100/3.5 versus 135/2.8 (was Re: New lenses)
Caveman wrote: C Any info on the 100/3.5 macro that could decide me to C go in favor of the FA 135/2.8 ? Yes, the 100/3.5 is the ugliest piece of crap that ever carried the Pentax name. The feeling of cheap was amazing even when I hold it side by side with the FA 28-70/4 - until then the champion of poor build quality for me... BTW, one of the things I recall from a respected former pdml member - Roberto Burgos - is that he highly valued his FA 135/2.8, both for optics and AF. Servus, Alin
Re: 100/3.5 versus 135/2.8 (was Re: New lenses)
Alin Flaider schrieb: Caveman wrote: C Any info on the 100/3.5 macro that could decide me to C go in favor of the FA 135/2.8 ? Yes, the 100/3.5 is the ugliest piece of crap that ever carried the Pentax name. Ha ha, true. But this is due to the fact that Cosina builds it. However, it's equipped with original SMC-coating and Pentax electronics. And the optics are really cool! I like it much for that reason - but the feel is disgusting, that's true. I got mine on ebay for 89,- So nothing to moan about. :-) BTW, one of the things I recall from a respected former pdml member - Roberto Burgos - is that he highly valued his FA 135/2.8, both for optics and AF. I would also recommend to watch out for the SMC-F 135/2.8 [IF] on ebay. The internal focus makes it fast and fun! Minimal distance is 0,70 meters! Perhaps you'll like this, even if you won't get it that cheap as the 100/3.5 : http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=2916203807category=4688 BTW, the seller is a very nice guy - I got my FA 85/1.4 from him (I think it was the one, that Boz shot for his site :-) ...) Thomas
Re: KAF3 lens mount already here?
Arnold wrote: Boz, you keep repeating the same wrong speculation, so I will quote again what Pentax USA writes: This is what they write on the *ist: Usable lenses - Pentax KAF2-(power zoom not available), KAF-, KA- and K-mount lenses (Autofocus possible with KA- and K-mount lenses using AF adapter) One can also quote from the Pentax Switzerland site (concerning the film *ist): Kompatible Objektive Pentax KAF2 und KAF Objektive (ohne PowerZoom) Pentax KA Objektive (AF mit optionalem AF-Adapter erhältlich) No translation needed I presume. I´ve seen this same information on a german .pdf file somewere. Seems that even Pentax doesn´t know what lenses the damn thing supports. -Matti
Re: 100/3.5 versus 135/2.8 (was Re: New lenses)
Th. Stach schrieb: Alin Flaider schrieb: Caveman wrote: C Any info on the 100/3.5 macro that could decide me to C go in favor of the FA 135/2.8 ? Yes, the 100/3.5 is the ugliest piece of crap that ever carried the Pentax name. Ha ha, true. But this is due to the fact that Cosina builds it. However, it's equipped with original SMC-coating and Pentax electronics. And the optics are really cool! I like it much for that reason - but the feel is disgusting, that's true. I got mine on ebay for 89,- So nothing to moan about. :-) BTW, one of the things I recall from a respected former pdml member - Roberto Burgos - is that he highly valued his FA 135/2.8, both for optics and AF. I would also recommend to watch out for the SMC-F 135/2.8 [IF] on ebay. The internal focus makes it fast and fun! Minimal distance is 0,70 meters! Perhaps you'll like this, even if you won't get it that cheap as the 100/3.5 : http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=2916203807category=4688 BTW, the seller is a very nice guy - I got my FA 85/1.4 from him (I think it was the one, that Boz shot for his site :-) ...) Thomas PS: Sorry - I forgot, it's German. Tried a babelfish-translation: *g* From my Pentax collection/equipment here a Pentax SMC f 2.8/135mm objective with interior focusing and inserted extendable back light screen comes. In accordance with test reports mechanically and optically even still better than the Pentax FA successor. Also those as neutrally valid French photo magazine Chasseur of d'Images was large the opinion that it belongs to the best 135mm objectives, which they ever tested. The objective is in good to very good condition. In two small places minimum lacquer abrasion is present, sees last picture. All glass areas are clear and without scratches. Supply takes place with original front and back cover. No Ebay fee.
