Re[2]: Wide Portraits - Was Re[2]: Pentax digital SLR
Cotty, Well, I have to agree that wides are really cool. They can certainly emphasize things in a unique way. Your shot was most interesting to all of us who don't know or care who the subject was. I really enjoyed it. Bruce Friday, December 6, 2002, 12:32:16 AM, you wrote: Now one could argue if that is a portrait. It certainly is a picture of someone with a heavy emphasis - :). One wonders if he would be excited to hang it on the wall, pay for prints etc. Now this is a wide portrait! http://pug.komkon.org/01sep/bkdpug.html Bruce C Hi Bruce, C As a hero of mine once said, 'I make the pictures for myself - is anyone C else likes them, too bad!' C BTW, I've seen the nag before - great shot. First six-legged horse I've C ever seen ;-) C Cot C C Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at C http://www.macads.co.uk/ C C Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! C http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ C
Re: Eastern US Winter Storm
On Friday, December 6, 2002, at 01:08 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PS: I was trying to figure out how the heck one lifts from the knees instead of the back when shovelling snow, and I'm wondering whether snow shovels just aren't long enough for someone of my height... The only way I could use my knees would be to do deep knee bends with each stroke the whole time I was out there, and there's no way my knees would take anywhere near that amount of punishment. Thing is, I'm not _that_ tall (IIRC, 6'0 is above average but well within the normal range, right?), so if I'm right about the length of the handles on snow shovels, that would seem a little odd. Glenn, You are taking too big a scoop. If your knees can't take the load, what do you think it's doing to your back? Shovel smart, or pay someone else to do it. Dan Scott
Re: Who has switched to Pentax and why?
I switched to Pentax because the famous Alpa Reflexes don't work in the cold. And I happened to have an ME Super knocking around. Don Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002
More on MX psudo mirro lock
Hi, Just a little tidbit. I was experimenting with a MX mirror mechanism and found that the mirror can easily be returned to normal after flicking the shutter to achieve pseudo mirror lock. The aperture stop-down lever is also the mirror flip-up catch therefore if you gently lower the stop-down lever the mirror will return to normal position and lock. You can do this with an index finger as long as you keep it out of the way of the mirror as it comes down, it doesn't flick either, the rate at which you pull down the lever controls the mirror speed. Again looking at how the mechanism works I can't see how flicking the shutter to achieve pseudo mirror lock could cause damage to the camera. 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: My December photo project for fun and hopefully profit
Looks good, good luck. Anton ___ Freeserve AnyTime, only £13.99 per month with one month's FREE trial! For more information visit http://www.freeserve.com/time/ or call free on 0800 970 8890
Re[2]: thoughts on the 77mm limited lens
Hi, Friday, December 6, 2002, 4:24:45 AM, you wrote: P.S. Anyone closely associated with using a Leica rangefinder almost by definition only uses a few focal lengths--no zooms, nothing over 135mm if that, no macro (no, the DR doesn't count s). I've found myself more and more using only a 35mm and 85/90mm lens. One of my favourite photo books of recent years is 'Voyages' by Raymond Depardon, a Magnum Leica photographer. He says that almost all the photos were shot with a 50mm lens. The photos drip with a certain atmosphere of distance and detachment and the unspectacular framing and perspective add to that. The very wide and very long lenses can put something specifically photographic between the viewer and the photograph, a reminder that you are looking at a photograph, whereas the more prosaic focal lenses let the viewer forget the technology and concentrate on the image. I hope that doesn't sound too pretentious. It's not meant to be. --- Bob Our heads are round so that our thoughts can fly in any direction Francis Picabia
Re: Pentax digital SLR
I can't even imagine (!) facing that lad on a football field! I'd expire of fright long before he actually slammed into me! Great shot! Thanks Keith. He's almost...Vulcan. Cotty 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: Digital printing beats optical?
You are not alone I am totally blown away by the prints I'm getting off my Epson printers. I have a Stylus Photo that I've heavily used for around 5 years - mostly 4X6 prints. I just started using the Epson 2000P that I won in an Epson contest and am really impressed with the quality of the 13X19 prints it puts out
Re: Erin's (err, Mrs. Reed's) MX
You'll really like the MX when a winder is attached. Much easier to grip. While I like light-weight, small bodies, sometimes Pentax bodies seem too small. Hi Eleanor, I agree with Collin. I find the MX very tiny in my hands, and while this can be an asset, I prefer it with the winder. The motor drive is even better g. Cotty 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[2]: Digital printing beats optical?
Hi Bruce, I'm in! Address (off list) please :-) Cotty For me, the control is important (ala digital darkroom), but I have been much more blown away by the Agfa D-Lab output from digital files than the Epson printers. Of course, we are comparing a $200,000.00 printer to a $500.00 printer. I have had 3 Epsons and seen great work on them, but the D-Lab output is wonderful. Kind of the best of both worlds - prepare in photoshop and print on the D-Lab. I would be very interested in doing a study. I would be happy to have anyone who would, prepare a digital image and accompanying 8X10 print for me. Send it in and I'll have my lab print the same image on the D-Lab for comparison. I will be more than happy to send back the D-Lab print for you to examine too. This is as much for my learning as anything, because I haven't seen as good of prints come off the Epsons. Usually the dark to black areas are the weakest in my experience. Any of you major digital printers out there game? 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: I didn't like the topic anymore ;-)
Well, let's be civil, the both of us then ok? Good, have a beer on me! I am having an especially nice Cabernet right now. I raise my glass to Brad Dobo!! Cheers William Robb Oh my God. Bill's been replaced by a bodysnatcher! 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: Re[2]: thoughts on the 77mm limited lens
On 6 Dec 2002 at 9:06, Bob Walkden wrote: I've found myself more and more using only a 35mm and 85/90mm lens. One of my favourite photo books of recent years is 'Voyages' by Raymond Depardon, a Magnum Leica photographer. He says that almost all the photos were shot with a 50mm lens. The photos drip with a certain atmosphere of distance and detachment and the unspectacular framing and perspective add to that. 35mm with a light spattering of 21mm, 50mm and 90mm (in that order) are my staples when range-finder shooting. The very wide and very long lenses can put something specifically photographic between the viewer and the photograph, a reminder that you are looking at a photograph, whereas the more prosaic focal lenses let the viewer forget the technology and concentrate on the image. An interesting observation and quite true I guess. I find that the 35mm FL provides a very neutral AOV the 50mm feels a little long for the type of subject matter that I shoot. 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[2]: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz!
Brad, The L converters have less negative impact on your image (especially vignetting and contrast loss) than the S or 3rd party. Only for lenses that can use them. I would strongly recommend going with the L over the S. Remember that not only light loss, but quality loss is greater with a 2X vs. a 1.4X. Bruce Friday, December 6, 2002, 12:39:05 AM, you wrote: BD Well, seems I have much to learn! I always wondered about the L converters, BD as I always saw only the short ones. Is the L necessary for the 400/5.6? BD As for the 1.4x and the 2x is there a difference in optical quality? Rob BD pointed out the light issue, but I would be using it during bright days I BD would imagine. I guess I'm a bit greedy now. Having the ability to shoot BD at 800mm sounds like it could be a lot of fun, but I understand not so BD practical. BD Brad BD - Original Message - BD From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] BD To: Brad Dobo [EMAIL PROTECTED] BD Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 3:22 AM BD Subject: Re: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz! Brad, I have the 1.4X-L converter. It works wonderfully with the A 400/5.6. The L converters have an extended snout that fits inside the rear of the lens. I know with the 1.4 that the loss of quality is very minimal. It is a great converter. I don't know for a fact that the 2X-L fits properly. I would guess it would, but am not positive. As to the issue of tripod mounted with MZ-S/Grip. No issue at all. The lens is bigger/heavier than the body. The lens mounts to the tripod and the camera just hangs off the end. So adding a converter doesn't have any real impact. HTH, Bruce Thursday, December 5, 2002, 11:35:57 PM, you wrote: BD Hey, BD Even though I have not received the lens yet, I'm looking at getting BD the 2x BD teleconverter. Anyone (Bruce D. etc) know if this is a good idea? BD This is BD quite new to me, not the converter and light, etc, but the weight or BD stress BD and balance when mounted on a tripod with the MZ-S w/grip? This would BD be BD the first lens I would have use (while limited) for a TC. BD Brad BD ** BD Brad W. Dobo, HBA (Eds.) BD Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BD ICQ#: 1658
Re: Eastern US Winter Storm
Ken Archer wrote: It must be getting cold up there because it is supposed to get down to 30 degrees F here tonight. Right now its 27 degrees C at 10pm. Feel free to Fedex me some of that snow; its going to be hard to sleep tonight! Our friends in Sydney could use some, too. Big fires again. Depending on the winds we might see the smoke here as we did last January. Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Re: Eastern US Winter Storm
I won't be lifting from the knees, my back or from anywhere else. I had a hernia repaired on Wednesday and for at least a month someone else will be doing the shovelling. So I won't be looking at any strange turquoise-blue-green colours in the snow for a while. But what I am going to do is some macro tests whilst recovering: A real Macro Lens (Sigma 50mm/f2.8) compared to - a variety of other lens combinations including the Panagor Auto Macro Converter with various lenses, reversed 50mm/f2.0, 50mm/f1.7 on the ends of other lenses, and so on. I have no tubes, so am bound to use just the centre of the field in some images. But the magnification is going to be quite high anyway. Anyone care to suggest combinations? I was thinking of using a 135mm with a reversed 50mm lens. the 135mm with the Panagor, some 50mm lenses with the Panagor and compare pictures taken of the same object under the same conditions. A nice little piece of Vypro mesh left over from my surgical procedure! Don 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: Dan Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Dan Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 10:44 AM Subject: Re: Eastern US Winter Storm On Friday, December 6, 2002, at 01:08 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PS: I was trying to figure out how the heck one lifts from the knees instead of the back when shovelling snow, and I'm wondering whether snow shovels just aren't long enough for someone of my height... The only way I could use my knees would be to do deep knee bends with each stroke the whole time I was out there, and there's no way my knees would take anywhere near that amount of punishment. Thing is, I'm not _that_ tall (IIRC, 6'0 is above average but well within the normal range, right?), so if I'm right about the length of the handles on snow shovels, that would seem a little odd. Glenn, You are taking too big a scoop. If your knees can't take the load, what do you think it's doing to your back? Shovel smart, or pay someone else to do it. Dan Scott
grainy vs sharper scans?
