras as well - even the analogue MF cameras do it. The pin for it has existed before any electronic contacts. But only the newer cameras can display it. All the best! Raimo Yes, perhaps it can be read, but the display cannot show 1.8. (This is in the case of my PZ-1p and FA 31 f1.8, which reads 1.7 on the LCD.) Joe
Re: SMC F 70-210 Vs. Takumar F 70-210
Steve, I have a Takumar F 1:4-5.6 70-210mm, and an SMC-F 1:3.5-4.5 28-80mm zoom, and used both on my recent sortie afloat at the Tall Ships, with excellent results(SF-1 and MZ-7). When I get my slides scanned, I'll post a link. James
RE: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
I think an interesting point to be made here is that status symbol is so much more an issue for the owner than the beholder anyway. In other words, Brad, you may be carrying around your MZ-S and feel like you are impressive in some way. Along comes Joe who sees your camera and really doesn't even care that you have a camera. He notices that you are taking pictures, perhaps smiles, and moves on. He really did not get any sense that you were top of the line. He just noticed that you had a camera. Now here is the good part. In your mind, he noticed that you had a professional looking camera and therefore must be a great photographer with great gear. You may go through your day getting this good feeling from interaction with a number of people. Some may be impressed with your top of the line SLR and others don't know their f/stop from their a__, and don't really care if you have a Hassie or a Fuji disposable. What is important (to you) is how it makes you feel to carry this camera around. It's all in your head, the perception you have of yourself as you imagine seeing yourself through other peoples eyes. I say more power to you. If it makes you feel good then great for you. I know when I walk about at weddings with my 645n and AF500FTZ on a BIG swiveling flash bracket I feel like a pro because of what I am carrying as much as what I am doing. It gives me an aire of confidence (but not arrogance) and I think that comes out in a positive way in my approach to my clients. And if I looked over (with my BIG 645n setup) and saw you there with your MZ-S I would just think pissy little amateur . Ha Ha !!! just kidding. All in fun, Brad. Have fun with your camera. Isn't that what it's really all about any way?? -Original Message- From: Brad Dobo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 8:41 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) Well, that was a rude email. I dislike those that call me crazy, and no, I could care less if Pentax didn't come up with things as fast and much as possible. I can go to other brands if I want that. Get a grip? Again you are saying I'm out of reality, and perhaps (again) crazy. As I've said before, that's my preference. I don't care if you don't like it. As for status symbols, cameras are like that whether you like it or not. It's just like a car. Now you would probably say those people aren't 'real' or 'true' photograhers, so does that mean if I own a Porshe 911 and you have a Corvette, that I'm not a real driver? *sigh* Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 6:26 AM Subject: RE: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) This is just plain crazy. We keep hearing how Pentax is behind (technologically), and now you say they can only bring out something new every 2 years or so in order that some elitist attitude can be sated. Don't you want them to improve their products as much as possible, as fast as possible? If you had your way, when (I know - if) Pentax launch a small sensor 3-6MP D-SLR, they wont be allowed to bring out a full frame 11MP SLR for another 2 years! Get a grip man and just enjoy what you have for what it is - a camera, not a status symbol. If you want a status symbol go and buy a Leica. -Original Message- From: Brad Dobo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 12 September 2002 05:02 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) Hey Mishka, Of course I understand that, we'd all be in the dark ages if things didn't keep improving. :) All I ask (to the camera gods) is that I want to enjoy having the top Pentax, for a couple years anyhow. Brad Dobo - Original Message - From: Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 11:53 PM Subject: Re: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :) Brad, I hate to break it to you, but I'm pretty sure that a few years *after* the new flagship comes out, there will be a newer, even better one. And so on, and on, and on...
RE: Has anyone used sigma AF 24/2.8 on pentax?
Consensus in the past is that the Sigma is very sharp - almost as good as the Fa24 except when it comes to flare control. I think it will far exceed the 20-35 unless flare is an issue. Of course with wide angle lenses, flare is more common and if you shoot sunsets or sunrises, then SMC would really make a big difference. You can get the Sigma incredibly cheap second hand and it is very good for the money. From past posts: FA* 24/2 is quite sharp but it is less sharp than my old Sigma 24/2.8 MF at infinity, both in the centre and at the edges. The difference is not big but noticeable on comparison shots. However, at closer distances, FA* remains sharp, not so with Sigma. Matjaz I had the MF version which was excellent optically - sharpness and colour. However, built quality and flare control were quite poor. Alan Chan This is all I still have on file - maybe the archives will say more if you do a search. This is the first I have heard about the reduction in aperture on Pentax and I don't believe it as I would remember if anyone mentioned it. I thought long and hard about getting one of these cheap, but went with the Pentax for flare control in the end. -Original Message- From: Rodelion [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 12 September 2002 16:49 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Has anyone used sigma AF 24/2.8 on pentax? And a reply on my own question, which, unfortunately has not yet been answered... I'd also like some comment on the SMC Pentax FA 20-35 f4 AL? (overal performance, build, such things) ThankS!! Rod. - Original Message - From: Rodelion [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 09:28 Subject: Has anyone used sigma AF 24/2.8 on pentax? G'day y'all. And? Have you? I know this lens is neat, but I've heard something about that the effective aperture on a pentax mount is only 3.5? And what about vignetting, really that bad? thanks, Rod.
