Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR
Hi gfen, on 16 Oct 02 you wrote in pentax.list: On 16 Oct 2002, Heiko Hamann wrote: And an analog flagship in fall? Man I was trying to decide whether to You know, another question, but WHAT fall? 2003? Considering we're already in teh start of this year's fall (at least in the Northern hemisphere) Ohoh...
Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR
Hi Pål, on 16 Oct 02 you wrote in pentax.list: APSDSLR?? Strange decision. No. APS sized sensor. OK, I've drawn my Olydak-4/3-driven conclusion too fast... And an analog flagship in fall? Man I was trying to decide whether to It is a rumor but very credible in my opinion since extremely highly placed Pentax sources has leaked out the existence of a flagship in the works for years. Gfen asked an interesting question - which fall? 2003? That's nearly one year from now... Regards, Heiko
Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR
Hi Ryan, on 16 Oct 02 you wrote in pentax.list: I read it to say APS sized CCD, but the article is a bit confusing at best. Oh you're right. I've read something about Olydaks 4/3 concept just before Pal's posting and draw the conclusion that Pentax would built a whole new camera around that chip. Following the agrgumentation of Olydak this would make sense in order to optimize the lenses for the chip size. But it would obviusly make no sense if you want to keep your K-mount;-) Maybe this ist the proof for having a Pentax spy here: he saw our dslr threads and reported his new boss that the PDMLers start getting crazy. The new management said: OK, let's do something for this maniacs. Hey guys what do we have on stock? Here's something like an MZ-S. It is marked with a 'D'. And we have found a couple of CCDs. Seems to be APS-size... That will be enough. Throw the chips into the body and inform the Marketing Department... g Regards, Heiko
Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR
Imaging Resource just brought it in their news: http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1034810406.html They've converted the Japanes price to $1600 - this could really mix up the market... Regards, Heiko
Re: The flagship is coming!
http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1034810406.html regards, Alan Chan _ Choose an Internet access plan right for you -- try MSN! http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp
Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR
A heads-up response! Pentax must realize that this is too little too late... an APS size sensor (3.3 MP ?) $2000 Number of pixels not limited by sensor size - I think Sony have a 9 or 10MP APs size sensor.
Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR
Where does 3.3 MP come from? It wasn't in Paal's translation of the announcement. Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 17 October 2002 1:27 PM Subject: Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR A heads-up response! Pentax must realize that this is too little too late... an APS size sensor (3.3 MP ?) @ $2000, when Cn and Nk both have 6MP @ $same, plus both are releasing 14MP cameras @ $4000 and $6000, due out This fall. I am tired of waiting, and am suprised that they didn't first come out with a E20/Min 7Hi knock-off. How many 5MP fixed-lens P S with a sync-outlet could they sell? I would have bet alot, given the size and quality of their P S digitals ...but instead they hint at old APS. Sad.
Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR
- Original Message - From: Heiko Hamann [EMAIL PROTECTED] (snip) APSDSLR?? Strange decision. Not at US$2,000 it's not. The full-frame chip cameras currently available are, what, about twice the price? More? The approx. US$2,000 direct competition also happen to be about APS sized. BTW the chip size and the camera size are not necessarily the same. It is still common (especially in medium and large format) for the chip to be smaller than the format of an equivalent film camera. Regards, Anthony Farr
Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR
Pentax makes wy too many different SLR models, especially when you consider the additional new-old-stock models in the warehouses and shops. A halving of the lineup is just the kind of refocussing on their market that Pentax needs IMO. At the end of M-42 mount the lineup was SP1000, Spotmatic-F, and ES-II. Soon after the launch of K-mount it was KM, KX, and K2. (MOT specials not included in either case) Those were the halcyon days. How many models are in the SLR lineup at present? Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: Chris Murray [EMAIL PROTECTED] (snip) Well, if they do cut their film cameras, esp. SLR's. I am moving to nikon. (snip)
Re: Want to play?
Did anyone happen to look at the headers of the sordid email attachment that Bob Blakely received from Brad and forwarded to the list. It was from [EMAIL PROTECTED] yet the only address that I've ever seen on one of Our Brad's emails is [EMAIL PROTECTED]. That's not to say that Brad doesn't have a hotmail account as well, but I did think it was noteable at the time. BTW Brad and I had a brief correspondence of 5 or 6 emails recently, because he wanted to clarify some things I'd said on-list before he reacted to them. I must say that it was a pleasant contrast to my other exchanges recently where the correspondant could have saved us both a lot of heatburn by first finding out what an on-list remark of mine meant before telling me %*!# you in an off-list message :-( To Ryan K. Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED], and all those who will whine about this waste of bandwidth, this may be OT and boring to you, but at only 2-3 Kb per message (average) even the slowest dial-up connections won't be overtaxed by these messages. Just delete them and get on with what interests you :-) Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: Paul Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 17 October 2002 1:22 PM Subject: Re: Want to play? Brad didn't send that email, the one he claimed he didn't, addressed from Bradley Dobo, it originated from a totally different IP to the ones Brads emails usually come from. When i trace the IP back for the forged email, it originates from Murdoch University in Australia. There is one list members who's emails also originate from Murdoch University, but i'm not going to mention his name. Some other listers will be able to work it out i'm sure. Regards, Paul Jones
Re: Re[2]: Pentax annonces digital SLR
Oooh, er. Nrrrse :-) Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message (taken entirely out of context) - From: Bob Walkden [EMAIL PROTECTED] rummage with Cotty's Cannon . Cotty's Cannon was a bit bigger than I can take, really (my eyes were watering)
Re: OT: Depth of Field
Hi, I tend to choose a DOF that just begins to distinguish what the backgroung is, espocially is I am taking a portrait, and especially if the person is in a surrounding that adds to that person. I do this because having the background too much out of focus ends up creating a 'netral backdrop' effect, where I dent to prefer just making out rhat the objects / people are within the frame, but keeping them well blurred. An example would be, on a 50mm lens, with subject say 1meter away and rest of the frame roughly 4-5 m, using an aperture of around 5.6 or 6.7 (1/2 stop more). Michele __ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos More http://faith.yahoo.com
Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR
Question: What if Pentax does come out with the DSLR that is currently being talked about, how many people on the list would buy one? (Assuming the price is what? ~$2000US) It's obvious then that it would not be a real feature rich camera. Not like the top Nikons or Canons, or the unfortunate MZ-D. Also, once they enter the market, then a year later a full-frame kick-butt one comes out? If I wanted a Pentax DSLR (which I don't :)), I would pass on what they seem to be offering and what I've read here (Hey, at $2000US it is worse in Canada and that's some serious money still), and wait another year for a superior? product. Another one: Would be it useful to professionals or more a toy for the serious-hobbist? One more (I think): I don't understand the megapixel difference. Unless you are in the business of making huge posters or want something you can use in your house instead of wallpaper :) does a 3.3mp do the job? These 6-11-15mp, are they overkill for anyone wanting more than an 11x14? Will it keep going up? How high? A ISO6400 colour print with the grain of a Velvia or Provia 100 F? I don't know know, I'm digitally stupid :) Similar theme, what *real* difference as far as outcome (ie, on screen, in print) does the sensor size matter? APS, full-frame, etc? I've read some of the posts on this and you guys are just way over my head in this area, lots of scientific stuff. (ok, sorry, that was a bunch of questions in one)
Re: Primes that we wish Pentax had built
thanks very much for your suggestions. However, Lens name: SMC Pentax-FA 1:2 100mm Length: Diameter: Weight: Filter Thread: 49mm I guess one needs at least a 52mm filter thread here. What was I thinking...? :) regards, Alan Chan _ Surf the Web without missing calls! Get MSN Broadband. http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp
RE: Pentax annonces digital SLR
http://www.excite.co.jp/world/text regards, Alan Chan This link seems to be in Japanese. Am I missing something here? I don't read Japanese. Can you translate? _ Get a speedy connection with MSN Broadband. Join now! http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp
Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR
Hi Brad, on 17 Oct 02 you wrote in pentax.list: Question: What if Pentax does come out with the DSLR that is currently being talked about, how many people on the list would buy one? (Assuming the price is what? ~$2000US) Honestly - that would be too much for me as a hobbist. But... It's obvious then that it would not be a real feature rich camera. Not like the top Nikons or Canons, or the unfortunate MZ-D. Also, once they enter the market, then a year later a full-frame kick-butt one comes out? ...if this happens the APS-sized DSLRs might get much cheaper and affordable:-) I don't think that the Pentax DSLR must necessarily have less feature than Nikons or Canons. Those manufacturers use similar chipsizes - we will have to wait and see. ... One more (I think): I don't understand the megapixel difference. Unless you are in the business of making huge posters or want something you can use in your house instead of wallpaper :) does a 3.3mp do the job? These ... does the sensor size matter? APS, full-frame, etc? I've read some of the posts on this and you guys are just way over my head in this area, lots of scientific stuff. (ok, sorry, that was a bunch of questions in one) Have a look at theesse interesting sites: http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/index.html Regards, Heiko
Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR
Hi Brad, on 17 Oct 02 you wrote in pentax.list: Question: What if Pentax does come out with the DSLR that is currently being talked about, how many people on the list would buy one? (Assuming the price is what? ~$2000US) Honestly - that would be too much for me as a hobbist. But... It's obvious then that it would not be a real feature rich camera. Not like the top Nikons or Canons, or the unfortunate MZ-D. Also, once they enter the market, then a year later a full-frame kick-butt one comes out? ...if this happens the APS-sized DSLRs might get much cheaper and affordable:-) I don't think that the Pentax DSLR must necessarily have less feature than Nikons or Canons. Those manufacturers use similar chipsizes - we will have to wait and see. ... One more (I think): I don't understand the megapixel difference. Unless you are in the business of making huge posters or want something you can use in your house instead of wallpaper :) does a 3.3mp do the job? These ... does the sensor size matter? APS, full-frame, etc? I've read some of the posts on this and you guys are just way over my head in this area, lots of scientific stuff. (ok, sorry, that was a bunch of questions in one) Have a look at theesse interesting sites: http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/index.html Regards, Heiko
Re: web hosting?