Re: flower pics
OK; http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/temp/flower.html Thx! :) BTW what kind of film did you use? I like the shades of purple near the top edges of the flower. Sensia 100. regards, Alan Chan _ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: KAF3 lens mount already here?
Hi Arnold, on 10 Mar 03 you wrote in pentax.list: Let's go to CeBit and put an end to all this speculation! Good idea! I might be there on thursday (13.), but that's not sure at the moment. Anyone else? Cheers, Heiko
Re: KAF3 lens mount already here?
Heiko Hamann schrieb: Hi Arnold, on 10 Mar 03 you wrote in pentax.list: Let's go to CeBit and put an end to all this speculation! Good idea! I might be there on thursday (13.), but that's not sure at the moment. Anyone else? Are students cards or cards for university members available? Those would be restricted to special days, I suppose??? (Haven't been there for years...) D'you anything about the entrance fee? I'm from Braunschweig, so I'm rather interested ... Thomas
Re: KAF3 lens mount already here?
Hi Thomas, on 11 Mar 03 you wrote in pentax.list: Are students cards or cards for university members available? Yes. All prices can be found here: http://www.cebit.de/21541 Cheers, Heiko
UKPDML 2003
Hi, 1. Did we decide a date/location finally? 2. Did our couch surfer possibilities come to a decision on participation? mike making plans for the summer.
Re[2]: KAF3 lens mount already here?
Come on, K mount compatibility is one of the very few Pentax trumps, and they need to play them all. Even if few posses both old lenses and new equipment Pentax still has to proclaim loud and clear our dslr takes whatever glass caries the Pentax name!. Until they come up with serious technological propositions like IS/USM that really tempt the users to buy new lenses, abandoning full K mount compatibility is not an option. BTW, I think you're wrong about the numbers. There are millions of K/M lenses out there and if only 1% (and that's very conservative) end up in the hands of enthusiasts, then Pentax should pay very close attention to satisfying this market segment. Servus, Alin Pål wrote: PJ I personally don't think limiting compatibility of K and M lenses PJ are particularly smart for their first DSLR. On the other hand, K PJ and M lenses were being made for only 6-7 years over 20 years PJ ago. Hardly anyone who still use them have bought a new Pentax PJ product in 20 years or ever. And very few of them will buy a DSLR. PJ I believe such compatibility, and mind you I speak as someone who PJ actually use K lenses, are only for psychological reasons as the PJ real market for DSLR for K and M lens owners is microscopic.
For Collin Brendemuehl
Hi! I am trying to send you some e-mail off list. I've tried both [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] addresses, but it keeps bouncing back like this: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: host mail.safe-t.net[209.57.215.7] said: 501 unacceptable mail address I would appreciate if you provided me with some other address of yours that would come through. Thanks in advance. --- Boris Liberman www.geocities.com/dunno57 www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625
Re: Long lenses handheld?
I have found that it's very difficult to shoot birds in the wild with anything less than an 800. Sure, at a backyard bird feeder, you can get closer. But pictures of birds at the feeder get tedious in a hurry. I frequently shoot birds in wooded areas where some of the best shots find them high off the ground on tree branches. I use an 800 and monopod, so that I can quickly aim up into the branches. Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not really sure about this comment, but it is always better to use a shorter lens and find a way to move in closer than stick a big long lens on and stay far away. Atmospheric haze, slower lens, camera shake all conspire against the users of very long lenses. This person wants to shoot birds. Find a place where they hang out ( a feeder or nesting area) and work them from in close. Eventually they get used to you and you should be able to get them with a 300 or 400... Vic In a message dated 3/10/03 11:47:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I love this. I have no idea what you're trying to do, but I'm going to tell you to do it differently.
Re: Long lenses handheld?