I was wondering what is your opinion on which is a better scan. I have scanned the same negative with light medium dust removal respectively. However, I have found the light one is sharper but has coarser grain, while the medium one is blurrer but has less visible grain. The problem is, coarser grain one would appear even coarser once sharpened. For whose who have scanned and print your own photos, which should I keep? The scans could be seen here (it's 1.4MB big): http://www3.telus.net/wlachan/light_medium.jpg regards, Alan Chan _ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
Re: Pentax digital SLR
Hi Cotty, on 06 Dec 02 you wrote in pentax.list: Thanks Keith. He's almost...Vulcan. Almost... yes I see... his mom might be Vulcan, but his dad... maybe Ferengi...bg Great shot! Regards, Heiko
Re: 28-105mm in black
Hello. I presume you mean the new IF lens? Yes it comes with a hood - this is the cute type that has the polariser cut-out in it. The hood is packaged in the box with the lens. Kind regards from sunny Brighton Peter
grainy vs sharper scans?
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I was wondering what is your opinion on which is a better scan. I have scanned the same negative with light medium dust removal respectively. However, I have found the light one is sharper but has coarser grain, while the medium one is blurrer but has less visible grain. The problem is, coarser grain one would appear even coarser once sharpened. For whose who have scanned and print your own photos, which should I keep? what DPI are you scanning at? which scanner? i think i would stick with light dust removal and manual touch up the places that need more work. for this particular image, i think the grain is a useful effect, but also, it's one where i would not apply any sharpening. there already is motion blur. i don't always sharpen my images. my digital cameras ones i do all the time because i have disabled the camera's internal automatic sharpening. for film, it depends on the subject. Herb
Re: I didn't like the topic anymore ;-)
Na, we're all just looking forward to better times here on the PDML. I can't stay angry at a fellow Canuck! Being English ties you in too Cotty! Best wishes (Holiday Season and all :)) Brad - Original Message - From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 4:20 AM Subject: Re: I didn't like the topic anymore ;-) Well, let's be civil, the both of us then ok? Good, have a beer on me! I am having an especially nice Cabernet right now. I raise my glass to Brad Dobo!! Cheers William Robb Oh my God. Bill's been replaced by a bodysnatcher! 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: Re[2]: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz!
I can see the headache coming. I know from you that the 1.4x L fits my lens, but not sure on the 2x L, of course, gonna be tough finding a place that has one to try out. So the quality is worse at 2x then..hmmm.and 800mm was so tempting. ~600mm isn't bad I suppose :) May stick with the better and compatible 1.4x L. Thanks for the info Bruce. Brad - Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Brad Dobo [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 4:38 AM Subject: Re[2]: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz! Brad, The L converters have less negative impact on your image (especially vignetting and contrast loss) than the S or 3rd party. Only for lenses that can use them. I would strongly recommend going with the L over the S. Remember that not only light loss, but quality loss is greater with a 2X vs. a 1.4X. Bruce Friday, December 6, 2002, 12:39:05 AM, you wrote: BD Well, seems I have much to learn! I always wondered about the L converters, BD as I always saw only the short ones. Is the L necessary for the 400/5.6? BD As for the 1.4x and the 2x is there a difference in optical quality? Rob BD pointed out the light issue, but I would be using it during bright days I BD would imagine. I guess I'm a bit greedy now. Having the ability to shoot BD at 800mm sounds like it could be a lot of fun, but I understand not so BD practical. BD Brad BD - Original Message - BD From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] BD To: Brad Dobo [EMAIL PROTECTED] BD Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 3:22 AM BD Subject: Re: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz! Brad, I have the 1.4X-L converter. It works wonderfully with the A 400/5.6. The L converters have an extended snout that fits inside the rear of the lens. I know with the 1.4 that the loss of quality is very minimal. It is a great converter. I don't know for a fact that the 2X-L fits properly. I would guess it would, but am not positive. As to the issue of tripod mounted with MZ-S/Grip. No issue at all. The lens is bigger/heavier than the body. The lens mounts to the tripod and the camera just hangs off the end. So adding a converter doesn't have any real impact. HTH, Bruce Thursday, December 5, 2002, 11:35:57 PM, you wrote: BD Hey, BD Even though I have not received the lens yet, I'm looking at getting BD the 2x BD teleconverter. Anyone (Bruce D. etc) know if this is a good idea? BD This is BD quite new to me, not the converter and light, etc, but the weight or BD stress BD and balance when mounted on a tripod with the MZ-S w/grip? This would BD be BD the first lens I would have use (while limited) for a TC. BD Brad BD ** BD Brad W. Dobo, HBA (Eds.) BD Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BD ICQ#: 1658
Re: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz!
Figure out what the 400mm can do on it's own first Brad... Cheers Shaun Brad Dobo wrote: I can see the headache coming. I know from you that the 1.4x L fits my lens, but not sure on the 2x L, of course, gonna be tough finding a place that has one to try out. So the quality is worse at 2x then..hmmm.and 800mm was so tempting. ~600mm isn't bad I suppose :) May stick with the better and compatible 1.4x L. Thanks for the info Bruce. Brad - Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Brad Dobo [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 4:38 AM Subject: Re[2]: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz! Brad, The L converters have less negative impact on your image (especially vignetting and contrast loss) than the S or 3rd party. Only for lenses that can use them. I would strongly recommend going with the L over the S. Remember that not only light loss, but quality loss is greater with a 2X vs. a 1.4X. Bruce Friday, December 6, 2002, 12:39:05 AM, you wrote: BD Well, seems I have much to learn! I always wondered about the L converters, BD as I always saw only the short ones. Is the L necessary for the 400/5.6? BD As for the 1.4x and the 2x is there a difference in optical quality? Rob BD pointed out the light issue, but I would be using it during bright days I BD would imagine. I guess I'm a bit greedy now. Having the ability to shoot BD at 800mm sounds like it could be a lot of fun, but I understand not so BD practical. BD Brad BD - Original Message - BD From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] BD To: Brad Dobo [EMAIL PROTECTED] BD Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 3:22 AM BD Subject: Re: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz! Brad, I have the 1.4X-L converter. It works wonderfully with the A 400/5.6. The L converters have an extended snout that fits inside the rear of the lens. I know with the 1.4 that the loss of quality is very minimal. It is a great converter. I don't know for a fact that the 2X-L fits properly. I would guess it would, but am not positive. As to the issue of tripod mounted with MZ-S/Grip. No issue at all. The lens is bigger/heavier than the body. The lens mounts to the tripod and the camera just hangs off the end. So adding a converter doesn't have any real impact. HTH, Bruce Thursday, December 5, 2002, 11:35:57 PM, you wrote: BD Hey, BD Even though I have not received the lens yet, I'm looking at getting BD the 2x BD teleconverter. Anyone (Bruce D. etc) know if this is a good idea? BD This is BD quite new to me, not the converter and light, etc, but the weight or BD stress BD and balance when mounted on a tripod with the MZ-S w/grip? This would BD be BD the first lens I would have use (while limited) for a TC. BD Brad BD ** BD Brad W. Dobo, HBA (Eds.) BD Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BD ICQ#: 1658 . -- Shaun Canning Cultural Heritage Services High Street, Broadford, Victoria, 3658. www.heritageservices.com.au/ Phone: 0414-967644 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] My images can be seen at www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=238096
OT: PDML Xmas Party!!