Re: Has anyone used sigma AF 24/2.8 on pentax?
Hi, I have used the Sigma 24mm extesively and has dome me well. Its much better than one would expect for the price (I bought it for 150$ new, 3-4 years back) and has aken quite a beating in my travels. The colours is warm and the lens is sharp, flare is well controlled for a 24mm and overall I have had nothing bad to say about it xcept the focusing ring is hard to use in manual. Unfortunately i do not have anything else to comapre it to Hope it helps Michele --- Rodelion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And a reply on my own question, which, unfortunately has not yet been answered... I'd also like some comment on the SMC Pentax FA 20-35 f4 AL? (overal performance, build, such things) ThankS!! Rod. - Original Message - From: Rodelion [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 09:28 Subject: Has anyone used sigma AF 24/2.8 on pentax? G'day y'all. And? Have you? I know this lens is neat, but I've heard something about that the effective aperture on a pentax mount is only 3.5? And what about vignetting, really that bad? thanks, Rod. __ Yahoo! - We Remember 9-11: A tribute to the more than 3,000 lives lost http://dir.remember.yahoo.com/tribute
Re: Pentax flashes / changing platforms
Perhaps you should also compare prices of the 50/1.4 s before jumping to conclusions? There's a reason why the Canon 50/1.8II is cheaper plastic bayonet (would they really do that on a prime? - yes) As I said, ugly surprises You're going to wish you bought the 1.4 anyway Chris L. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/12/02 08:37AM Not quite - The Canon 50mm 1.8 standard lens is $150 CDN @ a number of retailers. The Pentax 50mm 1.7 standard lens is $270 CDN @ the same retailers. I too have been considering a switch so that's the reason for the price check on the items mentioned but I'm waiting it out till after Photokina :) Cheers, Dave Original Message: - From: Frantisek Vlcek [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 14:19:06 +0200 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pentax flashes / changing platforms snip Their (Canon) primes are quite more expensive, the EOS 1.8/50 costs about as much as a 1.4/50 from pentax IIRC. /snip mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .
RE: Pentax at Photokina - where to watch?
A good, general, imaging news site is here: http://www.photointer.com Make sure you look at statistics here: http://www.photointer.com/pageset/Statistics1.html From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] In anticipation of Photokina, where would listers recommend to keep an eye on? Are there any decent news sites or official sites that one could check regularly in the run up to announcements about new gear? What's your take on this?
Pentax at Photokina
I must have missed the rumor about Pentax making some big news at Photokina, probably Pal's info. Could you repeat it? DG
Information about pentax len and camera
Dear list, Can someone point me the web site has detail technical information about pentax camera and len? Last time some people said about Bob's web page has everything about pentax information? Which one is it? Regards, - Andy Vu e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Information about pentax len and camera
You really can't beat Bojidar Dimitrov's Pentax K-Mount Equipment Page, which can be found at: http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/ Stan Halpin also has a nice site with lots of comments on Pentax lenses and gear: http://www.concentric.net/~smhalpin/BriefComments.html For medium format, including the 67 and 645, visit Robert Monaghan's site at http://people.smu.edu/rmonagha/mf/ t On 9/12/02 9:25 AM, Andy Vu wrote: Dear list, Can someone point me the web site has detail technical information about pentax camera and len? Last time some people said about Bob's web page has everything about pentax information? Which one is it? Regards, - Andy Vu e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW PENTAX PATENTS!!!: The gobbledegook and my humbletranslations...More...