- Original Message - From: CBWaters Where is everybody hosting their photos these days? I have been using Webshots lately but they changed their service and added a pay-tier. I'm looking for a place that's free or close to it, doesn't require viewers to have a membership, doesn't steel your photos, allows you to link to the photos themselves, and makes it easy to manage your photos. With Rogers, I get 10Meg for personal website stuff. Plus you can have up to 7 e-mail addresses each with their own 10Megs, so in total at least 70 Megs of space. Pretty good really. The company I host my www.beard-redfern.com website with, Webstrike (www.webstrikesolutions.com) gives 50 megs and hosting is free for the first year! (but you have to have registered a domain name to host with them) --- Wendy Beard
Re: web hosting?
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, CBWaters wrote: I'm looking for a place that's free or close to it, doesn't require viewers to have a membership, doesn't steel your photos, allows you to link to the photos themselves, and makes it easy to manage your photos. www.photo.net
Re: web hosting?
- Original Message - From: CBWaters Where is everybody hosting their photos these days? I have been using Webshots lately but they changed their service and added a pay-tier. I'm looking for a place that's free or close to it, doesn't require viewers to have a membership, doesn't steel your photos, allows you to link to the photos themselves, and makes it easy to manage your photos. I use my isp for that stuff. 5 megs with my account, and a small fee per mb additional. Check with bellsouth, they might surprise you. William Robb
Re: Going to start the PDML FAQ, please read me! (was Re: fisheye)
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, [iso-8859-1] Artur Ledóchowski wrote: I suggest: - another trick: flash compensation with TTL flashes (other that AF360FGZ) and MZ-5/5n/3/S Sure, although I have no idea what this is.. I started writing some things yesterday, I'll add all tehse and eventually submit what I've got with requests for teh missing chunks in the not too distant future. - lens names (Takumar, Super Takumar, SMC etc...) and coating Already added. - lenses that are especially noticeable for some reasons (like the Limited series but there's more) Collin had a great description of what makes the limiteds limited, he posted it to a newsgroup in such a way that I'll never find it again. Collin, if you read this, I'd love to have it. - the meaning of the * Good. - dual 6-segment metering in the 645 series - wireless flash operation with different Pentax flashes - 3rd-party flashes (especially MetzSCA modules - which to chose etc) Check on all, but more I don't know about. - most important dates in the Pentax history - awards that Pentax received Makes sense. - the most important names in the Asahi stuff (up-to-date) Can you explain what you mean? - suggested link: to Pentax manuals - PUG info Check.
RE: Paal Comes Through Again
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, tom wrote: We have a ways to go before it's listed anywhere... See, they have to make a date for you to win the camera, but I think they just have to show a prototype to make Bruce eat his pie
Re[2]: Pentax annonces digital SLR
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Cotty wrote: Cotty's Big Canon. Y'know, I worry about you... :)
Re: Going to start the PDML FAQ, please read me! (was Re: fisheye)
At 08:50 17.10.2002 -0400, you wrote: - the most important names in the Asahi stuff (up-to-date) Should this read ... Asahi staff ? Antti-Pekka --- * Antti-Pekka Virjonen * Fiskarsinkatu 7 D * GSM: +358 500 789 753 * * Computec Oy Turku* FIN-20750 Turku Finland * Fax: +358 10 264 0777 *
RE: List News
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Cesar Matamoros II wrote: Plans are to go to Manhattan tomorrow. Photos will be part of the plan. How long you in the city for, and what ever happened to another attempt at an NYC PDML gathering?
RE: web hosting?
Ahh... so many have fallen - soon - Pbase will be next I think. The issue isn't so much with web space as it is with bandwidth. Space is fairly cheap if you look around. I get 20mb with my web hosting @ $10 US/month. Now - hosting the images is fine - but if you get a lot of people hitting the site - each time they hit the image it's a download so the costs start rising if the downloads get excessive - and that's why the photo hosting sites that used to be free now start charging. Just some info... Dave Original Message: - From: CBWaters [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 08:30:43 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: web hosting? Where is everybody hosting their photos these days? I have been using Webshots lately but they changed their service and added a pay-tier. I'm looking for a place that's free or close to it, doesn't require viewers to have a membership, doesn't steel your photos, allows you to link to the photos themselves, and makes it easy to manage your photos. what say ye? Cory Waters mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .
Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR
Yes, Mark, you're probably right about the 645nII. I an one of those, however, who would be upset to see Pentax abandon its 6x7 camera, however. That also has a large presenvce in the Pro world. Mark Roberts wrote: I thing the 645nII should be the *last* camera to worry about being discontinued. It seems to be viewed by Pentax as their flagship camera. It's the one they're reportedly working on a digital back for (and the one for which NPS is doing a digital back). -- Daniel J. Matyola mailto:djm;stanleypmlaw.com Stanley, Powers Matyola mailto:dmatyola;yahoo.com Suite203, 1170 US Highway 22 East http://geocities.com/dmatyola/ Bridgewater, NJ 08807 (908)725-3322 fax: (908)707-0399
Re: web hosting?
Hi Cory, On Thu, 17 Oct 2002 08:30:43 -0400, CBWaters wrote: Where is everybody hosting their photos these days? I'm still just using the 10MB of space that comes with my Earthlink/Mindspring account. Now that I'm exercising greater editorial control, the 10MB isn't really that much of a handicap. I will soon be checking out for-pay hosting services, though, since I'm going to start up a couple of new sites. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Daniel J. Matyola wrote: If I read the translated press release correctly, pentax plans to reduce the number of film SLR models sold by more than half, and to cut in half the number of PS and MF models they sell. They only sell to MF cameras, however, the 645nII and the 67II. Does this mean that they will eliminate one of the two current MF lines? I certainly hope not! There's two models of 645 being produced, the 645n and the 645nii.