Hi Gang, I know it may sound a bit weird, but why don't we have a Christmas Party? (or general get together with a few grogs and a chat for those of the non-christian persuasion). The logistics could be difficult, but for those of us who are near their computer on or about the 25th December (perhaps an arbitrary xmas a day or two before or after), lets have a few beersand be allowed OT all night Cheers Shaun Shaun Canning Cultural Heritage Services High Street, Broadford, Victoria, 3658. www.heritageservices.com.au/ Phone: 0414-967644 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] My images can be seen at www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=238096
Re: Digital printing beats optical?
You can achieve higher resolution with digital printing than is possible with optical printing. I too have found that I can produce better prints on my Epson 1200 than can be achieved by any of the local labs, including some very good professional ones. Paul Stenquist J. C. O'Connell wrote: Is it me or are you all finding that digital scanning printing beats optical? I'm using epson 2450 scanner and epson 1280 printer. I seem to be getting results that beat even my best optical prints especially near the edges or corners of the frame. I've noticed this with both 35mm and 6X7. Needless to say I'm tickled pink about my findings I am amazed at the quality possible with 35mm. I never dreamed it could be this good. And my 6X7 prints are utterly fantastic! J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] My Business references Websites: http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/jco/
Re: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz!
I regularly use the A2X-S converter with my SMC Pentax 400/5.6. The L converters don't fit any of the Pentax 400/5.6 lenses. But the A2X-S and 400/5.6 are a great combination. Very sharp and not too difficult to focus. The lens has a tripod mount, so balance is okay with the converter installed. Not ideal, but good enough for serious work. Here's a shot made with that combo: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=971474size=lg Brad Dobo wrote: Hey, Even though I have not received the lens yet, I'm looking at getting the 2x teleconverter. Anyone (Bruce D. etc) know if this is a good idea? This is quite new to me, not the converter and light, etc, but the weight or stress and balance when mounted on a tripod with the MZ-S w/grip? This would be the first lens I would have use (while limited) for a TC. Brad ** Brad W. Dobo, HBA (Eds.) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ#: 1658
Best TC for 300mm
After surfing the archives, I found the following inquiry to the list from about 2 years ago (taken verbatim): I've lately acquired a 300 mm F2.8 A* big glass and naturally am looking for ways to burn off the extra F stops. If I read the materials correctly 300mm is sort of the breaking point between whether you should use an S or L converter. Someone know which works best with this lens/focal length? Surprisingly, there were only 2 responses... Part of one response was that... I believe the main advantage of XL teleconverters is a reduction in light fall-off in the corners compared to teleconverters without the long snout. The secondary advantage of XL teleconverters is optimized image quality for their compatible lenses. Another response mentioned, I'd assume that the 'L' converters would work slightly better, but I suspect you'd only see the difference under lab conditions. My question is, does anyone care to elaborate / confirm / disagree with these comments? In particular, with an FA 300mm 1:2.8, would one have the option of using either the 2x-S or the 2x-L? and if so, is the optical difference neglible? In short I'm trying to determine if paying twice as much for the 2x-L is necessary if the 2x-S is acceptable. Thanks in advance, jerome ___ Jerome D. Coombs-Reyes PhD Candidate, ISyE, Georgia Tech http://www.isye.gatech.edu/~jerome
WTB: flash accessories
It's time to try my hand at some (insect) macro shots... Hence I'll be needing: A) Extension Cord F - 5P B) Hotshoe Adapter FG If you have these items to offer, then please contact me off-list. Thanks in advance. Carry on. - jerome ___ Jerome D. Coombs-Reyes PhD Candidate, ISyE, Georgia Tech http://www.isye.gatech.edu/~jerome
Re: zenitar fisheye price
Thanks for all the answers... I didn't get it, it was German ebay and I couldn't afford to got much higher than 100 Euro and I also couldn't watch the ending, so I was outbid -_- Does anybody knows a place where I can get one for about the same price (maybe somewhere in europe)? I watch ebay Germany for a while and there's always a peleng for 250 euro, which I can't afford and nothing else. thx bye Katrin - Original Message - From: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 11:10 AM Subject: zenitar fisheye price Hi Katrin, Good lens - excellent price. One drawback - quality control. Make sure you get a return guarantee with it and give it a good testing immediately. See http://pug.komkon.org/01jul/derek.html http://pug.komkon.org/00octo/full.html for examples from this lens. mike
Re: grainy vs sharper scans?
what DPI are you scanning at? which scanner? i think i would stick with light dust removal and manual touch up the places that need more work. for this particular image, i think the grain is a useful effect, but also, it's one where i would not apply any sharpening. there already is motion blur. i don't always sharpen my images. my digital cameras ones i do all the time because i have disabled the camera's internal automatic sharpening. for film, it depends on the subject. Hi Herb, The scanner is Minolta Scan Elite FS-2900 at 2820dpi. regards, Alan Chan _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
RE: My December photo project for fun and hopefully profit
Ann, take it to OfficeMax, Kinko's or something similar. They'll do it for a couple of dollars. -Original Message- From: Ann Sanfedele [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: December 05, 2002 2:49 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: My December photo project for fun and hopefully profit My mini-ad can be seen at : http://users.rcn.com/annsan/calendar4adonweb.jpg I need to enhance it - but you'll get the idea. (want to show what one calendar page looks like) I used MS Publisher for the calendar itself, alas, and learned a few things the hard way. But it prints nicely. But the damn file is 30 megs! I know I need to show what one page looks like with captions and date boxes - will do it soon. Does anyone have one of those old and inexpensive spiral binding punches? and the simple manual machine for putting the combs in the holes? ALso, if anyone knows about how many full-color 8 1/2 x 11 pages I can milk out of a hp 722c I'd love to know - I can't find it in the paperwork I have and the machine is, as you know, not new. THe HP everyday photo matte paper looks good. I did the cover in the good glossy paper. I expect some of the photos on the little jpg file will look crappy on the aol browser. back to work.. any help will be appreciated - annsan
Re: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz!
Oh, well yes, of course. Don't have the cash for a TC for a bit anyhow :) Brad - Original Message - From: Shaun Canning [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 5:57 AM Subject: Re: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz! Figure out what the 400mm can do on it's own first Brad... Cheers Shaun Brad Dobo wrote: I can see the headache coming. I know from you that the 1.4x L fits my lens, but not sure on the 2x L, of course, gonna be tough finding a place that has one to try out. So the quality is worse at 2x then..hmmm.and 800mm was so tempting. ~600mm isn't bad I suppose :) May stick with the better and compatible 1.4x L. Thanks for the info Bruce. Brad - Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Brad Dobo [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 4:38 AM Subject: Re[2]: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz! Brad, The L converters have less negative impact on your image (especially vignetting and contrast loss) than the S or 3rd party. Only for lenses that can use them. I would strongly recommend going with the L over the S. Remember that not only light loss, but quality loss is greater with a 2X vs. a 1.4X. Bruce Friday, December 6, 2002, 12:39:05 AM, you wrote: BD Well, seems I have much to learn! I always wondered about the L converters, BD as I always saw only the short ones. Is the L necessary for the 400/5.6? BD As for the 1.4x and the 2x is there a difference in optical quality? Rob BD pointed out the light issue, but I would be using it during bright days I BD would imagine. I guess I'm a bit greedy now. Having the ability to shoot BD at 800mm sounds like it could be a lot of fun, but I understand not so BD practical. BD Brad BD - Original Message - BD From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] BD To: Brad Dobo [EMAIL PROTECTED] BD Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 3:22 AM BD Subject: Re: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz! Brad, I have the 1.4X-L converter. It works wonderfully with the A 400/5.6. The L converters have an extended snout that fits inside the rear of the lens. I know with the 1.4 that the loss of quality is very minimal. It is a great converter. I don't know for a fact that the 2X-L fits properly. I would guess it would, but am not positive. As to the issue of tripod mounted with MZ-S/Grip. No issue at all. The lens is bigger/heavier than the body. The lens mounts to the tripod and the camera just hangs off the end. So adding a converter doesn't have any real impact. HTH, Bruce Thursday, December 5, 2002, 11:35:57 PM, you wrote: BD Hey, BD Even though I have not received the lens yet, I'm looking at getting BD the 2x BD teleconverter. Anyone (Bruce D. etc) know if this is a good idea? BD This is BD quite new to me, not the converter and light, etc, but the weight or BD stress BD and balance when mounted on a tripod with the MZ-S w/grip? This would BD be BD the first lens I would have use (while limited) for a TC. BD Brad BD ** BD Brad W. Dobo, HBA (Eds.) BD Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BD ICQ#: 1658 . -- Shaun Canning Cultural Heritage Services High Street, Broadford, Victoria, 3658. www.heritageservices.com.au/ Phone: 0414-967644 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] My images can be seen at www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=238096
Re: PDML Xmas Party!!