- Original Message - From: Jan van Wijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 13 September 2002 12:01 AM Subject: Re: NEW PENTAX PATENTS!!!: The gobbledegook and my humbletranslations...More... On Thu, 12 Sep 2002 16:23:04 +1000, Anthony Farr wrote: Whoa! You're counting your chickens before they hatch. From the qoute you've supplied it seems like Pentax have found a means to multiplex the data streams of 3 in-lens-devices (eg. power zoom motor, focussing motor and IS system) through one connection which is presumably the power-zoom contacts that we already know about from the Z/PZ series. I really don't think so! These contacts only supply POWER to the lens (power-zoom) and that power could be used by any 'device' in the lens that needs it. (Which is why these contact are so large and rigid) The intelligence needed to CONTROL the devices is thrue one of the other smaller pins in the lens mount. One of those is a serial (digital) interface that can carry information about anything the lens and body agree upon. Jan, Perhaps the POWER contacts only carry power (at present at least) and the CONTROL is through a different serial interface pin, but I don't see the point of your contradiction of my interpretation. You should notice that I wrote contacts. Plural, not singular. I haven't memorized the pin layouts but I never, ever suggested that only one pin was used. I did write that it was through one connection so the inference that I meant only one pin was too easy to assume. That was my fault for making a superficial explanation. Consider that a mains electrical plug is one connection but uses three pins. Serial, parallel and SCSI connectors can each be called a single connection but they are comprised of very many pins. The gist of what I said was that (I believe) the in-lens-devices share their links to the camera, whether for power supply or data transfer, and that Pentax engineers have created a module or protocol, which they call the lens controller to ensure that only the appropriate device responds to any particular data communication from camera body to lens. Apparently (my guess, that is) there is some method of inhibiting a device from acting in response to received data if that data was intended for a different kind of device. This doesn't imply that more PZ lenses are in the offing, only that a means has been found to prevent your current PZ lens from inappropriately zooming when it receives a signal intended for the focussing device or IS device of an as yet unreleased lens. IS and USM can use the same power-source, and I don't see a reason why anymore pins would be needed to exchange information. They just need to expand the protocol on that serial connection, and if the engineers at pentax deserve that name, they will have designed it to be expandable. This part of your response is in essence a reiteration of what I wrote, but also contradicts your earlier position. You first pointed out that I had understated the number of contacts, because I described the separate POWER and CONTROL contacts as one connection. Then you refute the need for anymore pins to exchange information, but I never, ever predicted that anymore pins were required. Most importantly, I was attempting to communicate the CONCEPT of this patent in respect of the possibility of more power zoom lenses, not the details of its operation. I was warning Cam Hood not to get his hopes up for new power zoom lenses. I feel that Pentax mentioned power zoom only because the controller needs to accommodate the presence of old devices on the connection, in the best tradition of Pentax backwards compatability that we know and love. Regards, Anthony Farr
Re: pentax-discuss-d Digest V02 #87
Don writes Perhaps you should be more selective? 'scuse me, I don't follow threads. Must be years of exposure to deafening rock concerts. Everything in my skull turned to jelly. Kind regards Peter
Forwards and backwards (was Re: Pentax flashes / changing platforms)
The concept of forwards and backwards compatibility is only intelligible if everyone uses the terms in a similar manner. Backwards compatibility is generally understood to mean being able to use new accessories (lenses, flashes, etc.) on old cameras. Forwards compatibility is old accessories on new cameras. Then there is mechanical and electrical information interface compatibility. There can be good mechanical compatibility (mount the thing), but crummy functionality (flash will no longer work in TTL mode, lens supports limited metering, etc.) Pentax has good mechanical forward compatibility of lenses: screw to K (with adaptor), but poor backwards - K to screw. The flashes have good forwards compatibility, but poor backwards. Aperture coupling issues in newer cameras is the same can of worms that Nikon has (aside from G lenses which are much worse). Nikon lens mount, mechanical, backwards compatibility (one has to be very specific here) is perfect: the latest Nikon lens can be physically mounted (without damage) to their first SLR. Forwards and functional lens compatibility is much messier (but I do manage to use a single set of lenses, with full functionality, across MF and AF bodies). Nikon flash compatibility (both ways) is excellent: their latest TTL flash can be used on the first body that had TTL flash, retain TTL flash and visa versa. From: Christopher Lillja (and severely limited backwards compatibility in the Nikon system, and now forward compatibility, with the debut of the G series lenses, unuseable on MF bodies).
Re: How did you start photography
Please continue, and tell us what Band/Venue Kerrang used? Good ol' boy Ted Nugent, if you must know. At the Hammersmith Odeon, of course --- where else??? They used it about 3 x 1.5, black white, and of course I still have it tucked away here somewhere. £15 I think. Whoopee. Peter
RE: How did you start photography
I think I may well have seen that one. My parents threw all my old Kerrangs away a coupla months back I think though... -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 12 September 2002 17:53 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How did you start photography Please continue, and tell us what Band/Venue Kerrang used? Good ol' boy Ted Nugent, if you must know. At the Hammersmith Odeon, of course --- where else??? They used it about 3 x 1.5, black white, and of course I still have it tucked away here somewhere. £15 I think. Whoopee. Peter
645 zoom lens and filter rotation wheel
I have the 645n and two zoom lenses. I have the 80-160mm and the 45-85mm zooms. On the front of the barrel of the 80-160 there is an opening that gives access to a wheel or dial (whatever it may be called) that allows the threaded filter ring on the very front of the lens to be rotated even while the tulip-shaped hood. The 45-85mm zoom lens does not have this feature. I don't understand why one lens has it and the other does not, nor the choice for which one does. It seems to me that the wide angle lens would probably be used more for landscape pictures where be able to rotate a polarizing filter would be a great advantage without having to remove the hood to do it. Does anyone know anything about this feature and why it was done this way? Glen O'Neal
Re: Pentax at Photokina - where to watch?