RE: Paal Comes Through Again
The pie was related to Photokina; too late for that now. Before every big show, or Pentax anniversary, Paal implies (or states explicitly) that Pentax will make some big announcement. This makes him right about 10% of the time. I'm still waiting for something more substantial than rumor. BR -Original Message- From: gfen [mailto:gfen;infotainment.org] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 8:51 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Paal Comes Through Again On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, tom wrote: We have a ways to go before it's listed anywhere... See, they have to make a date for you to win the camera, but I think they just have to show a prototype to make Bruce eat his pie
Re: Cross Processing
Hi, Feroze. Thanks for comments. A Tirador Laser is the name of the band where Miguel Garcia (son of Charly Garcia, biggest rock star of Argentina) plays keyboards. No, they're not my family. Garcia is pretty common. Regarding xprocess. I made this comment because you asked about neg film, so I understood you wanted to xprocess neg film in E6 chemicals, wich is not the more common way to do things. If you want to do the classic Xprocess, I suggest you high saturated E6 films, so crossing them you get the strongest and weirdest effects. Just keep in mind to expose it accurately, since it's still slide film and it won't gain latitude because you process it as neg film. It's fun to do, and results can be very cool. You'll just gain the hate of the minilab guy (slide film doesn't have codes, so machine didn't recognize it, and he has to do it semi-manually) Regards and enjoy the Xprocess Albano --- Feroze Kistan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Albano oh, like your pics esp Miguel-A triadoe laser. (What does that mean Miiguel under the spotlight???) Unfortunately my cameras don't shoot black white so. I want to do E6 on negative film cause I want to make prints. Don't have a slide projector and don't want to carry my desktop with me either... Have no idea what a MTV video looks like, don't watch TV and the last music video I remember was Dire Straits's brothers in arms What I really mean't when I said digital was, do DSLR's have a filter like the BW or sepia ones that has that effect. I work 12-18 hours a day in front of a PC, designing, scanning and stuff. Of 1200 frames I have taken in the last 14 months 900 were pack shots. 300 were of my only niece. I want to do something creative with film, without resorting to artificial means. Am I making sense? Was thinking of hand colouring a BW print but after talking to anthony farr I knew I was not advanced enough yet. Within the next 6-10 months I am going to have to purchase a DSLR, but thats for work. I want to get into something special with film. shouldn't ask this but does anyone think I nuts? Thanks Feroze - Original Message - From: Albano Garcia [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 3:11 PM Subject: Re: Cross Processing Hi, Feroze I do X process but the most common way. Slide film processed in C41. You must keep in mind the film keeps the latitude properties of slide film, it doesn't become neg film. But it's fairly predictable in its results. The look is the one you can see in 100% of MTV music videos (directors are SO original). It can be done digitally using curves, I've seen good examples online, but I don't use curves, so I can't give you any tips about it. If you want to see some of my examples (9), go to http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=205913 The last ones are X processed Regards --- Feroze Kistan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone cross process here? I would prefer to hear from someone who uses negative film though, mainly which brand gave you the best results and what guidelines if any do you have for me. I know this is a hit or miss technique but I'm hoping to avoid a long learning process. I don't suppose you can do this with digital can you? Feroze BEGIN:VCARD VERSION:2.1 N:;[EMAIL PROTECTED] FN:[EMAIL PROTECTED] EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] REV:20021016T083950Z END:VCARD = Albano Garcia El Pibe Asahi __ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos More http://faith.yahoo.com = Albano Garcia El Pibe Asahi __ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos More http://faith.yahoo.com
RE: web hosting?
Where is everybody hosting their photos these days? I use Pair.com for my hosting. For just $10/month you get 100MB and 100MB/Day Traffic. For a while I kept switching from host to host, but these guys are great and I've been with them for about a year now, no problems.
Re: Going to start the PDML FAQ, please read me! (was Re: fisheye)
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Rob Studdert wrote: I applaud the concept however over the five years I've been here it's been suggested quite a few times before and hasn't been seen through. Yes, but how many of those five years have I been here, willing to write the first version in a vain attempt to avoid real thought and life? Bingo! The problem is that it is really only useful if it's all encompassing. Understood. However, I don't think we need all encompassing, as too much makes for a giant, unweidly mess. Many areas of your initial list are covered in detail under various pages about the web, take Boz's for example, how do you condense that? I don't need to condense that. I'll link to that, as its a wonderful resource and can't be compared to. However, while that DOES have a best body option, it doesn't have a best body for beginners or a why teh K1000 is overrated, and you should buy a ME Super. It also doesn't address the which is the best/preferred long zoom / mid zoom / etc. It just has raw facts. For an idea of the amount of work that is required to generate a useful FAQ for a far more limited (equipment selection wise) camera system check Andrews excellent Leica FAQ at: http://www.nemeng.com/leica/index.shtml But, I wrote a fascinating FAQ all about myself at http://www.infotainment.org, also, if you search you can find the original alt.fan.torok.urine-soaked-rags usenet FAQ I wrote (which, honestly, I don't even remember). I'm a FAQQING machine, mn! Again, I'll check the Leica FAQ, but I don't plan to have an all encompassing resource. I plan on having a resource that'll goto new list members and their most generic questions, what zoom lens should I buy and the like.
Re: Re[2]: Pentax annonces digital SLR
*You* worry about him? I worry about him ! ;-) On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Cotty wrote: Cotty's Big Canon. Y'know, I worry about you... :) Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/ Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps
RE: Paal Comes Through Again
I like what I've heard - but as I'm with Bruce on this one. It's been touted by us here and on that JIJ website and on DCresource but it's still rumor until Pentax makes it official (at which time of course that will confirm or renounce Paal's ability at prognostication) :) Cheers, Dave Original Message: - From: Rubenstein, Bruce M (Bruce) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 09:14:24 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Paal Comes Through Again The pie was related to Photokina; too late for that now. Before every big show, or Pentax anniversary, Paal implies (or states explicitly) that Pentax will make some big announcement. This makes him right about 10% of the time. I'm still waiting for something more substantial than rumor. BR -Original Message- From: gfen [mailto:gfen;infotainment.org] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 8:51 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Paal Comes Through Again On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, tom wrote: We have a ways to go before it's listed anywhere... See, they have to make a date for you to win the camera, but I think they just have to show a prototype to make Bruce eat his pie mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .
Re: List news (don't read this, Mr Brewer)
On Thursday, October 17, 2002, at 07:40 AM, gfen wrote: On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Bill Owens wrote: Nah, the BarbieCam isn't black, and since Doug is a pro photographer, he needs a black camera. Matter of fact, I think he has one but won't admit to it 8-) there's always spray paint.. hey, if you don't bother masking, maybe it'll help the optics? Doug's a pro, he's probably got all the tools he needs. Let's get him something really coola Lava Lamp! Dan Scott
Re: web hosting?
Photo.net - the license they claim to use your photos seems reasonable to me (it is only for the purpose of operating, displaying, distributing and promoting photo.net). They have a tier system as well - 100 photos with a free membership, and 200 if you pay $25 per year or $68 for 3 years. http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=291353 Maris - Original Message - From: CBWaters [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 7:30 AM Subject: web hosting? Where is everybody hosting their photos these days? I have been using Webshots lately but they changed their service and added a pay-tier. I'm looking for a place that's free or close to it, doesn't require viewers to have a membership, doesn't steel your photos, allows you to link to the photos themselves, and makes it easy to manage your photos. what say ye? Cory Waters
gfen's postings....
why do gfen's messages come as attachments? Im paranoid of attachments (for obvious reasons) others mail dont have this problem. I guess others have noticed this too ?
Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR
--- Brad Dobo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Question: What if Pentax does come out with the DSLR that is currently being talked about, how many people on the list would buy one? (Assuming the price is what? ~$2000US) I would buy one as quickly as possible. And am in fact making arrangements to insure that I have the money come this spring. It's obvious then that it would not be a real feature rich camera. Not like the top Nikons or Canons, or the unfortunate MZ-D. I expect it to be comparable to the d60/d100. But as long as it's got specs equal to the MZ-S I'll be happy. Also, once they enter the market, then a year later a full-frame kick-butt one comes out? If I wanted a Pentax DSLR (which I don't :)), I would pass on what they seem to be offering and what I've read here (Hey, at $2000US it is worse in Canada and that's some serious money still), and wait another year for a superior? product. A growing company will always have something more superior sooner or later. But there is only one reason that I want digital; that is because I work for a daily paper and a digital would greatly reduce my number of headaches. ;) For the paper, 3mp is more than enough. The ability to use my lenses and flashes etc etc etc, on a digital body outweighs any of the negatives that I've been able to think up this far. Another one: Would be it useful to professionals or more a toy for the serious-hobbist? If it has the specs of the MZ-S then it will most definitly be useful to pros. Nick Wright __ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos More http://faith.yahoo.com
RE: Paal Comes Through Again
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Rubenstein, Bruce M (Bruce) wrote: The pie was related to Photokina; too late for that now. Before every big show, or Pentax anniversary, Paal implies (or states explicitly) that Pentax will make some big announcement. This makes him right about 10% of the time. I'm still waiting for something more substantial than rumor. I thought they were keeping it on ice for the next trade show? I won't comment on Paal's hit/miss ratio, as I haven't been around long enough, but I'm going to side with the disbelief crowd until I see a bit more. Although, truthfully, I thought he was just blowing smoke until someone translated the Japanese page.. Maybe we'll all be wrong.
Re: List news (don't read this, Mr Brewer)
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Dan Scott wrote: Doug's a pro, he's probably got all the tools he needs. Let's get him something really coola Lava Lamp! What happened to the giant Spotty on ebay a few months back?
Re: gfen's postings....