All the bird people I know who take good bird pictures use very long lenses. Its not an easy task to get halfway up a tall tree to take a picture of an eagle or an owl. They tend to bugger off pretty fast when people approach and start crashing about in the branches. Also the bird watching platforms are not easy to move. Its no simple task to swim half way across a lake holding a camera over your head so you can take a picture of a rare aquatic bird with your 400 mm lens. Boats don't help much either. D ___ Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002 - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 8:31 AM Subject: Re: Long lenses handheld? I have found that it's very difficult to shoot birds in the wild with anything less than an 800. Sure, at a backyard bird feeder, you can get closer. But pictures of birds at the feeder get tedious in a hurry. I frequently shoot birds in wooded areas where some of the best shots find them high off the ground on tree branches. I use an 800 and monopod, so that I can quickly aim up into the branches. Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not really sure about this comment, but it is always better to use a shorter lens and find a way to move in closer than stick a big long lens on and stay far away. Atmospheric haze, slower lens, camera shake all conspire against the users of very long lenses. This person wants to shoot birds. Find a place where they hang out ( a feeder or nesting area) and work them from in close. Eventually they get used to you and you should be able to get them with a 300 or 400... Vic In a message dated 3/10/03 11:47:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I love this. I have no idea what you're trying to do, but I'm going to tell you to do it differently.
Re: Long lenses handheld?
On 10 Mar 2003 at 23:42, Ryan K. Brooks wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 3/10/03 11:17:05 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm not sure I follow you here, but it's probably just me. If you want to get an IS lens, certainly Canon are presently the folks with the goods. You may be overestimating IS, though, if you think it replaces good technique. Doug I'm with you Doug. I could care less about IS. My IS comes with three legs and it gives me stabilization with all my lenses. You can't do with your body what IS does. Too bad if your subject is moving, IS is not a substitute for fast glass. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html Pentax user since 1986 PDMLer since 1998
Re: New lenses (was Re: KAF3 lens mount already here?)
Why would you want a sharp portrait lens anyway ? Well, ~I~ like sharp portraits, as a rule. My subjects don't always like 'em, so I have to be flexible. However (as has been said here before on the PDML when discussing portrait lenses), you can always soften a sharp lens, but you just can't sharpen a soft lens. I would never consider a softish lens as anything more than a secondary (although often useful) portrait lens. Fred
Roberto Burgos - anybody heard from him
BTW, one of the things I recall from a respected former pdml member - Roberto Burgos - is that he highly valued his FA 135/2.8, both for optics and AF. Anybody know if he is still shooting? I miss his PUG contributions. Bob S.
Diaphragm actuator precision survey
Hi everybody, Startled by a recent mention of bodies unable to precisely set the diaphragm aperture, I conducted a small test to see for myself. Not that I care much as I set the aperture from the lens most of the time, but I wanted to know how reliable exposure is for those rare situations when I recourse to program or shutter speed priority. Here's what I found: the MZ-5N consistently sets the aperture on FA 28-70/4 half of stop higher across the entire range, from 4 to 19 (that is 4.5 instead of 4, ...22 instead of 19). On the contrary, it is very accurate with the FA 50/1.4 and FA 80-320/4.5-5.6, where the size of the aperture set by the body matches exactly the one set on the lens. So it seems it depends on the lens, and not surprisingly in this case the poorer built lens performed the worst. If you're willing to test your lenses and report back on the list to see if we can find a pattern, here is how to do it. Note that this works only with bodies capable of electronic depth of field preview. On the bright side, the error is easy to detect. - set the aperture ring on the lens to A; - set the aperture value on the body (with bodies like 5N lacking this feature just set the shutter speed to some value, measure the light and record the aperture selected by the body); - press the DOF button to close the diaphragm; - while keeping the DOF pressed, disengage the aperture ring from A and rotate it towards the target aperture value while looking through the lens at the size of the physical aperture; the blades should maintain their position all the way down from A to and including the target aperture; the true aperture set by the body is the one before the aperture shape has changed. Servus, Alin
Re: KAF3 lens mount already here?
Bruce wrote: I'm beginning to strongly suspect a bit of translation/terminology confusion going on here. What was originally meant in Japanese may not have properly come through in English. If $300 is the cheapest body to be sold in the US, then Pentax is dropping the biggest part of their market. I doubt that this is the case. I'm not sure. If the fact that the *ist is indeed entry level as Pentax says and that *ist is the brand name for Pentax 35mm slr's are true, then it may make sense. Firstly, a new camera is going to be sold at premium price. Pentax still have MZ-series cameras to sell and the *ist is competing with all of them. When the warehouses are cleaned of MZ-series bodies, my guess is that *ist prices may drop. Secondly, if the *ist is indeed the brand name then the *ist is litterally the plain *ist. *ist D is an *ist with something added. It is conceivable that *ist [something] are the name of higher model wheres plain *ist is just that the entry level. Also, I wonder how long the bottom market of slr's will continue to exist. Now they are used and bought as advanced PS but how long will it take before digital is capturing this market for good? Then SLR's are for the more advanced users who know what they want. The *ist fit this bill as an entry to slr photography. Pål
OT: Which dcams have this feature?