Great idea, better yet is to set up a channel on the IRC for it. Easier to chat that way! Brad - Original Message - From: Shaun Canning [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 6:06 AM Subject: OT: PDML Xmas Party!! Hi Gang, I know it may sound a bit weird, but why don't we have a Christmas Party? (or general get together with a few grogs and a chat for those of the non-christian persuasion). The logistics could be difficult, but for those of us who are near their computer on or about the 25th December (perhaps an arbitrary xmas a day or two before or after), lets have a few beersand be allowed OT all night Cheers Shaun Shaun Canning Cultural Heritage Services High Street, Broadford, Victoria, 3658. www.heritageservices.com.au/ Phone: 0414-967644 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] My images can be seen at www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=238096
Re: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz!
That's a superb shot! 1600 ISO and looks great! Now, the problem we have to sort out is, that Bruce D. uses the 1.4 L with his 400/5.6, and you say it doesn't jive. Are we all talking about the same lens here I wonder? Perhaps the lens or TC changed? Not likely eh? I'm getting the Pentax SMCP-A 400mm f/5.6, is there a way to use the serial number to trace date of manufacture, I have it here? Or maybe...bah...I'm confusing myself and about to hit the sack. Lots of time to sort it out (since I don't even have the lens yet and a TC is a few months away at least) Brad. - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 6:39 AM Subject: Re: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz! I regularly use the A2X-S converter with my SMC Pentax 400/5.6. The L converters don't fit any of the Pentax 400/5.6 lenses. But the A2X-S and 400/5.6 are a great combination. Very sharp and not too difficult to focus. The lens has a tripod mount, so balance is okay with the converter installed. Not ideal, but good enough for serious work. Here's a shot made with that combo: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=971474size=lg Brad Dobo wrote: Hey, Even though I have not received the lens yet, I'm looking at getting the 2x teleconverter. Anyone (Bruce D. etc) know if this is a good idea? This is quite new to me, not the converter and light, etc, but the weight or stress and balance when mounted on a tripod with the MZ-S w/grip? This would be the first lens I would have use (while limited) for a TC. Brad ** Brad W. Dobo, HBA (Eds.) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ#: 1658
: OT Shabat - ROM was: Toronto this weekend.
I'm going to try 100%(ly) to get there for Noon.If i can, do you want me to bring the posters guys. What a bout parking?Any near by,so i can leave them in the truck for dispersal later:) Dave Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Re: zenitar fisheye price
Does anybody knows a place where I can get one for about the same price (maybe somewhere in europe)? I watch ebay Germany for a while and there's always a peleng for 250 euro, which I can't afford and nothing else. thx bye Hi Katrin My suggestion: go on USA ebay (www.ebay.com) and do a search for the seller 'ustas'. This is the ebay name of Pavel Gubanov and he usually has one or two listed with a buy-it-now of (I think) $99. If he hasn't got any listed, just watch for a week and he will have or mail and ask him. He's located in the Ukraine, so that's Europe isn't it? :-) Several members of the PDML have dealt with him (me included) and found him fast, friendly and efficent. If I was after a Zenitar fisheye (and I might be yet) I'd go straight to him. Chris
Re: Build quality of lenses
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: why this obsession with feel? I take pictures because I like using cameras. The feel of the equipment means as much or more to me as the picture. A commendable reply William! I don't care a whit about focus feel myself as long as I like the resulting image, but I can appreciate your opinion and respect the fact that you're one of the few focus feel fans who doesn't try to rationalize it into something affecting their photos. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: thoughts on the 77mm limited lens
definition only uses a few focal lengths--no zooms, nothing over 135mm if that, no macro (no, the DR doesn't count s). I've found myself more and more using only a 35mm and 85/90mm lens. Well, this post ~is~ about a zoom, but it responds to your point, Bob. I've been using the ol' VS1 35-85/2.8 a lot lately, and I've found that I haven't been feeling as constrained by the ends of the 35mm to 85mm FL range as much as I thought I would. (On the other hand, I did more often find using the A 35-70/4 to be annoyingly restrictive.) Nonetheless, and you can call me lazy, but I'm not likely to leave home with a body with just one prime to use on it. (OK, I'm not proud of that...) g Fred
Re: best TC for 300mm
Hi Jerome, You wrote: with an FA 300mm 1:2.8, would one have the option of using either the 2x-S or the 2x-L? and if so, is the optical difference neglible? AFIR, the Pentax lens accessories booklet printed between 198x and 1990(ish) states something like: Up to 300mm... -S..., over 300mm -L... To me, that reads that 300mm lenses are recommended to use the -S series of TCs. Unfortunately, the actual operating manual for the TCs (as available on the Pentax website) is more than confusing. For the -S convertors it shows a list of lenses listed as UNUSEABLE (Combine SMC lenses not listed below with the S-type rear convertors) and for the Ls it shows a list of the lenses suitable (Only combine the lens listed below with L convertors) both tables having long and short lenses. According to these tables the FA300/2.8 does not exist, as the leaflet was printed in 1990. The F*300ED(IF) is listed under the -S list of lenses WHICH ARE UNSUITABLE. Which is about as clear to me as the great, grey-green, greasy Limpopo river, all set about with fever trees. Mr Kipling Who makes exceedingly confused photgraphers
Re: Build quality of lenses
What is the quality (optics) of K35/3.5?Do you recommend it? It is a real jewel. Optical quality is fantastic. It is small and light and built very well. This is why I enjoy using it with the LX. Does anyone know if this lens is the same optical design as the screwmount version with the same specs? --Mike
Article in Shutterbug
I was looking through the most recent issue of Shutterbug and they have an article where staffers were making predications about the next ten years. One of the interesting ( and universal) predictions is that film will not go away but it's use will drop off quicker than most people think and that processing services will become more rare or at least more expensive. Does anyone see this. I realize that many of us don't want to switch, but I asking for predications not preferences. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: zenitar fisheye price
Katrin, check out ebay store MoscowGifts4U. I have bought a couple of lenses from the guy, he ships from Ukraine and he's a nice seler. Got the fisheye rom him for $120 (IIRC) -- fantastic lens. Especially, considering that Photoshop can get rid of fisheye effect, making this one hell of a very wide lens. Best, Mishka - From: Scars Subject: Re: zenitar fisheye price Thanks for all the answers... I didn't get it, it was German ebay and I couldn't afford to got much higher than 100 Euro and I also couldn't watch the ending, so I was outbid -_- Does anybody knows a place where I can get one for about the same price (maybe somewhere in europe)? I watch ebay Germany for a while and there's always a peleng for 250 euro, which I can't afford and nothing else. thx bye Katrin
FS: SMCT 85 1.8 with k-mount adapter
Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 85 f1.8, with matching metal lens hood in KEH BGN condition. US$130 ONO Slight cleaning mark on front element, otherwise glass is generally good with no fungus. Mechanically good, diaphragm and focus both smooth. Lens barrel has a few little paint chips and control rings shows usual amount of paint wear. The threads on the lens hood are a little tight but the filter threads on the lens itself are fine. The lens has had a k-mount adapter ring permaenently attached (probably glued). It may be possible to remove it, but I haven't tried. Airmail to the US or Europe (including insurance) will be $10. Contact me off list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] thanks, Paul Ewins Melbourne, Australia
OT: USA, photography, and terrorism. Yet another story.
Its on 2600, so I have to doubt its sincerity somewhere, but, for what its worth: http://www.2600.com/news/display/display.shtml?id=1441 -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
Re: Article in Shutterbug
On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Steve Desjardins wrote: think and that processing services will become more rare or at least more expensive. Does anyone see this. I realize that many of us don't want to switch, but I asking for predications not preferences. That doesn't surprise me, however, I think that won't happen in the next five years, and probably far closer to that 10 year window. The difference, though, is people who are pro or amatuer or what it may be we all are, know where to find the pro labs that won't go away, and that people like us tend to shoot BW and can process in our homes, and even home development of E6 isn't that difficult, if you've got a processor which is cheap enough. I doubt films disappearance will hurt the likes of us as much as some people fear. -g. -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com - photography and portfolio.
Words to work by
As a hero of mine once said, 'I make the pictures for myself - is anyone else likes them, too bad!' Cotty, The late Oliver Gagliani, who I was fortunate to have met, was quoted in John Sexton's latest newsletter saying: You will never make a photograph that everyone likes, so make sure that you like every one of your photographs. Words to work by. --Mike
Re: Pentax digital SLR
I hope Pentax decides to use a 2nd generation Foveon chip. I find the reviews and discussions about results from the Sigma DSLR very interesting and I think the next iteration of the Foveon could bring Pentax right up to speed in the digital world. Pentax builds great bodies and lenses and the functions availible in their top line film cameras proves that they are pretty good at software/firmware, too. I am anxious to see the new Pentax DSLR. If it's as good as I think it should be, I'll dump the digital stuff I have now, buy the Pentax DSLR, and never look back. Len --- _ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: Re: My first Ebay!!!