Introducing the new Pentax 'Rose-tinted spectacles'!!! What do you mean, new? I already have several pairs. Why is it that Brighton is forever Sunny? Actually it is, today. Peter
Re: Need Info from MZ-S and MZ-L/6/7 users (was: Has the MZ-S already a new mount?)
Sorry that I don't have any info on the MZ-6, but I think you're barking up the wrong tree. All FA lenses can transmit the exact aperture. Whether or not the camera use it depends on the camera From Pål Hallo Pal, you are wrong. If you look in my list, you will see, that with the MZ-S which can display the right values, with the FA 3.5-4.7 28-80 and the FA 3.8-5.6 28-200 the display is wrong. regards Rüdiger Hallo, I need some help. The MZ-S displays also odd aperture values like 1.9, 1.8, 3.2 in the viewfinder. The Z1p and the MZ-5n shows instead 2, 1.7, 3.5. The min and max aperture values of a lens were transmited by the contacts of the KA-mount. A lens from 2.8 - 22 has a certain pattern of the 6 pins. It is not possible to transmit values like 1.9 in that way. So there have been a change in the protokoll of the 7th pin which transmitted the focal lenth and the distance of F/FA lense. It must also transmit the exact aperture value. For that there must be a change in the lense and in the camera. I have the question which lense and since when transmitted the exact values and which camera can read it besides the MZ-S. I have tested some lenses with odd apertures with the MZ-S. But some lenses are missing. (see list) I'm also interessted if the new bodies like the MZ-6/L can read the new protokol. Here is my list with a lot of ??? in order of the lens and camera appearance. K-mount F/FA lenses with odd aperture values which can/cannot transmit exact aperature values: FA 3.5-4.7 28-80 PZ since 1991no F4.7-5.6 80-200 black since 1994?? FA 3.8-5.6 28-200 since 1996no FA 1.9/43 since 1997yes FA 4.7-5.6 80-200 silversince 1999 ?? FA 1.8/77 since 1999yes FA 4.7-5.8 100-300 since 2000?? A 1.2/50 for LX2000 since 2000?? FA 1.8/31 since 2001 ?? FA 3.2-4.5 28-105 since 2001yes Cameras which can/cannot display the exact aperature values: Z-1p 1995 no MZ-5n1997 no MZ-7/MX-7 1999 ?? MZ-S 2001yes MZ-L/MX-6 2001?? MZ-60 2002?? Can you please fill in the lists at the questionmarks Thanks Rüdiger Neumann P.S: It is interesting, that this protokol which was already in a lens since 1997 (1.9/43) was used the first time ?? in a camera in 2001.
Re: We're meeting at Photokina
Raim0, Dario and I will be getting together at Photokina. We're meeting at the Pentax stand at 11:00 on Saturday 28 September. Anyone else planning on being there? The more the merrier! Folks, I shall attempt to struggle along (don't hold your breath). You can easily identify me by the hordes of hangers-on, groupies, roadies, and nubile fans trailing in my wakeor maybe I shall be toting the snakeskin LX with Black 31mm. Which is it Cotty, Rob? Kind regards Peter Ask me why I am in such a good mood: Peter, why are you in such a good mood? It's my wedding anniversary I _remembered_ to buy the flowers, card, _and_ book the restaurant. Simply amazing. Surely something will come along to it all up?
RE: We're meeting at Photokina
He will be the one toting a massive 1000mm F8 and tripod. He will turn up for 1/2 an hour, go to the toilet and then go home. Better keep your eyes peeled or you will miss him!! Oh the busy life of an international pop star! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 12 September 2002 18:16 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: We're meeting at Photokina Raim0, Dario and I will be getting together at Photokina. We're meeting at the Pentax stand at 11:00 on Saturday 28 September. Anyone else planning on being there? The more the merrier! Folks, I shall attempt to struggle along (don't hold your breath). You can easily identify me by the hordes of hangers-on, groupies, roadies, and nubile fans trailing in my wakeor maybe I shall be toting the snakeskin LX with Black 31mm. Which is it Cotty, Rob? Kind regards Peter Ask me why I am in such a good mood: Peter, why are you in such a good mood? It's my wedding anniversary I _remembered_ to buy the flowers, card, _and_ book the restaurant. Simply amazing. Surely something will come along to it all up?
Re[2]: NEW PENTAX PATENTS!!!: The gobbledegook and my humbletranslations...More...