When the shutter release is pressed and the image is captured, it is immediately sent out the USB port instead of being storedin memory. TIA, Collin
Re: Which dcams have this feature?
the only ones i know are the top DSLRs that allowed tethered mode of operation. they don't use USB because it is too slow. either Firewire or SCSI for the really old ones. USB 2.0 changes the speed equation, but i don't think enough. Herb... - Original Message - From: collinb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 09:19 Subject: OT: Which dcams have this feature? When the shutter release is pressed and the image is captured, it is immediately sent out the USB port instead of being storedin memory. TIA, Collin
Re: Defining civilisation: Re: *ist v D60 and now the EOS 10D.
LOL. Depends how you define 'civilisation'. that which the English and Japanese practice that the Americans try to imitate. Not true. Americans have long since rejected civilization. The ratings were too low . . 8^)
Re: OT: Which dcams have this feature?
Your Message has been carefully placed in it's very own, specially prepared, luxuriantly hand crafted circular file where it will receive ALL the dignity and attention it deserves! And, in case you're too dumb to understand that. It's been placed in the TRASHCAN, moron! Later, Gary
New lenses (was Re: KAF3 lens mount already here?)
This was my chain of reasoning, and hence I have the FA 100 2.8. It's a heavy lens, but it's sharp and has a very solid feel. The adjustable feel of the focus ring is very good for manual work (macro of portrait). Unless money or weight is a real problem, save up and go for this one. It also has that barrel aesthetic that Pentax seems to favor lately. . . Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/10/03 02:54PM Gregory L. Hansen wrote: They need to tempt users to new lenses, not introduce compatibility issues. They would tempt me with a nice AF portrait lens. Let's see: FA 77 - greta lens, but too short focal length FA 85 - too expensive, a little bit short, great for indoor only FA 100/2.8 macro - right focal length, great lens expensive, and hey, it's a macro FA 100/3.5 macro - right focal length, nice price, a little slow, again a macro FA 135/2.8 - nice focal length, would be great except it's quite soft. So where's that killer portrait lens ? I was looking hard and my best bet was the 100/2.8 macro. cheers, caveman
Re: UKPDML 2003
Hi, 1. Did we decide a date/location finally? 2. Did our couch surfer possibilities come to a decision on participation? mike making plans for the summer. Er sorry Basil, what was the question again??? I'll try to be there. Wherever. Cotty Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: New lenses (was Re: KAF3 lens mount already here?)
Hi, never owning an 85 or similar lens before and been used to several 135 lenses I've had in my bag, I was afraid 77 would be to short. Finally, I've bought an 77 and boy am I glad I did. Love it. It seems just perfect for portraits. Matjaz They would tempt me with a nice AF portrait lens. Let's see: FA 77 - greta lens, but too short focal length FA 85 - too expensive, a little bit short, great for indoor only FA 100/2.8 macro - right focal length, great lens expensive, and hey, it's a macro FA 100/3.5 macro - right focal length, nice price, a little slow, again a macro FA 135/2.8 - nice focal length, would be great except it's quite soft. So where's that killer portrait lens ? I was looking hard and my best bet was the 100/2.8 macro. cheers, caveman
Re: OT: Which dcams have this feature?