Frank. I'll apologize for being part of the latest $1 Billion dollar Government Boondogle. Sorryg Dave Begin Original Message From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 20:40:41 -0500 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: My first Ebay!!! Yes, just that I'd never try to scam the government, as I know that taxes and duties are always to put to good use, for Government Programmes that benefit All of Us - I'm just glad to do my part. Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Re: I didn't like the topic anymore ;-)
O sweet, christmas cames early in Canada VBG Feroze PS. How much have you had to drink? - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 8:34 AM Subject: Re: I didn't like the topic anymore ;-) - Original Message - From: Brad Dobo Subject: I didn't like the topic anymore ;-) Well, let's be civil, the both of us then ok? Good, have a beer on me! I am having an especially nice Cabernet right now. I raise my glass to Brad Dobo!! Cheers William Robb
FS: Pentax FA 28-105 f/4-5.6 powerzoom
As I wrote in a previous message, I recently picked up the new Pentax 28-105 f3.2-4.5 lens in black for my PZ-1 (though if I had known that BH would start offering the black version and listing it as an imported item ...) I'm now offering for sale the 28-105 powerzoom lens I got a couple of months ago from a list member. It's in very nice shape, great glass and very good + cosmetics. It's just so much larger and heavier than the two 28-105 versions that followed it ... and I don't really use the power zoom functions. Images from it are sharp and contrasty, though, it has nice flare control and focuses quite close. Photos of the lens are at: http://people.clarityconnect.com/webpages/wilensky/eBay/28-105_side.jpg http://people.clarityconnect.com/webpages/wilensky/eBay/28-105_rear.jpg There is a small crack around the plastic collar of the zoom set button on the side of the lens, which doesn't affect function at all: http://people.clarityconnect.com/webpages/wilensky/eBay/28-105_button.jpg I'm asking $150, a bit less than I paid for it. If anyone would like a package deal that includes a well-used FA 28-70 f/4, I'll let both go for $200 including shipping. Joe -- Joe Wilensky Staff Writer Media Technology Services 1150 Comstock Hall Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853-2601 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel: 607-255-1575 fax: 607-255-9873 Please visit our Web site at http://www.mediasrv.cornell.edu
Re: How's this for juxtaposition?
I sit here in my computer room/darkroom, that is not wired into the emergency generator, sending you folks email via 21st century computer using 19th century oil lamp for lighting. Actually, the computer screen is brighter than the lamp :-) It seems that all that is needed to complete the picture is a ~picture~. How 'bout an available-light photo for us ? - g Fred
RE: 28-105mm in black
Feroze, The part is PH-RBC58. Sorry, I don't have the 5-digit Pentax part number. Any one who has one, is it on the lens box or elsewhere. Mark Mangum -Original Message- From: Feroze Kistan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 8:58 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: 28-105mm in black Oh wonderful, I must be the only one who isn't getting the hood. Its the last black one they had and if you order anything that's for the Japanese market from the distributor it takes 8 weeks to get here. Don't suppose theres a model number on that hood so I order it seperately Thanks Feroze - Original Message - From: wendy beard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 3:59 AM Subject: Re: 28-105mm in black At 08:21 PM 05/12/2002 -0500, you wrote: I just ordered the 28-105 (f/3.2-4.5) in all black -- from Japan, since you can't get it in black in North America at all. The lens hood, packaged in the box with the lens, is all black, as well, and matches the lens perfectly. Joe BH have it listed in black. It's in stock too. And the same price as the silver one. Wendy Wendy Beard, Ottawa, Canada http://www.beard-redfern.com
FA20-35/4 AL: ghostless coating, yes or no
Hi, does anyone have some Pentax publication where it is officially stated that the FA 20-35/4 AL lens features the new ghostless coating? Thanks, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/ = __ __
Re: Build quality of lenses
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I would argue that the experience we have of the equipment affects not only the photographs, but _whether_ we photograph or not. Various large-format photographers have reported a fascination with the groundglass image, and one (sorry, I can't remember who) said that sometimes the actual exposure of the film seems secondary. for me, the process is secondary so long as i get the results i want when i want them and the equipment doesn't get in the way. the equipment's job is to stay out of my way. Herb...
Re: grainy vs sharper scans?
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi Herb, The scanner is Minolta Scan Elite FS-2900 at 2820dpi. regards, Alan Chan the dust filtering in my Nikon doesn't affect grain much because it uses Digital ICE. if i had your scanner, i would stay with the light dust filtering all the time and put up with a little more retouching. i wouldn't sharpen much. using the dust filter and then sharpening afterwards without retouching will bring back some of the dust. Herb...
Re[2]: Digital printing beats optical?
So Paul, join in on this test to see how the Epson printers compare to the Agfa D-Lab. Bruce Friday, December 6, 2002, 3:19:52 AM, you wrote: PS You can achieve higher resolution with digital printing than is possible PS with optical printing. I too have found that I can produce better prints PS on my Epson 1200 than can be achieved by any of the local labs, PS including some very good professional ones. PS Paul Stenquist PS J. C. O'Connell wrote: Is it me or are you all finding that digital scanning printing beats optical? I'm using epson 2450 scanner and epson 1280 printer. I seem to be getting results that beat even my best optical prints especially near the edges or corners of the frame. I've noticed this with both 35mm and 6X7. Needless to say I'm tickled pink about my findings I am amazed at the quality possible with 35mm. I never dreamed it could be this good. And my 6X7 prints are utterly fantastic! J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] My Business references Websites: http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/jco/
Re[2]: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz!
Paul, Sorry, I regularly use my 1.4X-L converter with my A 400/5.6. It fits just fine. I can't say if the 2X-L fits however. Bruce Friday, December 6, 2002, 3:39:31 AM, you wrote: PS I regularly use the A2X-S converter with my SMC Pentax 400/5.6. The L PS converters don't fit any of the Pentax 400/5.6 lenses. But the A2X-S and PS 400/5.6 are a great combination. Very sharp and not too difficult to PS focus. The lens has a tripod mount, so balance is okay with the PS converter installed. Not ideal, but good enough for serious work. Here's PS a shot made with that combo: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=971474size=lg PS Brad Dobo wrote: Hey, Even though I have not received the lens yet, I'm looking at getting the 2x teleconverter. Anyone (Bruce D. etc) know if this is a good idea? This is quite new to me, not the converter and light, etc, but the weight or stress and balance when mounted on a tripod with the MZ-S w/grip? This would be the first lens I would have use (while limited) for a TC. Brad ** Brad W. Dobo, HBA (Eds.) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ#: 1658
Re: Build quality of lenses
What about K35/2.0 and FA35/2.0? Those three lenses are considered to be the best PEntax 35mm lens. Which one do you recommend? Alek Some people believe that A50/1.7 is even sharper than A50/1.4? True or false. You wrote you prefer 1.4 version Alek, I believe the best 35mm may be the current FA 35/2, although I haven't tried them all. I prefer the 50/1.4 not only to other Pentax 50s (which are also very good), but to most other manufacturer's 50mms. --Mike Mike Johnston See my weekly online column about photography at either of these two locations: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sunday1.shtml http://www.steves-digicams.com/smp/smp_index.html Also, check out my new monthly column in the English _Black White Photography_ magazine!
Re: Best TC for 300mm
Jerome, Wish I could help you. I only have the 1.4X-L and a Tamron 7 element AF 2X converter. The L converters will also fit the FA* 200/2.8 (which I have and use regularly). On the 200/2.8 or 400/5.6, there is a marked difference in contrast between the two converters. Comparing images/prints between plain lens and both converters, I can't see any obvious differences with the 1.4X-L. The Tamron, however, is plain as day. The images just don't have the clarity/contrast that you would expect. One way to look at it is that you are already compromising the image simply by using a converter. You should try to minimize the compromise any way you can. You also spend a bundle on your lens, you should want it to perform to it's best. HTH, Bruce Friday, December 6, 2002, 3:44:13 AM, you wrote: JDCR After surfing the archives, I found the following inquiry to the list from JDCR about 2 years ago (taken verbatim): JDCR JDCR I've lately acquired a 300 mm F2.8 A* big glass and naturally am looking JDCR for ways to burn off the extra F stops. If I read the materials correctly JDCR 300mm is sort of the breaking point between whether you should use an S JDCR or L converter. Someone know which works best with this lens/focal JDCR length? JDCR JDCR Surprisingly, there were only 2 responses... JDCR Part of one response was that... I believe the main advantage of XL JDCR teleconverters is a reduction in light fall-off in the corners compared to JDCR teleconverters without the long snout. The secondary advantage of XL JDCR teleconverters is optimized image quality for their compatible lenses. JDCR Another response mentioned, I'd assume that the 'L' converters would work JDCR slightly better, but I suspect you'd only see the difference under lab JDCR conditions. JDCR My question is, does anyone care to elaborate / confirm / disagree with JDCR these comments? In particular, with an FA 300mm 1:2.8, would one have the JDCR option of using either the 2x-S or the 2x-L? and if so, is the optical JDCR difference neglible? In short I'm trying to determine if paying twice as JDCR much for the 2x-L is necessary if the 2x-S is acceptable. JDCR Thanks in advance, JDCR jerome JDCR ___ JDCR Jerome D. Coombs-Reyes JDCR PhD Candidate, ISyE, Georgia Tech JDCR http://www.isye.gatech.edu/~jerome
Re: Who has switched to Pentax and why?