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Arathi-Sridhar wrote: why do gfen's messages come as attachments? They do? Im paranoid of attachments (for obvious reasons) Understood. others mail dont have this problem. I guess others have noticed this too ? Have they? What does your mail reader tell you? Weird. Arathi, I'm going to send you a few messages, and a test message.. everyone can respond off list, though, as to not clog.
Test, but please read and respond off list.
CC'd to pentax-discuss.
test 2, please read and respond off list...
to pdml.
Re: web hosting?
local ISPs usually have a certain amount for free. how much space are you looking for? my ISP provides 100 megabytes for free. Herb I use tripod,but its slow.I have a small one through my ISP but i only have 5mb.I can go bigger but they want cash:) Dave Brooks
Re: web hosting?
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] The company I host my www.beard-redfern.com website with, Webstrike (www.webstrikesolutions.com) gives 50 megs and hosting is free for the first year! (but you have to have registered a domain name to host with them) my ISP gives 100MB free with a DSL subscription but i also know they base it on a quota of the entire file system. most people don't use anywhere near their limit and so people like me can end up with a lot more, so long as i don't generate too much traffic. my web site is about 163 MB right now. http://www.bestweb.net/~hchong. it's almost all photos, about 1800 unique images. i can't be sure because there are too many to check for dupes 8-). Herb
Re: Going to start the PDML FAQ, please read me! (was Re: fisheye)
- Original Message - From: Antti-Pekka Virjonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Going to start the PDML FAQ, please read me! (was Re: fisheye) - the most important names in the Asahi stuff (up-to-date) Should this read ... Asahi staff ? Heh:)) Of course I mean staff... Sorry for the typo - I was tired when I was writing this posting... Regards Artur
Re[2]: Paal Comes Through Again
With all due respect to you, Bob, it appears that this particular duck caught some of Paal's lead. By the way, is your middle name Bruce or The Who ? DG At 11:23 PM 10/16/02 +0100, you wrote: Hi, well, with all due respect to Paal, his predictions are rather like horoscope. There's an awful lot of them, usually couched in vague and ambiguous terms, and 99.999% of the time they're wrong. People only remember when they're right because it happens so rarely and because, like that character in the 'X Files', they want to believe. If you fire enough buckshot one piece might hit a duck from time to time, but that doesn't make you a marksman. --- Bob Wednesday, October 16, 2002, 9:56:10 PM, you wrote: I know it's still premature, but Paal is normally pretty accurate (remember his pre MZ-S predictions). And the Japanese news item is zeroing in even closer.
Re: Going to start the PDML FAQ, please read me! (was Re: fisheye)
- Original Message - From: gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Going to start the PDML FAQ, please read me! (was Re: fisheye) - another trick: flash compensation with TTL flashes (other that AF360FGZ) and MZ-5/5n/3/S Sure, although I have no idea what this is.. Exposing for the ambient light in M mode with the exposure compensation applied - in this case the latter affects only the flash output. Pretty slow operation but also effective... - the most important names in the Asahi stuff (up-to-date) Can you explain what you mean? As I wrote in another e-mail - it's a typo:)) I mean of course staff, not stuff:)) Sorry for that Regards Artur
Re: gfen's postings....
Hi gfen, on 17 Oct 02 you wrote in pentax.list: why do gfen's messages come as attachments? They do? Nor here - everything's fine. Bye. Heiko
Re: Going to start the PDML FAQ, Flash
This is the problem i have with this method.Using the SP and 280T,if i set camera in M mode but try and use TTL or other mode on flash,it defaults the shutter speed to 125.I have to set 280T to Manual.Would it be best to meter ambiant light,then under expose say 1 stop,then let the flash fill in the stop.Or meter correctly and use Cottys plastic bouncy thinghy to reflect(i have one) Dave Exposing for the ambient light in M mode with the exposure compensation applied - in this case the latter affects only the flash output. Pretty slow operation but also effective...
Re: Going to start the PDML FAQ, please read me! (was Re: fisheye)
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, [iso-8859-2] Artur Ledóchowski wrote: - the most important names in the Asahi stuff (up-to-date) Can you explain what you mean? As I wrote in another e-mail - it's a typo:)) I mean of course staff, not stuff:)) Sorry for that OK, but can you explain by what you mean in regards to important names in the staff? Like the CEO, etc?
Slightly OT: Success
Well last nights darkroom and develop sure was a lot better than last.Put the right chemicals in the right order(and enough of them) to do a good job on a roll of Delta 100,shot this past Thanksgiving weekend.Only 2 attempts to do a decent contact sheet. We also learned how to do a test strip,read it and proceed with prints.Because there are 6 enlargers and 10 students we were backed up a bit during the night,but i did manage to complete a strip(after several BAD attempts due to thinking i was at f 16 but not) and record times for a print next week.Hard for these eyes to see those f stops:) Now i just have to learn how to put a neg strip in the holder properly ie:not backwards:) Dave(this is fun now)Brooks
Re: Want to play?
Most of this exchange has been off-list. Thanks to William Robb it has returned. Please forward complaints to William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Who's insulting whom now? FYI Accesscomm did inform me that they would pursue my complaint if our list administrator forwarded the complaint (because the exchange originated from list chat). I'm not gonna put that on Doug Brewer, because he's too busy with technical aspects of the list, and because it would conflict with his loyalties, ie. I can't expect that he would back me against you because of his hands off approach to list content, and because he doesn't know me from Adam. OTOH, perhaps I should take it up with Doug. I'm being given plenty of motive, and the evidence to make an irrefutable case. Just keep pushing me, I'll be saving your messages, they make such good evidence. Not very clever of you. If anyone cares to know what the situation is just back up to William's message of Sun, 13 Oct 2002 08:56:39-0600 (extracted from the header). At any rate it's the message that ends, I liked this list a lot more when it was about film and photography. I thought I had useful stuff to contribute back then. My responses occured about 9 hours afterwards, You the reader can judge how awful they were (poor wounded William) ;-) 14 hours later I opened an email in my Inbox (not my PDML folder) to be met with %#* you. The rest is history. It would be best if it stayed history. I did not name William in the last message, and as so many of the list claim not to be interested in these matters that leaves only a few who know or care to whom I referred. At least until William responded. Regards, Anthony Farr Forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] follows -- Hi Anthony, I had talked to our internet administration group about this, just to see where our policy is. You are correct in assuming that we do have a policy against this kind of behaviour. But, according to what I have been told, I am to tell you to contact the administrator of the mailing list, and you are to pressure them to contact our abuse department through [EMAIL PROTECTED] . I hope that this does not stop you from continuing your efforts, but as I'm sure you understand, there is a procedure for everything and everyone, and if it is followed to the T, things happen. Iann -- Internet Support Representative Access Communications Co-operative Limited. 2250 Park Street, Regina, SK S4N 7K7 Phone: 306.565.5357, Fax: 306.565.5395 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 17 October 2002 10:52 PM Subject: Re: Want to play? - Original Message - From: Anthony Farr Subject: Re: Want to play? BTW Brad and I had a brief correspondence of 5 or 6 emails recently, because he wanted to clarify some things I'd said on-list before he reacted to them. I must say that it was a pleasant contrast to my other exchanges recently where the correspondant could have saved us both a lot of heatburn by first finding out what an on-list remark of mine meant before telling me %*!# you in an off-list message :-( Listen up twit: There was no way that post was meant as a compliment, and since it was taken as an insult, there was a problem with your concept. Why don't you dry up and stop drooling about how Mr. Meanie told you where to go? Oh yes, and stop telling me about how intellectually superior you are in private posts. I don't believe it, and likely never will. It would appear that my ISP figured it out, why can't you? You seem like a smart guy, you should be able to figure it out too. Apply some of that superior intellect you claim to possess Regards William (still at [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Robb
Re: Going to start the PDML FAQ, please read me! (was Re: fisheye)
Electric cable release DIY.
Re: Going to start the PDML FAQ, Flash
From what I remember from when I had a Super Program, the flash sets the camera to 1/125 in M mode _only_ if the shutter speed had been set to one faster than 1/125 before you turned the flash on. If you want to balance ambient light better, and set shutter speed to 1/30 or 1/60, for instance, the flash ready indicator should come on without changing the set shutter speed, and you can still use TTL flash. Joe This is the problem i have with this method.Using the SP and 280T,if i set camera in M mode but try and use TTL or other mode on flash,it defaults the shutter speed to 125.I have to set 280T to Manual.Would it be best to meter ambiant light,then under expose say 1 stop,then let the flash fill in the stop.Or meter correctly and use Cottys plastic bouncy thinghy to reflect(i have one) Dave Exposing for the ambient light in M mode with the exposure compensation applied - in this case the latter affects only the flash output. Pretty slow operation but also effective...