From what I have read (I don't own one), the Kodak DCS-760 can do this. This camera was expensive before but it has become obsolete and the prices for used ones should be getting a lot lower. I haven't been searching eBay for one. Len --- From: collinb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: OT: Which dcams have this feature? Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 09:19:44 -0500 When the shutter release is pressed and the image is captured, it is immediately sent out the USB port instead of being storedin memory. TIA, Collin _ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: Diaphragm actuator precision survey
Align I hate to be the one to toss a rock in your gears but I see an inherent problem with your theory. On most zoom lenses the f stop changes as you change the zoom setting. Thus one reason why your testing proved better on a 50 mm prime. You also list that your test was done successfully on another zoom however. If the zoom is set on the shortest focal length then, and only then with the exception of some lenses that claim f stop stays the same, the cameras shown f-stop will equal what it says on the aperture ring. I guess I would question the accuracy of doing this type of test in this manner on any zoom lenses. I've done some testing by setting the rig up on a tripod aimed at a steady unchanging scene with a constant midtone color for a large area. I would use aperture priority to select an aperture with the ring set on A, making sure it was not in between stops but at a full stop setting corresponding to one available on the dial. If it's a zoom use again only the shortest focal length, primes again work better. Note the corresponding shutter speed selected by the camera. Change the aperture ring setting to the same one shown in the camera, and again note the shutter speed settings for any change. I would think theoretically they would be the same if all is well. Hi everybody, Startled by a recent mention of bodies unable to precisely set the diaphragm aperture, I conducted a small test to see for myself. Not that I care much as I set the aperture from the lens most of the time, but I wanted to know how reliable exposure is for those rare situations when I recourse to program or shutter speed priority. Here's what I found: the MZ-5N consistently sets the aperture on FA 28-70/4 half of stop higher across the entire range, from 4 to 19 (that is 4.5 instead of 4, ...22 instead of 19). On the contrary, it is very accurate with the FA 50/1.4 and FA 80-320/4.5-5.6, where the size of the aperture set by the body matches exactly the one set on the lens. So it seems it depends on the lens, and not surprisingly in this case the poorer built lens performed the worst. If you're willing to test your lenses and report back on the list to see if we can find a pattern, here is how to do it. Note that this works only with bodies capable of electronic depth of field preview. On the bright side, the error is easy to detect. - set the aperture ring on the lens to A; - set the aperture value on the body (with bodies like 5N lacking this feature just set the shutter speed to some value, measure the light and record the aperture selected by the body); - press the DOF button to close the diaphragm; - while keeping the DOF pressed, disengage the aperture ring from A and rotate it towards the target aperture value while looking through the lens at the size of the physical aperture; the blades should maintain their position all the way down from A to and including the target aperture; the true aperture set by the body is the one before the aperture shape has changed. Servus, Alin
Re: KAF3 lens mount already here?
Hi! The EOS Rebel Ti 35mm SLR Autofocus Camera Body sells for $240 at BH (Canon's latest, greatest, current body). If Pentax doesn't have anything at this, or a lower price, in their line up they're screwed. Digital PS cameras are irrelevant: they are already the same price as an entry SLR and lens kit. People still buy cheap film SLRs. BR A year ago I bought my ZX-L body from BH for $250. I suppose that with *ist hitting the shelves, the price could only go down... --- Boris Liberman www.geocities.com/dunno57 www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625
RE: 100/3.5 versus 135/2.8 (was Re: New lenses)
BTW cheers - package arrived. Rob C'mon Robbo. Spill the beans! What was in the package?? ;-) Cot Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
RE: 100/3.5 versus 135/2.8 (was Re: New lenses)
Don't you try to enable me again! Not me squire. Oooh no. Well, not much anyway. Just think, 200mm F2.8 equivalent with min focus at (gets lens out of box and drools) 70cm. The 50 was a good purchase though. Cheers Peter
Re[2]: Diaphragm actuator precision survey
Taz wrote: TIf the zoom is set on the shortest focal length then, T and only then with the exception of some lenses that claim f stop stays the T same, the cameras shown f-stop will equal what it says on the aperture ring. T I guess I would question the accuracy of doing this type of test in this T manner on any zoom lenses. Taz, The 28-70 is a constant aperture zoom. The 80-320 was tested at 80 setting. Focal length was invariant. T I've done some testing by setting the rig up on a tripod aimed at a steady T unchanging scene with a constant midtone color for a large area. I would T use aperture priority to select an aperture with the ring set on A, making T sure it was not in between stops but at a full stop setting corresponding to T one available on the dial. If it's a zoom use again only the shortest focal T length, primes again work better. Note the corresponding shutter speed T selected by the camera. Change the aperture ring setting to the same one T shown in the camera, and again note the shutter speed settings for any T change. I would think theoretically they would be the same if all is well. You can bet they would be the same, always. The whole problem lies not in what aperture/speed the camera displays, but in what aperture is effectively used when closing down the lens. You can't figure this without actually looking through the lens... Servus,Alin