On Friday, December 6, 2002, at 08:19 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FA35/2.0 which is probably very good. Alek No _probably_ about it Alek. Just, FA35/2.o which is very good. vbg Dan Scott
Re: Article in Shutterbug
Steve, I wouldn't be shocked to see film usage drop quickly. As to processing services, tougher call. The newer printing machines are equally adept at taking film (they actually scan it at high speed) or digital. The cost/process is the same. The only difference for the film is that it has to go through the film processor first. Currently, that costs me $2.29 per roll above the cost of the prints. I would guess that it stays like that for some time to come. The labs that don't already have the digital printers will need new equipment, but that is already on the market. I wonder if the price of film, rather than the processing won't rise quicker. Bruce Friday, December 6, 2002, 5:39:30 AM, you wrote: SD I was looking through the most recent issue of Shutterbug and they have SD an article where staffers were making predications about the next ten SD years. One of the interesting ( and universal) predictions is that film SD will not go away but it's use will drop off quicker than most people SD think and that processing services will become more rare or at least SD more expensive. Does anyone see this. I realize that many of us don't SD want to switch, but I asking for predications not preferences. SD Steven Desjardins SD Department of Chemistry SD Washington and Lee University SD Lexington, VA 24450 SD (540) 458-8873 SD FAX: (540) 458-8878 SD [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: thoughts on the 77mm limited lens
On my most recent trip, I shot 99+ % with the 20-35 or the 50 1.4. I used the 50 mainly for speed reasons. I had never been a fan of wide angles, and I thought I would force myself to think in that mode. It worked fairly well, although the f4 was slow, and a tripod was impractical. One interesting problem I had was that this time of the year I kept getting my own shadow in the picture. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: K35/3.5 K35/2 M35/2.8 (was: Who has switched...)
Alek wrote: And it was M35/2.8 lens for sure? test was done about 15 year ago I think. Even better than Zeiss? I asked since many people believe K 35mm lenses are alegedly much better. I find this a bit weird as I assume (correct me if I'm wrong) the M 35/2.8 is optically identical to the A 35/2.8, the latter among Pentax weaker efforts (probably in the league with the A 28/2.8 and A 135/2.8 lenses). According to tests I've seen the A 35/2 is apparently even worse. Pal
Re: Pentax digital SLR
Ramesh wrote: Is Pentax capable( financially / technically ) of building their own CCD? Are they working on it? They are certainly filing patents regarding digital sensors. However, making them themselves make perhaps even less sense than starting making their own film, their own electronic parts etc. Most manufacturers rely on a host of subcontractors that are specialists in their own field. Pentax is better off spending their resources on developing cameras. Although Canon makes their own digital sensors they probably will be at a disadvantage if they stick to their own only while the competiotion can choose from the offerings of various electronic giants. Pål
RE: Interesting read
I know the E-10 is an older camera, but it takes FOREVER to download images, never mind adjust them. Even though the film drop-off takes days, it's time I have to wait not waste. . . Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Pentax digital SLR
No. Pentax does not have the facilities, expertise, interest or reason to make their own chips. BR From: Nagaraj, Ramesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is Pentax capable( financially / technically ) of building their own CCD? Are they working on it?
Re: My December photo project for fun and hopefully profit
Bill Sawyer wrote: (re getting comb binding done) Ann, take it to OfficeMax, Kinko's or something similar. They'll do it for a couple of dollars. annsan replies: Actually, I found that the Staples price I was quoted at first was inflated 'cause the kid that gave me the price had included the materials. I had my own front and back cover.. Staples added a mylar(?) - um - clear plastic cover and the price was still only $1.40 each. Which is pretty good for the middle of NYC
Sensors (Was:Re: Pentax digital SLR)
- Original Message - From: Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pentax digital SLR Although Canon makes their own digital sensors they probably will be at a disadvantage if they stick to their own only while the competiotion can choose from the offerings of various electronic giants. What exactly are the differences between various sensors, except from the obvious ones like size, resolution etc? Are there any analogies to films i.e. contrast range, color saturation, grain (noise perhaps) etc? I'm sure there are better and worse sensors (that's obvious), but are there any among the ones of the same quality, that, say, are suitable to a particular type of photography? Regards Artur --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- Masz dosc placenia prowizji bankowi ? mBank - zaloz konto http://epieniadze.onet.pl/mbank
Re: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz!
Brad Dobo wrote: Having the ability to shoot at 800mm sounds like it could be a lot of fun, but I understand not so practical. nonsense!no different than any other focal length. just ensure that there isn't camera movement during exposure and pick a quality film that has a bit of extra speed to it. go for short or rather long (1sec plus) exposures rather than the 1/8th - 1/30thsec range that tends to emphasize shutter/ mirror disturbances for to great a %age of the actual exposure time. ... enjoy the long end - live large take chances! Bill - Bill D. Casselberry ; Photography on the Oregon Coast http://www.orednet.org/~bcasselb [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: Best TC for 300mm
Thanks, Bruce and Mike. Mike Wrote: The F*300ED(IF) is listed under the -S list of lenses WHICH ARE UNSUITABLE. Not exactly. For the 1.4x-L half of the table, it's listed as vignetting at picture corners... but it's not listed in the usuable table at all for the 2x-S half; hence logic would have it that it is indeed usuable for this lens... but then again this is a Pentax document (logic.. Pentax... oxyMORONS?) Anyhow, thanks for the reference. I did not realize that this table / manual was available. Lastly, I called Pentax (Colorado) this morning. At first I was a bit discouraged that the product info rep didn't know what I meant by rear converter... but once he figured it out, he readily admitted that he didn't know the answer (which is WA better than just making something up) and sought help. From his sources (the repair dept., I think) I was told that the 2x-S is the best match for the FA 300mm f2.8 lens... I hope they're right since the savings are quite appreciative. Thanks again, jerome ___ Jerome D. Coombs-Reyes PhD Candidate, ISyE, Georgia Tech http://www.isye.gatech.edu/~jerome
Noctilux and 43mm Limited
Is it just me, or does the bokeh on this Noctilux pic remind you of the 43 Limited? http://www.alaska.net/~rowlett/images/noctilux/mimi4.htm R
Re: Eastern US Winter Storm
Dan Scott advised: You are taking too big a scoop. Sometimes, but my back complains when I do, and I make the next scoop smaller... If your knees can't take the load, what do you think it's doing to your back? My knees won't take lifting _me_ up and down that many times! I'm pretty sure it's a geometry problem -- if the angles were different, I could make the push come from my knees as a pivot type of motion instead of a squat-stand-squat-stand thing. Or is that in fact what they mean by lift with the knees? Shovel smart, or pay someone else to do it. I wish. I'm already on a Ramen noodles budget. :-( That's why most of the film I shoot goes into the freezer instead of the lab laely. -- Glenn, wondering whether I'll get any spectacular bright sunshine sparkling on the ice shots today.
re converters
Anyone ever try the pentax 1.7x converter that changes manual focus to af Also any opinions on sigma 1.4x vs pentax JD
Re: K35/3.5 K35/2 M35/2.8 (was: Who has switched...)