Re: test 2, please read and respond off list...
Both messages perfect. No attachments, message contents in message window as expected. Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 18 October 2002 12:17 AM Subject: test 2, please read and respond off list... to pdml.
Oh, 645! revisited: 645x67.
I'm sure this is going to be an awfully weird, and stupid, message. Please, bear with and input on the important question with me (and sorry abou all the extraenous info, I like to babble). I'm torn, I like everything about my 645 except teh fact that its only 645.. It feels underwhelming to see the negs, and I'm wondering if I've talked myself into something for the conviences it offers me (autowinder, higher flash, easier handholdability, more frames). I'm torn, I'm not sure if I would really see any advantage in 6x7 over 6x45, or if I just tell myself this, so I turn to everyone to offer insights. The flash sync problem can be overcome with a leafshutter lens, which leans only the camera shake as an immediate problem. I'm definatly a hand-hold kinda guy, as I prefer to travel light (and if I'm not going to travel light, I can break out the 4x5). Keep in mind, I don't hav ethe ability to goto a store and rent for a day. My only option is to do what I did, buy from a mail order house and rent it for two weeks. My two weeks ends real soon now, and I think I need to decide.. So, bear with me, and feel free to encourge one way or another. Most of my prints will be smaller. 8x10 or 11x14. I wanted an MF camera to have nicer prints, smoother tonal range in BW (which is what I primarily do). I was happy with the tonality in my 6x6 negs, and figured that 645 would be fine since I crop in the viewfinder anyway (ergo 6x6 ends up being 645). However, somehow I'm just not blown away by my 645 shots (this may also be because I haven't taken any truly nice pictures with it). Will I really see an apprechiable difference in small prints (8x10, 5x7, even 4x5 proof sizes) if I go from 645 to 67, or am I just confusing myself? I'm biased because I see the difference in an 8x10 made from a 4x5 image compared to 35mm (I know, I know, its no real comparision!), and I think I'm just neg-fixated. Pros: 645: Easier to carry, easier to handhold, tolerable flash sync. 67: Bigger neg, its what I orginally wanted. Big neg easier to accomplish than setup of a 4x5. Cons: 645: Smaller neg, seems like a second choice. 67: Not as handholdable. Handhold flash w/o LS lens not gonna happen, giant neg possible with a 4x5. I know, no one can tell me what I want, nor would I want them to (that's a lie, I need people to tell me so I can stop being wishywashy!), however, my biggest question, and what I need to know: Is there really a noticable difference in the tonality of an 8x10 between 645 and 67. Sending the camera back won't hurt too much ($30 in roundtrip shipping), as i bought from a large mail order house (no where to rent, etc, around here). My only problem is if I decide the 645 wouldn't been as good, I'd loose a 645 I was quite happy with (large eyecup, grid screen, clean and nice). Perhaps this is some sort of male inadaquecy issue I should be dealing with in therapy... (upon re-reading, all I can think is Wow, I'm pathetic)
Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR
Daniel wrote: If I read the translated press release correctly, pentax plans to reduce the number of film SLR models sold by more than half, and to cut in half the number of PS and MF models they sell. They only sell to MF cameras, however, the 645nII and the 67II. Does this mean that they will eliminate one of the two current MF lines? I certainly hope not! The short answer; No. This is a controlled leak with some misunderstandings. Some have contacted Pentax Japan and they say that Pentax don't intend to do any cuts in the MF line-up (in the near future). The reductions by half is in 35mm PS and 35mm slr's. Pål
Re: K mount whining
Alin wrote: My wishful interpretation is that current lens line will fit the new standard by preserving all FA functionality, including AF and transmitting MTF, F and D data. At least they didn't say new lenses but one or several new wide angle lenses. This suggests they still rely on the current FA line. I don't think anything meaningful can be read out of this. The mentioning of new wide angles is simply to answer the obvious questions when releasing an APS sized CCD: What wide angles to use. Pentax is basically saying that there will be a more suitable selection of wide angle lenses when the digital slr is released. Pål
Re: Going to start the PDML FAQ, please read me! (was Re: fisheye)
- Original Message - From: gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Going to start the PDML FAQ, please read me! (was Re: fisheye) OK, but can you explain by what you mean in regards to important names in the staff? Like the CEO, etc? Yup I thought it would be interesting... Regards Artur
Re: test 2, please read and respond off list...
D'oh, I knew I had to change the address and then forgot. Humble and abject apologies all round. Late, distracted, stressed, monitor misbehaving, brain misbehaving :-/ Regards, Anthony Farr
Re: Going to start the PDML FAQ, please read me! (was Re: fisheye)
common DIY tips and frequent maintenance issues. For instance: Sticky mirror for LX RTF spring bracking loose (Z1) use of self made batteries and/or packs foam replacing focusing screen cleaning ...
Re: Paal Comes Through Again
Gentlemen, Pål spells his name as I started out this sentence, with the tiny diacritical o mark over the 'a.' Why does everyone spell it Paal? But then, I don't know how to correctly pronounce Paal any more than I do Pål! Just curious...trying to learn something else new today! keith whaley Robert Soames Wetmore wrote: This is of course totally inaccurate. Paal has not predicted .001% correctly - he has predicted something like 25-50% correctly. And where he is incorrect it is usually because after he has heard the news, Pentax changes direction. He has been correct about various lens releases, about the MZ-S and the existence of the MZ-D, and about several other things. That means there has to be something like 500,000 incorrect predictions he has made. Paal is a great source who clearly has good inside connections. Just because half of what is on the drawing boards doesn't make it to production doesn't mean he's making stuff up or that the idea was never on the table. And even if you do want to blame him for all of that, at least be a little more realistic about the percentages. Paal is a great resource to the list. Who else has contributed so much (or any) pre-release news from this cagey company called Pentax??? But I'm sure you will be deeply sorry and apologize if either or both of these news items becomes an official release. Rob Hi, well, with all due respect to Paal, his predictions are rather like horoscope. There's an awful lot of them, usually couched in vague and ambiguous terms, and 99.999% of the time they're wrong. People only remember when they're right because it happens so rarely and because, like that character in the 'X Files', they want to believe. If you fire enough buckshot one piece might hit a duck from time to time, but that doesn't make you a marksman. --- Bob
RE: gfen's postings....
I guess others have noticed this too ? Not really. Lukasz
Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR
On Thursday, October 17, 2002, at 04:22 AM, Brad Dobo wrote: Question: What if Pentax does come out with the DSLR that is currently being talked about, how many people on the list would buy one? (Assuming the price is what? ~$2000US) It's possible, but not probable. Currently I'm itching for more detail, not equal or less. Plus, $2KUS is a significant amount of change in our economic niche. It will take me at least 2 years to put aside the cash if things stay the same as they are now. But then again, in two years that same camera should be significantly cheaper and its successor should be considerably better...tough call. I'm more likely to spring for a new scanner (epson 2450) and a dirt cheap MF or 4x5 which, for the MF, would be less than $1kUS for the scanner and camera w/lens and graflock back. Most likely scenario is I buy another Pentax slr so I can carry two cameras with different film and lenses if I want to, and continue to snag good deals on lenses and what not (just snagged a demo A2X-S and case for $123no box, no papers, but apparently new and unused). Dan Scott
Re: Going to start the PDML FAQ, please read me! (was Re: fisheye)
Flavio Minelli a écrit: Electric cable release DIY. http://perso.wanadoo.fr/krg/Photo/trucs.htm
Re: Oh, 645! revisited: 645x67.