Hi, I did a project once using a thing called a mains modem. The company I was working for was looking for a cheap way of networking some PCs together so with one of the engineers I got to write some rs232 comms. stuff in assembler and Modula-2 and run around the site with the engineer pushing a trolley with a PC on, plugging the thing into the mains and sending test messages to the base PC to see how far away we could get a signal. Fun project, crap product. --- Bob mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Thursday, September 12, 2002, 3:19:52 PM, you wrote: Yep, you can even get broadband internet down the mains power lines if you filter out the noise. They can implement things any number of ways using either the digital link or the power contacts, depending on communication speeds being up to the job.
Re: Pentax at Photokina - where to watch?
Once again, Pentax is behind the curve. Nikon, Canon and Leica have had rose-tinted spectacles for years. At 01:04 PM 9/12/02 -0400, you wrote: Introducing the new Pentax 'Rose-tinted spectacles'!!!
RE: Pentax at Photokina - where to watch?
Hi, one can also try at: http://www.genyosha.com/index.html and click on Latest news. Normally this are subscribed pages, but before major events they offer free user names and passwords. This days before Photokina as well, ID and password being 0266 like it stands on the page. Cao, Matjaz
Re: How did you start photography
Me I was at a CC taking an ad-art program (with me focussing on illustration) and I quite rapidly realized hauling a handful of photos back to my studio (one bedroom of a two bedroom apt) was a lot more workable than hauling my gear (drafting table, airbrush, compressor, paints, etc.) out to my subject. One of the photo teachers at school suggested a K1000 and a 50mm fit my needs, and it did. I added a 100mm shortly thereafter and got serviceable use out of the kit for a few years. But they were just tools to me I wouldn't classify myself as Pentax enthusiast or even an amateur photographer. Me and the camera gear parted company during a particularly lean year (and I was glad to have it to sell). I didn't own another camera until 1996 (ten to twelve years later) when my wife and I bought a Yashica T4 Super to take photos of our soon to be born son. That camera gave me the bug. I easily put 4-5 rolls a week through it the first year we had it. 2 or 3 years ago I decided to buy another 35mm kit after reluctantly concluding MF was just too expensive. I looked at Contax since they had Zeiss lenses (just like the Yashica) but G series bodies weren't suitable for macros though they looked ideal otherwise. So I started doing a lot of research on the web, and whenever possible noted what gear went with what type of look that any photo I liked had. Pentax and Contax topped the list. I bought a ZX-5n and the FA 35/2 figuring the most I'd go beyond that was a macro and a tripod. HA!!! Now I've got the FA 24/2, the FA 35/2, A 50/1.7, A 50/2, FA 77/1.8, FA 100/2.8, M 135/3.5, Autobellows A, Refconverter M, AF500 ftz with cords and adapters, a tripod w/ 2 different heads, filters and more junk I can't think of at the moment. It's a disease, for sure. Dan Scott
Re: SMC F 70-210 Vs. Takumar F 70-210
Thanks, John. It all helps. Now I'm faced with selling a couple of my stop-down aperture lenses and replacing with full-aperture metering lenses. I bought a couple when I was 'unaware.' g I really hate getting rid of my Super Takumar 135mm f/3.5 M-42 mount. It's so smooth and small, and almost brand new! If there's an SMC Takumar version of the same lens, that has the aperture lever, either M-42 or K-mount I'll buy it! I have both a Pentax MG and a Spotty F, so I can use either lens. I suppose I should shoot for an M-42 version, because I can put a bayonet adapter on the M-42, but not vise-versa! I do have another 135, an f/2.5 version, but it's so much bigger and heavier than the littler f/3.5 version... All of your info helps a lot in increasing my understanding of the various Pentax lenses. One question left...there's a _tiny_ spring loaded pin on the rear _mounting_ face of my M-42 lenses. It's located about 1/4 CCW from the solid machined stop on the aperture ring on the rear, but the pin itself is on the mounting face. What is it? Keith Whaley John Coyle wrote: Hi Keith: Here's my understanding of the various combinations of Takumar, SMC etc: Takumar was the original name for the non-auto diaphragm lenses of the 1950's - 60's. Some of these were pre-set diaphragm lenses, with an additional control ring. You focussed these at full aperture, then stopped them down for exposure (and for metering with the Spotmatic and later). Auto-Takumars were introduced with semi-automatic diaphragms, where you opened up the aperture for focussing, and the camera closed it on pressing the shutter release Super-Takumars were introduced with the fully auto-diaphragm mechanism when the Spotmatics, SV's and S1a's were produced, beginning about 1963-4. Lenses of 200mm and over continued to be produced with no automatic diaphragm, and remained designated as Takumar or Tele-Takumar, whether pre-set or manual diaphragm. (Source: 'Asahi Pentax Guide', Focal Press, tenth edition, August 1967) Super-Takumar, then, does not necessarily refer to the coating used. Super-Multi-Coated coatings were introduced in 1971, and the lenses were Bagdad Super-Multi-Coated in full. Pentax lenses were coated prior to this, but part of the marketing of the SMC was that it was more efficient for less thickness of coating - test