I find this a bit weird as I assume (correct me if I'm wrong) the M 35/2.8 is optically identical to the A 35/2.8, the latter among Pentax weaker efforts (probably in the league with the A 28/2.8 and A 135/2.8 lenses). According to tests I've seen the A 35/2 is apparently even worse. Pal And it was M35/2.8 lens for sure? test was done about 15 year ago I think. Even better than Zeiss? I asked since many people believe K 35mm lenses are alegedly much better. Alek The K lenses were not part of the competition as they had been, at that time, discontinued. Now, again, much better? Certainly not. The difference between these lenses are small. See for yourself: http://www.takinami.com/yoshihiko/photo/lens_test/pentax_35.html M35/2.8 is better than K35/2 almost everywhere. But all these differences are small and may vary from one lens to another. If the test was done on 5 lenses of each, we would have a better picture... I personnally prefer K lenses because they handle better (I have quite big hands). But if I travel, I use M lenses. The difference between these lenses optically is very small. Having said that, K35/3.5 is in a special class. It is one of the highest resolution lens ever made, and have no flare even with spot lights in front of you. But rather big and slow. Andre --
Re: Eastern US Winter Storm
On Friday 06 December 2002 13:04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm already on a Ramen noodles budget. :-( That's why most of the film I shoot goes into the freezer instead of the lab laely. What is it with IT professionals and the Ramen noodle diet? Christian eating his ration of noodles for the day
Re: More on MX psudo mirro lock
Again looking at how the mechanism works I can't see how flicking the shutter to achieve pseudo mirror lock could cause damage to the camera. Rob Studdert What I have heard from a repairman was that, on slow speeds, once the mirror is up, there is free moving piece that may cause the speed to change. I have tried to shake an MX with the mirror up and check the speed on a tester before and after, and have not find any difference. MX is an incredible camera. Andre --
Re: Eastern US Winter Storm
On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Christian Skofteland wrote: What is it with IT professionals and the Ramen noodle diet? We;re too busy buying toys to feed ourselves. Christian eating his ration of noodles for the day Hah, I got the condensed chicken soup today! -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
Re: Pentax digital SLR
On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Leonard Paris wrote: I hope Pentax decides to use a 2nd generation Foveon chip. I find the reviews and discussions about results from the Sigma DSLR very interesting and I think the next iteration of the Foveon could bring Pentax right up to speed in the digital world. On the other hand, it is more risky to depend on a small company such as Foveon. With no major volume manufacturers jumping on board (e.g. Sony, Olympus, Canon etc), the long term survival of Foveon as a independant company remains uncertain. As intriguing (and arguably superior) as Foveon's technology may be, the economy of scale of CCD and traditional CMOS development could overwhelm Foveon in terms of price and performance. They desperately need a major partner to survive. -- --Lawrence Kwan--SMS Info Service/Ringtone Convertor--PGP:finger/www-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.vex.net/~lawrence/ -Key ID:0x6D23F3C4--
Re: Eastern US Winter Storm
-- Glenn, wondering whether I'll get any spectacular bright sunshine sparkling on the ice shots today. We didn't. Temperature rose above freezing and melted all the ice before the sun came out. Bill
RE: Eastern US Winter Storm
-Original Message- From: gfen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Christian Skofteland wrote: What is it with IT professionals and the Ramen noodle diet? We;re too busy buying toys to feed ourselves. Christian eating his ration of noodles for the day Hah, I got the condensed chicken soup today! I quit my IT job to do photography full time. My young girlfriend made me a grilled roast beef and cheese sandwich for lunch today. I won't tell you what she was wearing while she made it. Oh look, it's almost 2, time for a nap! tv
Re: thoughts on the 77mm limited lens
I know which one for Cartier-Bresson, but what about Winnogrand and Salgado? Winogrand used a 28mm almost always, and Salgado, when I heard him interviewed, said he used a 28, 35, and a 60. --Mike Thanks Mike. I did a rapid check on the web yesterday but could not find the answer for Salgado. For Winogrand, I read that after using a 50mm in the 40s (like HCB), he progressively went for the 28 during the fifties. Then he must be one of the first, if not the first, to strech his view angle in a systematic way. It looks like his 28mm was a Canon. Andre --
RE: Eastern US Winter Storm
What is it with IT professionals and the Ramen noodle diet? Easy to make = less time away from the computer. That's my excuse anyway...
Re: Pentax digital SLR
Lawrence Kwan wrote: On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Leonard Paris wrote: I hope Pentax decides to use a 2nd generation Foveon chip. I find the reviews and discussions about results from the Sigma DSLR very interesting and I think the next iteration of the Foveon could bring Pentax right up to speed in the digital world. On the other hand, it is more risky to depend on a small company such as Foveon. With no major volume manufacturers jumping on board (e.g. Sony, Olympus, Canon etc), the long term survival of Foveon as a independant company remains uncertain. As intriguing (and arguably superior) as Foveon's technology may be, the economy of scale of CCD and traditional CMOS development could overwhelm Foveon in terms of price and performance. They desperately need a major partner to survive. As a counterpoint, Kodak is betting the farm on FillFactory. But I do agree with you- especially from the perspective of the amount of development information out there already on CCD and to a lesser extent CMOS. Research has been done, people can be hired, etc. -Ryan
I hate you tom (was: Re: Eastern US Winter Storm)
On Friday 06 December 2002 13:46, tom wrote: I quit my IT job to do photography full time. My young girlfriend made me a grilled roast beef and cheese sandwich for lunch today. I won't tell you what she was wearing while she made it. Oh look, it's almost 2, time for a nap! tv I hate you tom Christian desperately trying to quit his IT job but unable to take the pay-cut
Re: Words to work by
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Reading the life experiences of photographers I admire, it is clear that they simply do their own thing and be done with it. That notion finally hit home with me, but bloody hell, it took 40 years! :-) Cotty that's true, but if you want to make money, you have to find the people who like what you like. that is sometimes hard. lots of phatography schools around here are obsessed with photographing with a message or being different. everything has to make a social statement or be different from anything else. i saw an exhibit recently as i passed by of a photographer who took a picture of every trash can on NYC's 42nd St and posted that as a collection. pictures were from the top down. Herb
Re: Words to work by
Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Reading the life experiences of photographers I admire, it is clear that they simply do their own thing and be done with it. Recommended book: Seeing the Light by Tom Shroder and John Barry (ISBN 0-769-43282-5) It's the story of Clyde Butcher and a remarkable story it is. With no formal photographic training he built a business doing landscape photography and got rich selling big color photos to corporate clients like J.C. penney. Then he went bust. Then he scraped out a living selling photos at art shows around the country, until his son was killed in a traffic accident, when Clyde decided screw it, I'm gonna do what *I* wanna do and comited himself to doing nothing but large format black and white - stuff that just doesn't sell on the art show circuit. This is the work that has since made him famous. He's often referred to as the Ansel Adams of the Florida Everglades and his work *is* amazing. His story is much longer and more bizarre than my synopsis here can convey and the authors do a good job of telling it. And the book is also full of Clyde Butcher's incredible photographs. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re[4]: Wide Portraits - Was Re[2]: Pentax digital SLR
Somehow I'm thinking that you have just a little more leeway shooting a kid with an ultra wide than his mother. :) Bruce Friday, December 6, 2002, 1:17:11 PM, you wrote: DS On Friday, December 6, 2002, at 02:13 PM, Cotty wrote: Cheers Bruce. I dare say the kid's mother wouldn't necessarily be pleased! ;-) Cot DS Just give'r a wink and a smile, and ask if she wouldn't like a copy of DS the one you shot of her. DS (and run like hell) DS Dan Scott
Re: Vivitar Series 1 70-210
Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If anyone on the list wants it, $70.00 plus shipping will do it. If it were the VS1 70-210/2.8-4 QDOS version, it's a deal... g What's the QDOS version? -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: re converters
With an f2.8 or faster lens, they are brilliant. Very sharp, and focus very quickly on my z-1p.I used to have a Sigma 1.4x that was nowhere near as good as the Pentax. The sigma was very soft, and dimmed the viewfinder image unacceptably. Buy the Pentax. You will not regret it. Cheers Shaun John Daniele wrote: Anyone ever try the pentax 1.7x converter that changes manual focus to af Also any opinions on sigma 1.4x vs pentax JD . -- Shaun Canning Cultural Heritage Services High Street, Broadford, Victoria, 3658. www.heritageservices.com.au/ Phone: 0414-967644 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] My images can be seen at www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=238096
Re: thoughts on the 77mm limited lens
Hi Alan, I disagree with almost everything you say about the 43mm ltd. Actually, the 43mm ltld. is a really special lens. The question is rather if you like it's characteristics or not. But that is a totally different matter ... Guess I just can't stand the bright-edge bokeh of the 43. :) regards, Alan Chan I think this is a feature, not a fault :-) In fact the out of focus part are clearly separated from the sharp part for such a wide lens (some of your examples show this). IMO the intense colors of the out of focus images are a hallmark of the 43mm ltd lens and contribute to the the 3D-effect Pål is so enthusiastic about. However, it is quite a difference to the milky, softy and low contrast out of focus images of the 1.4 and 1.2 50mm lenses. Which one is better? It depends ... All the best, Alexander __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz!