I wish I could help you based on personal experience. When I bought my system (P67II) I went through a similar experience trying to decide. I was fortunate to have the local camera store carry Pentax MF gear. I must have gone in 12 times handling the two camera and comparing them. The owner had some blow ups on the wall of 645, 67 and some 66 from 645n, 67II, Mamiya 7, and Hassy 66. At 16 X 20, I don't think the differences were plain as day - they were there, but more subtle. Without a side by side comparison, all of them looked good. Back to the camera issue. My decision ended up being based on several things. First and foremost, why was I getting an MF camera - Answer: image quality. This tipped in favor to the 67. Second, was I going to continue to use 35mm for some things - Answer: yes. This negated some of the size/handling of the 645 over the 67. Third, which camera did I enjoy holding, working and using the most - Answer: the P67II. I really liked the style, the viewfinder, interchangeable finder capability, just enough automation when really needed. Kind of like a big LX without the low light meter. The best I can answer here is - the 645n/ii is the best choice if you are a working pro (wedding, outdoor) and need the camera as the main and possibly only workhorse you have. It can do it all - automation, AF, TTL, size/weight, etc. If you are like me, only doing paying jobs part of the time and able to pick equipment that I like and suits me and my style, then the 67II is the better choice. When the action is quick (AF, automation) or I need light weight, I use my 35mm gear. When I want great image quality, I use the 67. I can say that I am very happy with my choice and would make the same choice again if I could. For the total cost of about $60, it seems that you owe it to yourself to send back the 645 and try the 67. The total purchase price is high enough that the concept of rental for two weeks makes a lot of sense. After trying the 67 - if you don't see enough difference between the negs and/or don't prefer the 67 handling, send it back and get another 645. Only you can really decide if you like one better than the other. Remember, for me, I much preferred the style, design and handling of the 67. I really disliked the Kepplarian style viewfinder on the 645 - had to position my eye just so or it would not be visible - quite annoying to me. Send it back, try the 67 and then make your decision. You would only be out an extra 30 bucks to settle in your own mind and really not ever question your final decision. Bruce Thursday, October 17, 2002, 8:27:33 AM, you wrote: g I'm sure this is going to be an awfully weird, and stupid, message. g Please, bear with and input on the important question with me (and sorry g abou all the extraenous info, I like to babble). g I'm torn, I like everything about my 645 except teh fact that its only g 645.. It feels underwhelming to see the negs, and I'm wondering if I've g talked myself into something for the conviences it offers me (autowinder, g higher flash, easier handholdability, more frames). g I'm torn, I'm not sure if I would really see any advantage in 6x7 over g 6x45, or if I just tell myself this, so I turn to everyone to offer g insights. The flash sync problem can be overcome with a leafshutter lens, g which leans only the camera shake as an immediate problem. I'm definatly g a hand-hold kinda guy, as I prefer to travel light (and if I'm not going g to travel light, I can break out the 4x5). g Keep in mind, I don't hav ethe ability to goto a store and rent for a day. g My only option is to do what I did, buy from a mail order house and rent g it for two weeks. My two weeks ends real soon now, and I think I need to g decide.. So, bear with me, and feel free to encourge one way or another. g Most of my prints will be smaller. 8x10 or 11x14. I wanted an MF camera to g have nicer prints, smoother tonal range in BW (which is what I primarily g do). I was happy with the tonality in my 6x6 negs, and figured that 645 g would be fine since I crop in the viewfinder anyway (ergo 6x6 ends up g being 645). However, somehow I'm just not blown away by my 645 shots (this g may also be because I haven't taken any truly nice pictures with it). g Will I really see an apprechiable difference in small prints (8x10, 5x7, g even 4x5 proof sizes) if I go from 645 to 67, or am I just confusing g myself? I'm biased because I see the difference in an 8x10 made from a 4x5 g image compared to 35mm (I know, I know, its no real comparision!), and I g think I'm just neg-fixated. g Pros: g 645: Easier to carry, easier to handhold, tolerable flash sync. g 67: Bigger neg, its what I orginally wanted. Big neg easier to accomplish g than setup of a 4x5. g Cons: g 645: Smaller neg, seems like a second choice. g 67: Not as handholdable. Handhold flash w/o LS lens not gonna happen, g giant neg possible with a 4x5. g I know, no one can tell me what I
Re[2]: K mount whining
My interpretation is by omission. Should they intend to launch a new lens mount, they would have said body with accompanying lenses. Instead, they explicitly stated new wide angles, hinting they will fill the gap not covered by the current lens line in relation to the CCD demands (size and light beam perpendicularity). Hence my hope the new body will still be built around the K mount and not a specific CCD size. Servus, Alin Pål wrote: PJ I don't think anything meaningful can be read out of this. The PJ mentioning of new wide angles is simply to answer the obvious PJ questions when releasing an APS sized CCD: What wide angles to PJ use. Pentax is basically saying that there will be a more suitable PJ selection of wide angle lenses when the digital slr is released. Servus, Alin
Re[2]: Paal Comes Through Again
I, for one, am glad that Pål passes on what he hears/finds. Whether they materialize or not, if gives me something to look into and check out that I might otherwise totally miss. A big thanks from me! Bruce Thursday, October 17, 2002, 8:50:02 AM, you wrote: PJ Dave wrote: I like what I've heard - but as I'm with Bruce on this one. It's been touted by us here and on that JIJ website and on DCresource but it's still rumor until Pentax makes it official (at which time of course that will confirm or renounce Paal's ability at prognostication) :) PJ I don't find this discussion very interesting. I just like to point out that I'm not prognosticating anything but simply pass on information. If this information is correct or incorrect it's not PJ really up to me. The information is there and everyone is free to do whatever they want with it. PJ Pål
Re: Going to start the PDML FAQ, please read me! (was Re: fisheye)
Flavio Minelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: common DIY tips and frequent maintenance issues. For instance: Sticky mirror for LX RTF spring bracking loose (Z1) use of self made batteries and/or packs foam replacing focusing screen cleaning ... Stan Halpin's and Boz's web pages, right? Perhaps my Pentax service manual page (I may add K1000 and Super Program service manuals shortly) -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com Photography and writing
Re: Going to start the PDML FAQ, please read me! (was Re: fisheye)
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Mark Roberts wrote: Stan Halpin's and Boz's web pages, right? Boz's yes, but which one is Stan? The lenses tests? The URL, please? Perhaps my Pentax service manual page (I may add K1000 and Super Program service manuals shortly) That would also be great... URL for that? :)
Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR
- Original Message - From: Dan Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 1:37 AM Subject: Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR On Wednesday, October 16, 2002, at 05:11 PM, Pål Jensen wrote: Can't be. They are certainly not making more MF than PS. Pentax PS sales are approaching 30 000 000. Pentax is market leader in PS, and apparently MF as well, which proves, along with their overturn numbers, that they are among the worlds largest camera manufacturers. Pål They wouldn't have to be selling more MF than PSa higher profit margin on the full range of MF products would do the trick, wouldn't it? And anyway, I just took the numbers as representing the portion of Pentax's revenue from the camera market, and not including their surveying equipment, binoculars, astronomy, rifle scopes, etc. Dan Scott Isn't the camera divison seperate from the rest of their inventory or does it just look like that? And does these figures indicate the companies market share ie 40% of all MF sales are Pentax or is it that 40% of all products that Pentax sells are MF? Feroze
Re: Oh, 645! revisited: 645x67.
gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm torn, I like everything about my 645 except teh fact that its only 645. Will I really see an apprechiable difference in small prints (8x10, 5x7, even 4x5 proof sizes) if I go from 645 to 67 No way. At those sized they'll be pretty much indistinguishable. Pros: 645: Easier to carry, easier to handhold, tolerable flash sync. Plus: Bigger selection of lenses (you can use 645 lenses or, with an adapter, any lens made for the 67). Wider (rectilinear) wide angles available (the new 32-55 is beautiful). Smaller, lighter overall kit (With camera body, tripod and equivalent selection of lenses) More shots per roll of film. Faster film loading/unloading (especially if you get a spare insert). Film data imprinting (I *love* this feature on my MZ-S) Auto bracketing. Digital backs coming. 67: Bigger neg, its what I orginally wanted. Big neg easier to accomplish than setup of a 4x5. Interchangable finders. (May not be an advantage for you, but then, at 8 x 10 print sizes, neither is the bigger negative...) Cons: 645: Smaller neg, seems like a second choice. 67: Not as handholdable. Handhold flash w/o LS lens not gonna happen, giant neg possible with a 4x5. my biggest question, and what I need to know: Is there really a noticable difference in the tonality of an 8x10 between 645 and 67. No. It really sounds as if you need the 645 and your ego is trying to get you to buy the 67. I faced the same dilemma as you and went with the 645 (original, manual focus version) because I take it hiking in some pretty rugged country sometimes; My decision was based on size/weight issues, but I've never regretted it from in image quality standpoint (or any other standpoint). -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com Photography and writing
Re: K mount whining
Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think anything meaningful can be read out of this. The mentioning of new wide angles is simply to answer the obvious questions when releasing an APS sized CCD: What wide angles to use. Pentax is basically saying that there will be a more suitable selection of wide angle lenses when the digital slr is released. And a good 17-35 would be appreciated by a lot of us film users, too! -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com Photography and writing
RE: Pentax price list - but what was the year?