reports at the time said it blew away competitive coatings, and IIRC, had been either jointly developed with, or licensed to, Carl Zeiss, who designated it as T* coatings, or something similar. These seven-layer coatings, according to the LX brochure, reduced the loss of transmitted light to 0.2%, compared with 1-2% for conventional coatings. It was with the change of mount to the bayonet that Pentax lens were designated Pentax rather than Takumar, and the SMC abbreviation replaced the full text. I have a brochure for the original K series release in which all of the new lenses are named SMC Pentax with the suffix Shift, Macro, etc., where appropriate. The generally physically smaller lens range introduced for the M series was designated SMC Pentax-M. The LX brochure lists both SMC Pentax-M and SMC Pentax lenses, and I am not sure whether the non-M ones are new introductions or a continuation of the K series: for example the SMC Pentax 15/3.5 appears in both brochures, but the SMC Pentax 30/2.8 only appears in the LX list The Takumar Bayonet range, introduced as a budget range in the later '80's, did not carry the SMC tag at all, and, while my example of the 28/2.8 is optically good, it undoubtedly would be prone to more flare than the M-series, which looks like a totally different design. HTH John Coyle Nicholas John Consultants Brisbane, Australia
Re: Has anyone used sigma AF 24/2.8 on pentax?
Hi Rod, I did own manual focus Sigma 24/2.8, which is supposed to be optically the same as it's AF version. I never noticed being it only 3.5 on any of my Pentaxes. In comparison to FA*24/2 which I have nowadays, Sigma is a bit sharper both in the centre and at the edges at infinity. At closer distances it seem that FA* starts to get the better one. Sigma is much more prone to flare than FA*. Also, vignetting can be a problem. All in all, Sigma is a good lens, especially for the price. Hope it helps, Matjaz G'day y'all. And? Have you? I know this lens is neat, but I've heard something about that the effective aperture on a pentax mount is only 3.5? And what about vignetting, really that bad? thanks, Rod.
RE: 645 zoom lens and filter rotation wheel
-Original Message- From: Glen O'Neal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] I have the 645n and two zoom lenses. I have the 80-160mm and the 45-85mm zooms. On the front of the barrel of the 80-160 there is an opening that gives access to a wheel or dial (whatever it may be called) that allows the threaded filter ring on the very front of the lens to be rotated even while the tulip-shaped hood. The 45-85mm zoom lens does not have this feature. I don't understand why one lens has it and the other does not, nor the choice for which one does. It seems to me that the wide angle lens would probably be used more for landscape pictures where be able to rotate a polarizing filter would be a great advantage without having to remove the hood to do it. Does anyone know anything about this feature and why it was done this way? I haven't played much with the longer zoom, but the hood on the 45-85 is pretty wide - you can just reach your fingers in and turn the filter, I think. Maybe you can test this and see if the 80-160 hood is narrower and harder to get to from the front. tv
RE: Re[2]: Pentax flashes / changing platforms
Bruce, My comparison of prices was based on Frantisek Vlcek's original quote. I merely pointed out what was listed. I haven't got a clue wrt the build quality - if it was all plastic and the image was as sharp as a Zeiss lens - I'd go for the Pentax, regardless - so build quality is moot to this discussion. You'll recall that Frantisek Vlcek's statement was that the 50 f1.8 was the SAME cost as the Pentax f1.4 which of course just isn't true. Dave Original Message: - From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 07:21:48 -0700 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re[2]: Pentax flashes / changing platforms david, The price on the 50's is quite interesting - and should not be a good reference. Basically, the Canon and Nikon 1.8 versions are cheaper than the Pentax one. There is a simple reason - build quality. The Pentax one is built in the same manner as the 1.4 - that is to say, mechanically well built. The Canon and Nikon are both built very cheaply - much like a consumer zoom. The 1.4's from both of these companies are much, much better mechanically. The Pentax 1.4 is cheaper than the Canon and Nikon. You really should compare apples to apples. I am sure there are cases where there is a cheaper Pentax product where it is because of poorer quality that it is cheaper. Bruce Thursday, September 12, 2002, 5:37:18 AM, you wrote: dcsc Not quite - The Canon 50mm 1.8 standard lens is $150 CDN @ a number of dcsc retailers. The Pentax 50mm 1.7 standard lens is $270 CDN @ the same dcsc retailers. dcsc I too have been considering a switch so that's the reason for the price dcsc check on the items mentioned but I'm waiting it out till after Photokina :) dcsc Cheers, dcsc Dave dcsc Original Message: dcsc - dcsc From: Frantisek Vlcek [EMAIL PROTECTED] dcsc Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 14:19:06 +0200 dcsc To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] dcsc Subject: Re: Pentax flashes / changing platforms dcsc snip dcsc Their (Canon) primes are quite more expensive, the EOS 1.8/50 costs about dcsc as much as a 1.4/50 from pentax IIRC. dcsc /snip dcsc dcsc mail2web - Check your email from the web at dcsc http://mail2web.com/ . mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .
Re[4]: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
I had a few similar experiences. The worst is MF equipment: no matter what you say, you are assumed to be a professional, with strong (negative) attention of business owners, security personel etc. Once I wanted to take a pic of one of the building of Polaroid offices here, from a parking lot, openly accessible from a dozen places. The second I stepped from my car with a tripod and a P6x7, I was approached by a couple security guys, asking who employs me, whether I have appropriate clearance, and so on, summing it up with something like get the hell out of here boy (probably more polite than that, though). Mind you, one could make a good shot of that place from a pizzeria across the street. I am dead sure, if I just stopped there and grabbed a few shots with a PS, noone would have given a damn. I am really surprised that anyone was given *more* slack because everyone assumed he was a pro. Best, Mishka -Original Message- From: Dave Kennedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] I can't remember the specific circumstances, but I do remember this summer, being asked if I was a Pro when entering a tourist atttraction (I think it was a museum or a historical village). When I confirmed that any pictures I took were strictly for personal enjoyment (and not financial gain), I was allowed in. Just an example where being an amateur is an advantage. dk
Re: 645 zoom lens and filter rotation wheel
Glen wrote: I have the 645n and two zoom lenses. I have the 80-160mm and the 45-85mm zooms. On the front of the barrel of the 80-160 there is an opening that gives access to a wheel or dial (whatever it may be called) that allows the threaded filter ring on the very front of the lens to be rotated even while the tulip-shaped hood. The 45-85mm zoom lens does not have this feature. I don't understand why one lens has it and the other does not, nor the choice for which one does It's simply a function of release date. Pentax added this feature at a certain point in time. Lenses released before this date are without this window. Pål
Re: Pentax at Photokina
Dick wrote: I must have missed the rumor about Pentax making some big news at Photokina, probably Pal's info. Could you repeat it? Don't blame it on me! The fuzz is due to the fact that someone posted recent Pentax patents on a new KAF3 lens mount that take USM and IS lenses. Some believe it will be shown at Photokina. So far no rumors have said so... It is pure speculation. However, there will be new products at Photokina. There are two distinc possibilities: 1. There's nothing worth showing (maybe a Limited lens and a few compacts). 2. Pentax have given their distributors stern messages about keeping their lips unusually tight. This may indicate that major news will be showed. Take your pick... Pål
Re: Need Info from MZ-S and MZ-L/6/7 users (was: Has the MZ-S already a new mount?)
Rüdiger wrote: you are wrong. If you look in my list, you will see, that with the MZ-S which can display the right values, with the FA 3.5-4.7 28-80 and the FA 3.8-5.6 28-200 the display is wrong. I hope I'm wrong but I'm not convinced. What you describe above is most likely due to the fact that these consumer zooms don't transmit absolute accurate aperture but approximate ones. Pål
Re: Re: Resend of RE: The important thing...
Hey Dave, I seem to pick the worse days...why is it always so damned cold when the snow's not blowing? It's just like a breeze just as you take a macro shot :) Your idea sounds very interesting. I had once planned to do a B/W of London, then decided it was too big and too ugly! Brad Dobo (Btw, I'm gonna sue you if I get frostbite :)) hehe - Original Message - From: David Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 3:20 PM Subject: Re: Re: Resend of RE: The important thing... Hi Brad.I work out side and live in the country so winter is no biggy for the fingers .g I started a project last winter,to capture the Township i live in on BW film,with mostly winter scenes but have taken some summer ones.I want to remember what it looks like before the developers move in in a few years. Plus it gets me out of rebuilding the kitchen :) I think you;ll like cold fingy's. 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
My God It's Finally Arrived
http://www.pentaxcanada.ca/eng/products/sur_eth100.html
Re: The important thing...
Oh, yesss I like winter. And i hope to create webpage dedicated to winter some day. And mountains too, of course. Don't have enough time to scan these negatives... Gasha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I)f you want to see some good winter shots go to http://www.luminous-landscape.com/galleries/wildlife/yellowstone-winter.sht ml The author has done some great winter pics Regards Albano
Re: We're meeting at Photokina
Folks, I shall attempt to struggle along (don't hold your breath). You can easily identify me by the hordes of hangers-on, groupies, roadies, and nubile fans trailing in my wakeor maybe I shall be toting the snakeskin LX with Black 31mm. Which is it Cotty, Rob? Great Scott. His brain *has* turned to jelly! You take the hordes of hangers-on, groupies, roadies, and I'll take the nubile fans... :-) Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh classified ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: Resend of RE: The important thing...