Best money you could spend with a beast that size is a good tripod and ball head. Good balls are hideously expensive (no pun intended), but worth it. I have used an Arca Swiss B1 a fair bit, but have never been able to justify the expense. By the time you get hold of the ball, and 4-5 plates for lenses and cameras, you've spent $600.00 or so. A lot of moula! However, the are magnificent to use. Cheers Shaun Bruce Dayton wrote: Shaun, I dunno...when I bought mine, I got the 1.4X-L at the same time. It isn't that hard to figure out what the lens can do. One other way to look at it is to see what else you need to spend money on to see if the converter is really the next thing on your list. Perhaps a good tripod head that works well with the lens, or a nice monopod (that is how I use mine quite often) or something may be the first order of business. Bruce Friday, December 6, 2002, 2:57:31 AM, you wrote: SC Figure out what the 400mm can do on it's own first Brad... SC Cheers SC Shaun SC Brad Dobo wrote: I can see the headache coming. I know from you that the 1.4x L fits my lens, but not sure on the 2x L, of course, gonna be tough finding a place that has one to try out. So the quality is worse at 2x then..hmmm.and 800mm was so tempting. ~600mm isn't bad I suppose :) May stick with the better and compatible 1.4x L. Thanks for the info Bruce. Brad - Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Brad Dobo [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 4:38 AM Subject: Re[2]: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz! Brad, The L converters have less negative impact on your image (especially vignetting and contrast loss) than the S or 3rd party. Only for lenses that can use them. I would strongly recommend going with the L over the S. Remember that not only light loss, but quality loss is greater with a 2X vs. a 1.4X. Bruce Friday, December 6, 2002, 12:39:05 AM, you wrote: BD Well, seems I have much to learn! I always wondered about the L converters, BD as I always saw only the short ones. Is the L necessary for the 400/5.6? BD As for the 1.4x and the 2x is there a difference in optical quality? Rob BD pointed out the light issue, but I would be using it during bright days I BD would imagine. I guess I'm a bit greedy now. Having the ability to shoot BD at 800mm sounds like it could be a lot of fun, but I understand not so BD practical. BD Brad BD - Original Message - BD From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] BD To: Brad Dobo [EMAIL PROTECTED] BD Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 3:22 AM BD Subject: Re: Already looking at equipment for my 400mm -- TC advice plz! Brad, I have the 1.4X-L converter. It works wonderfully with the A 400/5.6. The L converters have an extended snout that fits inside the rear of the lens. I know with the 1.4 that the loss of quality is very minimal. It is a great converter. I don't know for a fact that the 2X-L fits properly. I would guess it would, but am not positive. As to the issue of tripod mounted with MZ-S/Grip. No issue at all. The lens is bigger/heavier than the body. The lens mounts to the tripod and the camera just hangs off the end. So adding a converter doesn't have any real impact. HTH, Bruce Thursday, December 5, 2002, 11:35:57 PM, you wrote: BD Hey, BD Even though I have not received the lens yet, I'm looking at getting BD the 2x BD teleconverter. Anyone (Bruce D. etc) know if this is a good idea? BD This is BD quite new to me, not the converter and light, etc, but the weight or BD stress BD and balance when mounted on a tripod with the MZ-S w/grip? This would BD be BD the first lens I would have use (while limited) for a TC. BD Brad BD ** BD Brad W. Dobo, HBA (Eds.) BD Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BD ICQ#: 1658 . . -- Shaun Canning Cultural Heritage Services High Street, Broadford, Victoria, 3658. www.heritageservices.com.au/ Phone: 0414-967644 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] My images can be seen at www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=238096
Re: Re: My first Ebay!!!
- Original Message - From: David Brooks Subject: Re: Re: My first Ebay!!! Frank. I'll apologize for being part of the latest $1 Billion dollar Government Boondogle. Sorryg Dave, tell me you didn't register your guns. William Robb
Re: Digital printing beats optical?
I've tried twice to post this now! Here goes a third. Seems to get hung up halfway through the quoted text, so I won't include it this time fanfare I have been using an Epson Stylus Photo EX (prints up to A3) since 1998. It produces glorious prints using the Epson colour carts and 3rd party black inks. An Epson col cart (20110) costs me about £25 for a pack of three from www.7dayshop.com based in Jersey. Blacks are a 3 for a fiver or so. I just did some commissions for local families on it, and on the back of each print is a sticker that says ' For best results display print behind glass or keep in album. Avoid prolonged exposure to direct sunlight...' Regarding ink longevity, I have found that a print hanging on a wall behind glass, out of sunlight, will last for about 2 to 3 years before the greens and blues start taking over as the reds and yellows fade. An unprotected pic stuck on the fridge looks decidedly peaky after only a few weeks, and is almost white within 6 months. This is partly the reason I am looking to replace the Epson for colour printing using archival inks. Another Epson or the Canon 9000S are my choices, and based on some input here, I'm looking at the Canon. I have had a few head blockages with the Photo EX, once serious that was resolved by using something (I forget what) to soak the head. I find that if the printer is used at least once a week, with a head cleaning cycle every six or ten prints, blockages are uncommon. Quality-wise, it is still a stunner. I usually increase colour saturation by about 15 percent on each shot before printing, otherwise the colour is a bit drab. Printing mono is a bit of a letdown. I like using just black only rather than a desaturated colour shot using all inks. I might turn the Epson into a mono printer using the 6-black systems that are available. Regarding the issue about photographers having to use image editing software rather than just printing straight from a digicam and expecting gallery class award winners, well now there's a surprise! If you do your own wet-printing, you would not expect to just pop into a darkroom and do a bit of tinkering, would you? Some people spend years under the enlarger trying to perfect their trade. Similarly with an app like Photoshop. If you are serious about using the digital darkroom, you cannot get a DSLR and then skimp on the software and hardware that will support your output to print or whatever. If you can't or won't do it, then pay for someone else to do it. But when you get your work back and it's not to your liking, you only have a few choices, 2 of which are: find someone better, or learn to do it yourself! One of the reasons that I switched from film to digital is that I did not enjoy losing control of even one part of the photographic process. I also do not enjoy darkrooms. Digital means that I have full control, in the way I want it, in the timescale I want, with the quality I want. This doesn't suit everyone - but boy o boy, when the Pentax DSLR arrives on the scene, a lot of people on this list are going to discover what they've been missing :-) HTH Cotty 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: Re[6]: electra studio flash/ring flash
- Original Message - From: Feroze Kistan Subject: Re: Re[6]: electra studio flash/ring flash Hi Rob, So what is the generally accepted opinion? In a studio setup, for my situtation, 90% pack shots, and I'm just learning to shoot slides, will a hand held meter be more accurate than using the cameras meter? Are yoy planning on shooting with studio strobes, or continuous light? If you are shooting with continuous light, then the in camera meter will be as accurate as anything. If you are shooting with studio strobe, then it depends on how much of the work you want to do. If you are going to do the flash calculations yourself, using guide numbers and flash to subject distances, then that will be as acurate as the meter, presuming you can get an accurate estimate of your studio unit's output (hint: you'll need a flash meter). I wouldn't want to do it this way. I like knowing that the exposures will be close to correct. William Robb
Unemployed again
So the 43/1.9 is on E, for anyone wanting one. Collin :(
Re: Noctilux and 43mm Limited
Is it just me, or does the bokeh on this Noctilux pic remind you of the 43 Limited? http://www.alaska.net/~rowlett/images/noctilux/mimi4.htm R I am not sure. Unlike those those seen on this picture (maybe an effect of scanning?) out of focus highlights produced by the 43 mm ltd. lens seem to show quite well defined edges, are evenly illuminated and not look smeared out. At least this is my impression. Enjoy, Alexander __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: Unemployed again
BTW, I'm also in IT. Lotus Notes/Domino, DB2, Java. It's a pretty bad market right now. Collin :(
Re: OT: PDML Xmas Party!!
Great idea. We've done a bit of that unofficially in the past, but a general call to liquid refreshment and jovial conversation would be a lot of fun. Shaun Canning wrote: Hi Gang, I know it may sound a bit weird, but why don't we have a Christmas Party? (or general get together with a few grogs and a chat for those of the non-christian persuasion). The logistics could be difficult, but for those of us who are near their computer on or about the 25th December (perhaps an arbitrary xmas a day or two before or after), lets have a few beersand be allowed OT all night Cheers Shaun Shaun Canning Cultural Heritage Services High Street, Broadford, Victoria, 3658. www.heritageservices.com.au/ Phone: 0414-967644 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] My images can be seen at www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=238096
Re: Unemployed again
On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: BTW, I'm also in IT. Lotus Notes/Domino, DB2, Java. It's a pretty bad market right now. This is why I want to just move onto a new job market, like digging a ditch. Sigh, my company just had a massive equipment failure, and I get the pleasure of callign people. -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
RE: Unemployed again
Collin.. I'm in IT as well.. I am thankful that I have a job... my sympathies - it's still pretty bad as the numbers would suggest that came out this morning in the U.S. , hope things pick up soon. Dave -Original Message- From: Collin Brendemuehl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 4:53 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Unemployed again BTW, I'm also in IT. Lotus Notes/Domino, DB2, Java. It's a pretty bad market right now. Collin :(
Re: Words to work by
Does this mean that you're a Trekkie? Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 20:22:24 + From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... Post 40, I really don't give a Targ's Tail anymore ... Cotty