My guess is it could be as early as the late 80's to early 90's, by the look of what is listed. On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Malcolm Smith wrote: Cotty wrote: a href=http://mail.peoplepc.com/jump/http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/misc/pricelist.html;http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/misc/pricelist.html/a Seriously, I don't know the answer - I'm curious. What an interesting find! 1986? Malcolm Ken Waller PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart. http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: Going to start the PDML FAQ, please read me! (was Re: fisheye)
gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Mark Roberts wrote: Stan Halpin's and Boz's web pages, right? Boz's yes, but which one is Stan? The lenses tests? The URL, please? Perhaps my Pentax service manual page (I may add K1000 and Super Program service manuals shortly) That would also be great... URL for that? :) http://www.robertstech.com/pentax.htm -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com Photography and writing
Re: Cross Processing
Hi Albano If you want to do the classic Xprocess, I suggest you high saturated E6 films, so crossing them you get the strongest and ok, i'll do the easy way then, I've never shot slide film before though. Please define high saturated and what preferably fuji film would that be.. Thanks Feroze
Re: Re[2]: K mount whining
On Thursday, October 17, 2002, at 12:01 PM, Alin Flaider wrote: My interpretation is by omission. Should they intend to launch a new lens mount, they would have said body with accompanying lenses. Instead, they explicitly stated new wide angles, hinting they will fill the gap not covered by the current lens line in relation to the CCD demands (size and light beam perpendicularity). Hence my hope the new body will still be built around the K mount and not a specific CCD size. Servus, Alin Any speculation as to the quality of these lenses used on film bodies? Some of the current popular wides in use on dslr bodies are crap when used on film slrs. Dan Scott
Re: The flagship is coming!
My Opinion: If there is a new flagship, it won't be based on the MZ-S.Most of the missing flagship pieces like high FPS will require a bigger body, and the MZ-S just wasn't desgined for that (unless they integrate the grip and put stuff in there, like the original MZ-D design.). It would make sense to me to build one of those big hunk o'black bodies (like the F5 or EOS-1v) precisiely for those folks who liked the PZ-1P and want all of the high end features. The MZ-S can remain the nice but less features camera like the the F100 or EOS3. One last prediction. I think Pentax will leave all the flash comepsnation in the flash and just come out with a more powerful flash, e.g., AF 500 FGZ Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Pentax price list - but what was the year?
My list has the SF-7 introduced in 1988,so my quess would be 1988 or 1989. Dave My guess is it could be as early as the late 80's to early 90's, by the look of what is listed. On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Malcolm Smith wrote: Cotty wrote: a href=http://mail.peoplepc.com/jump/http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/misc/pricelist.html;http://www. macads.co.uk/snaps/misc/pricelist.html/a Seriously, I don't know the answer - I'm curious. What an interesting find! 1986? Malcolm Ken Waller PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart. http://www.peoplepc.com
RE: is the list broken again?
The digest isn't working for me either. BR -Original Message- From: Francis Alviar [mailto:alviar629030;yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 12:25 PM To: Pentax Discuss List Subject: is the list broken again? Have not been getting any digests since yesterday pm. Just wondering. Thanks. Francis M. Alviar __ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos More http://faith.yahoo.com
RE: Oh, 645! revisited: 645x67.
-Original Message- From: gfen [mailto:gfen;infotainment.org] I'm torn, I like everything about my 645 except teh fact that its only 645.. It feels underwhelming to see the negs, and I'm wondering if I've talked myself into something for the conviences it offers me (autowinder, higher flash, easier handholdability, more frames). Negs aren't very interesting to look at. Make some prints. I'm torn, I'm not sure if I would really see any advantage in 6x7 over 6x45, or if I just tell myself this, so I turn to everyone to offer insights. Not really. I shot several rolls through a 67II last summer. If I were to to show you the 8x10's, you couldn't tell them from 8x10's printed from 645 negs. Will I really see an apprechiable difference in small prints (8x10, 5x7, even 4x5 proof sizes) if I go from 645 to 67, or am I just confusing myself? You won't see any difference at that size. You might see some at 16x20. I know, no one can tell me what I want, nor would I want them to (that's a lie, I need people to tell me so I can stop being wishywashy!), however, my biggest question, and what I need to know: Is there really a noticable difference in the tonality of an 8x10 between 645 and 67. No. I was wondering the same thing last year: would 6x7 noticably improve my prints? I shot the 67, and found that it wouldn't (99% of my prints are 11x14 or smaller). I also found the thing to be too damned big and bulky. tv
Re: Want to play?
I havn't been around long enough on this list to know, but is this kind of hate mail campaign/talk loud and burp in the movies/drive on the pavements/honk at old ladies crossing the streets/spit in the drinking fountain behaviour common on PDML or is it just a passing phase. I don't see the point, don't really care to know why people have to tell one another that they are better anyway. Go www.mensa.com if you really want to know who's smarter. But if your wife just left you or your mother through your entire playboy collection in the trash please find some other means to get over it. Feroze - Original Message - From: Anthony Farr [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 5:20 PM Subject: Re: Want to play? Most of this exchange has been off-list. Thanks to William Robb it has returned. Please forward complaints to William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Who's insulting whom now? FYI Accesscomm did inform me that they would pursue my complaint if our list administrator forwarded the complaint (because the exchange originated from list chat). I'm not gonna put that on Doug Brewer, because he's too busy with technical aspects of the list, and because it would conflict with his loyalties, ie. I can't expect that he would back me against you because of his hands off approach to list content, and because he doesn't know me from Adam. OTOH, perhaps I should take it up with Doug. I'm being given plenty of motive, and the evidence to make an irrefutable case. Just keep pushing me, I'll be saving your messages, they make such good evidence. Not very clever of you. If anyone cares to know what the situation is just back up to William's message of Sun, 13 Oct 2002 08:56:39-0600 (extracted from the header). At any rate it's the message that ends, I liked this list a lot more when it was about film and photography. I thought I had useful stuff to contribute back then. My responses occured about 9 hours afterwards, You the reader can judge how awful they were (poor wounded William) ;-) 14 hours later I opened an email in my Inbox (not my PDML folder) to be met with %#* you. The rest is history. It would be best if it stayed history. I did not name William in the last message, and as so many of the list claim not to be interested in these matters that leaves only a few who know or care to whom I referred. At least until William responded. Regards, Anthony Farr Forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] follows -- Hi Anthony, I had talked to our internet administration group about this, just to see where our policy is. You are correct in assuming that we do have a policy against this kind of behaviour. But, according to what I have been told, I am to tell you to contact the administrator of the mailing list, and you are to pressure them to contact our abuse department through [EMAIL PROTECTED] . I hope that this does not stop you from continuing your efforts, but as I'm sure you understand, there is a procedure for everything and everyone, and if it is followed to the T, things happen. Iann -- Internet Support Representative Access Communications Co-operative Limited. 2250 Park Street, Regina, SK S4N 7K7 Phone: 306.565.5357, Fax: 306.565.5395 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 17 October 2002 10:52 PM Subject: Re: Want to play? - Original Message - From: Anthony Farr Subject: Re: Want to play? BTW Brad and I had a brief correspondence of 5 or 6 emails recently, because he wanted to clarify some things I'd said on-list before he reacted to them. I must say that it was a pleasant contrast to my other exchanges recently where the correspondant could have saved us both a lot of heatburn by first finding out what an on-list remark of mine meant before telling me %*!# you in an off-list message :-( Listen up twit: There was no way that post was meant as a compliment, and since it was taken as an insult, there was a problem with your concept. Why don't you dry up and stop drooling about how Mr. Meanie told you where to go? Oh yes, and stop telling me about how intellectually superior you are in private posts. I don't believe it, and likely never will. It would appear that my ISP figured it out, why can't you? You seem like a smart guy, you should be able to figure it out too. Apply some of that superior intellect you claim to possess Regards William (still at [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Robb
Re: Oh, 645! revisited: 645x67.
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Mark Roberts wrote: No way. At those sized they'll be pretty much indistinguishable. The only reason I'd feel different is I see there is a difference, to my eyes, in 8x10 enlargements made from a 4x5 neg.. Then, that's also biased eyes.. Film data imprinting (I *love* this feature on my MZ-S) Auto bracketing. Digital backs coming. Not for my lowly 645 (the original series).. :) Interchangable finders. (May not be an advantage for you, but then, at 8 x 10 print sizes, neither is the bigger negative...) Again, when I know I'm going to go bigger, I can go 4x5, which is why I'm not overly concerned about giant enlargments.. If its something where I'm out tramping around, and suddenly the scene of a lifetime opens up before me, at least I'll have a 645 instead of just a 35mm. It really sounds as if you need the 645 and your ego is trying to get you to buy the 67. I faced the same dilemma as you and went with the I don't know to call it ego, or what, but just the feeling that it was the 67 I wanted all along, then I read up on the specs, and decided that in almost all categories, the 645 was a better camera for general use than the 67 The problem is now I look back and wonder if I cheated myself.