Hey Steve, Yes, I can say I'm a very open person about myself, most of the skeletons in my closet have been seen :) Once I had the cash, I went and spent $750? for a tripod and $300 for the head (while having a perfectly fine tripod before). I wanted the MZ-S and all its goodies for some good reasons, but one of the 'bad' reasons was I wanted a black camera instead of the silver top ones that usually are associated with cheaper, auto function cameras. In fact, my next lens will be the FA 24-90mm AL etc jobbie I think.(to replace my 28-105 silver (again) jobbie) As you might be able to tell, I am not good with money :) Brad Dobo
Re: My God It's Finally Arrived
I've always dreamed of having one! :) - Original Message - From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 4:40 PM Subject: My God It's Finally Arrived http://www.pentaxcanada.ca/eng/products/sur_eth100.html
Re: 15/3.5 Aspheric or not? (was: KMP Update)
Not Bob but Rob in reply; ~68.6mm diameter, now just envision me with the pointy ends of my stainless steel vernier calipers trying to avoid gouging the front element of my SMCPA15f3.5... Cheers, Rob Studdert I think we both have the non-aspheric lens. Well, I understand the A lens is for sure non-aspheric and that any SMC Takumar or K 15mm that has a front element diameter of 68/69mm is non-aspheric. The SMC Takumar that have sn # in the 7xx have more chance to be aspheric than the later ones in the 8x, like mine (#8014040), I guess. Bob said: My 15mm's serial number is 8013862. I wonder what the original starting number was and what the increment was. Bob, is it a SMC Takumar or a K, and could you measure its front element? Andre --
Re: Who are you?
Re: Who are you? Nice tale, Dave. You're a star. Made my day, thanks. Cotty. PS You like theodolites by any chance? Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh classified ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: My God It's Finally Arrived
http://www.pentaxcanada.ca/eng/products/sur_eth100.html What's that? --
Re: Pentax flashes / changing platforms
Ray wrote: True. But I was talking about my plain K mount lenses. You cannot compare plain K lenses with Canon EF lenses. Plain K lenses are comparable to Canon FD lenses. Try to mount those FD on a EOS camera and I'll sure that you'll end up a lot more confused than trying to mount a K-mount lens on a Pentax AF camera! Pål
Re: Forwards and backwards (was Re: Pentax flashes / changingplatforms)
Christoffer wrote: It's just slow torture compared with the revolutionary change of going from FD to EOS... Theres more to it than that. Having great backwards compatibility may be considered good when releasing new cameras. However, in the long run it erodes sales from newer cameras and lenses. Manufacturers build in obsolence in order to sell more products. A risky strategy but it may pay well off. Nikon and Canon can not compete with Pentax on the basis of comprehensive compatibility. The Pentax system can not compete with the Nikon or Canon on the basis of comprehensiveness or ultimate technology. But the latter point has nothing to do with compatibility. Pål
Re: Re[4]: Orgin Myths -- The Finale? :)
Mike wrote: Once I wanted to take a pic of one of the building of Polaroid offices here, from a parking lot, openly accessible from a dozen places. The second I stepped from my car with a tripod and a P6x7, I was approached by a couple security guys, asking who employs me, whether I have appropriate clearance, and so on, summing it up with something like get the hell out of here boy (probably more polite than that, though). Mind you, one could make a good shot of that place from a pizzeria across the street. I am dead sure, if I just stopped there and grabbed a few shots with a PS, noone would have given a damn. I am really surprised that anyone was given *more* slack because everyone assumed he was a pro. Are you living in a police state? The concept of needing permission to shoot public buildings or private properties is unknown in my part of the world. Pal
Re: Pentax flashes / changing platforms
Ray wrote: Someone made the argument that at least Pentax tried to keep its older lenses usable in its platform while Canon abandoned the FD mount. That's true. But there's is an advantage to an all-new lens mount and camera system: much more compatibility because you don't have to factor in older lenses and flashes. No. It's not more compatibility, but less compatibility. I cannot understand the argument that having great compatibility is worse than having less compatibility. If the compatibility is confusing, stay with AF lenses only, like with Canon - no difference between Canon and Pentax is this regard. Pentax is certainly no worse off by offering the compatibility (which you again don't have to take advantage of) Canon doesn't. Pål
Re: My God It's Finally Arrived
How many megapixels ? Is it available in black ? How many fps ? :-) Bill - Original Message - From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 4:40 PM Subject: My God It's Finally Arrived http://www.pentaxcanada.ca/eng/products/sur_eth100.html