Re[4]: K mount whining
Parallel and perpendicular light beams implies more optical elements and may come at the cost of resolution, especially at the edges. Just a guess... Servus, Alin Dan wrote: DS Any speculation as to the quality of these lenses used on film bodies? DS Some of the current popular wides in use on dslr bodies are crap when DS used on film slrs.
RE: The flagship is coming!
If they bulked up the MZ-S it would be in the EOS3/F100 class. It's less than half the weight of the F5. I don't think any Pentax user would want anything bigger/heavier than a EOS3/F100, which are also somewhat bigger/heavier than a PZ-1. BR -Original Message- From: Steve Desjardins [mailto:DesJardinS;wlu.edu] My Opinion: or EOS-1v) precisiely for those folks who liked the PZ-1P and want all of the high end features. The MZ-S can remain the nice but less features camera like the the F100 or EOS3.
RE: Pentax annonces digital SLR
Pentax has 40% of the MF market in Japan according to intelligible translations. BR -Original Message- From: Feroze Kistan [mailto:angelart;telkomsa.net] ... does these figures indicate the companies market share ie 40% of all MF sales are Pentax or is it that 40% of all products that Pentax sells are MF? Feroze
Re: Oh, 645! revisited: 645x67.
gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Digital backs coming. Not for my lowly 645 (the original series).. :) Just speculation at this point but it's believed that the NPS digital back may be compatible with all Pentax 645 cameras - even the manual focus original. Again, it's just speculation, but if you were a third party manufacturer wanting to market a product like this, you'd try your best to make it compatible with as many versions of the 645 as possible. (Unlike Pentax, they don't have any incentive to try to make people upgrade.) -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com Photography and writing
Re (x): Pentax annonces digital SLR
I expect [the Pentax DSLR] to be comparable to the d60/d100. But as long as it's got specs equal to the MZ-S I'll be happy. Nick Wright Wow, specs equal to the MZ-S - that includes ISO equivalency up to 6400. That would be impressive! Rob _ Unlimited Internet access -- and 2 months free! Try MSN. http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/2monthsfree.asp
RE: The flagship is coming!
I know that the MZ-S is much lighter than the current F100/EOS1V, but Pentax cameras tend to be lighter (as you indicated). I just think that the MZ-S won't bulk up well, so they will need a larger body to include those extra Pro features. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re[3]: Paal Comes Through Again
Hi, Thursday, October 17, 2002, 3:38:39 PM, you wrote: With all due respect to you, Bob, it appears that this particular duck caught some of Paal's lead. By the way, is your middle name Bruce or The Who ? we all have the right to be as skeptical or as credulous as we please, and to make our opinions known, but we don't have the right to make unprovoked ad hominem remarks. We've just been through an example of what often happens when people do make such remarks. I've been on this list for some time now, and I was on it while The Who was active. I fail to see how you can make such a comparison based on a couple of skeptical postings about yet another rumour about an unannounced camera. Since you don't have a sound basis for the comparison I can only take the comparison with The Who as an unprovoked insult, which drops you right down to the bottom of my estimation, along with all the other people who toss personal insults around so freely. Bob
Re: Pentax annonces digital SLR
I thing the 645nII should be the *last* camera to worry about being discontinued. It seems to be viewed by Pentax as their flagship camera. It's the one they're reportedly working on a digital back for (and the one for which NPS is doing a digital back). Hmmm, with the breadth and quality of the Pentax digital PS (3.3 MP entry level at everyone elses 2 MP price) and the upcoming Digital SLR promising to be a price-breaker, make a digital 645 with a full frame sesnsor, and an entry level DSLR and there'll be no need to buy film again
Re: Want to play?
Passing Phase.Just annoying. Dave I havn't been around long enough on this list to know, but is this kind of hate mail campaign/talk loud and burp in the movies/drive on the pavements/honk at old ladies crossing the streets/spit in the drinking fountain behaviour common on PDML or is it just a passing phase. I don't see the point, don't really care to know why people have to tell one another that they are better anyway. Go www.mensa.com if you really want to know who's smarter. But if your wife just left you or your mother through your entire playboy collection in the trash please find some other means to get over it.
Re: Paal Comes Through Again
I'll second this comment... In the absence of a continuos flow of product or product flow from Pentax, a stream of informal clues add an important demension to the list---IMHO. Otis Bruce Dayton wrote: I, for one, am glad that Pål passes on what he hears/finds. Whether they materialize or not, if gives me something to look into and check out that I might otherwise totally miss. A big thanks from me! Bruce Thursday, October 17, 2002, 8:50:02 AM, you wrote: PJ Dave wrote: I like what I've heard - but as I'm with Bruce on this one. It's been touted by us here and on that JIJ website and on DCresource but it's still rumor until Pentax makes it official (at which time of course that will confirm or renounce Paal's ability at prognostication) :) PJ I don't find this discussion very interesting. I just like to point out that I'm not prognosticating anything but simply pass on information. If this information is correct or incorrect it's not PJ really up to me. The information is there and everyone is free to do whatever they want with it. PJ Pål
RE: Oh, 645! revisited: 645x67.
-Original Message- From: Mark Roberts [mailto:mark;robertstech.com] gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Digital backs coming. Not for my lowly 645 (the original series).. :) Just speculation at this point but it's believed that the NPS digital back may be compatible with all Pentax 645 cameras - even the manual focus original. Again, it's just speculation, but if you were a third party manufacturer wanting to market a product like this, you'd try your best to make it compatible with as many versions of the 645 as possible. (Unlike Pentax, they don't have any incentive to try to make people upgrade.) While we're speculating...I was thinking about the 3rd party back for the 645 and I figured that it wouldn't disable the motor drive. We'd still have that very loud wind-on, wouldn't we? Maybe the contacts in the NII would allow a back to disable it. This might be an inconsequential point to most, but that motor is pretty damned loud. One of the appeals of digital for me is how quiet they are. tv
RE: The flagship is coming!
Pro features, yes? 45oz body weight? I don't think so (even I didn't). There is just so much designers can do in terms of size/weight/cost/features/performance. It's not like other maker's cameras are made from cast iron. BR -Original Message- From: Steve Desjardins [mailto:DesJardinS;wlu.edu] I know that the MZ-S is much lighter than the current F100/EOS1V, but Pentax cameras tend to be lighter (as you indicated). I just think that the MZ-S won't bulk up well, so they will need a larger body to include those extra Pro features.
RE: The flagship is coming!
Some times my D1 gets VERY heavy.:) Dave If they bulked up the MZ-S it would be in the EOS3/F100 class. It's less than half the weight of the F5. I don't think any Pentax user would want anything bigger/heavier than a EOS3/F100, which are also somewhat bigger/heavier than a PZ-1. BR -Original Message- From: Steve Desjardins [mailto:DesJardinS;wlu.edu] My Opinion: or EOS-1v) precisiely for those folks who liked the PZ-1P and want all of the high end features. The MZ-S can remain the nice but less features camera like the the F100 or EOS3.
Re: Want to play?
Somewhere Oblix is wandering around tapping his temple going these PDML's are crazy Feroze - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 5:23 PM Subject: Re: Want to play? Passing Phase.Just annoying. Dave I havn't been around long enough on this list to know, but is this kind of hate mail campaign/talk loud and burp in the movies/drive on the pavements/honk at old ladies crossing the streets/spit in the drinking fountain behaviour common on PDML or is it just a passing phase. I don't see the point, don't really care to know why people have to tell one another that they are better anyway. Go www.mensa.com if you really want to know who's smarter. But if your wife just left you or your mother through your entire playboy collection in the trash please find some other means to get over it.
Re: FYI : PTN of Japan
This is interesting news. Pity it's not a full frame, but what can you expect for $2500 ? Also 12% of the SLR market, is more then I would have guessed. On Thursday 17 October 2002 15:07, tom wrote: -- Photo Trade News of Japan, October 17, 2002 No. 02-53 - Pentax plans to market lens-interchangeable digital SLR next spring Pentax Corporation (new name for Asahi Optical) is planning to enter lens-interchangeable digital SLR camera market next spring, probably, according to the company. The camera will use APS-format size CCD image sensor, in stead of 35mm format size , so as to make camera price lower, less than Y300,000 ($2,500) and the body more compact. Simultaneously the company will shift more to digital cameras, accordingly number of 35mm SLR and compact photo cameras will be reduced gradually. Regarding Pentax market share in Japan, the company has 12% share in 35mm SLR market, 25% in compact flash cameras, and 40% in medium format cameras. - -- Frits Wüthrich