Re: Re[2]: Diaphragm actuator precision survey
Alin How are they running the tests on the PZ-1 and PZ-1p's, which were the cameras that were specifically mentioned as having this problem originally. They have depth of field preview, but it is a manual function rather then electronic, that only works with the aperature ring actually turned to the manual settings according to the manual. It appears to work in the A setting but it actually always goes to the smallest aperature setting of the lense when in the A mode, thus making it useless there. I have noted that the aperature setting noted in the display does not always seem to match the numbers on the dial while in the middle, but rather somewhere close. However the high and low limits are the same. My biggest question in all this is the metering in Program modes going to wind up being off because of this, or is it just the manual modes using an external lightmeter that are messed up. This whole thing is getting a bit confusing the more I think about it. Is the metering even going to be accurate in the manual aperature modes? Which one is the camera going to use for this metering...the actual position of the adjustment lever...or the information the lens is feeding the camera electronically..ugh what a mess You can bet they would be the same, always. The whole problem lies not in what aperture/speed the camera displays, but in what aperture is effectively used when closing down the lens. You can't figure this without actually looking through the lens... Servus,Alin
ATTN: Brendan - Lens Info Needed :-)
Seeing as how you've got the Tokina 2.6-2.8 28-70 AT-X Pro, I was hoping that you could show me some shots taken with said lens or at least offer me an opinion on your likes/dislikes. I'm shopping for one currently as I think it's my best option at a sharp and fast 28-70 that doesn't cost me a bundle. Cheers, Dave mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .
Re: Is flare bad?
Ghosting is a form of flair.In fact, ghosting is the only form of flair that can be mitigated by quality lens coatings. Regards, Bob True that some ghosts still have a lot of flair but, joke apart, are you sure lens coatings only improved ghosting? I think it contributes to lower flare level of a lens even if lens construction is mostly involved. Or have I been mislead by some readings? Andre --
Pentax SMC A 35-135mm
Hello In my quest for a multi-purpose lens I looked through the PEntax selection. What I know of this lens that it is extremely rare. Anybody have one? How is it? How often does one pop up on the market and what does it cost? Is the zoom push pull or twist the barrel zoom? Can anyone suggest viable alternatives? (don't have to be Pentax, only Pentax mount :)) Any info would be appreciated. thx L
Re: OT: Which dcams have this feature?
On 11 Mar 2003 at 11:52, Gary L. Murphy wrote: And, in case you're too dumb to understand that. It's been placed in the TRASHCAN, moron! Gary, Before you go throwing responses like this to the list quote some of the original message or at the very least the author. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html Pentax user since 1986 PDMLer since 1998
Re: Is flare bad?
On 11 Mar 2003 at 15:56, Andre Langevin wrote: True that some ghosts still have a lot of flair but, joke apart, are you sure lens coatings only improved ghosting? I think it contributes to lower flare level of a lens even if lens construction is mostly involved. Or have I been mislead by some readings? Ghost images are most usually a product of a bright light source reflecting off the glass surfaces (as it often has a discernible form). Whereas light reflected off the walls of the lens inside the barrel or off the hood or inside the body cavity have a scattered reflections and therefore produce veiling flare or an overall reduction in contrast. So coatings reduce light loss, light loss is in the form of reflection therefore it's also safe to assume that contrast is improved too. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html Pentax user since 1986 PDMLer since 1998
Re: Pentax SMC A 35-135mm
Anybody have one? How is it? How often does one pop up on the market and what does it cost? Is the zoom push pull or twist the barrel zoom? Push pull I think. http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/zooms/medium/A35-135f3.5-4.5.html Can anyone suggest viable alternatives? (don't have to be Pentax, only Pentax mount :)) A35-105/3.5? http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/zooms/medium/A35-105f3.5.html regards, Alan Chan _ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Starist arrival...USA
Starist (film) and BG-20 moved further away to April (mid to end) arrival. Pentax USA quote. Optio S - end of March Burt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re[2]: Diaphragm actuator precision survey
Interesting test you got there, Alin. Just tried it out with my Z-1, and I think it's possible to do with the Z-1/p too. Here's my method: Make sure you have no film in the camera. Turn the f-stop ring to A. Dial in M-bu mode, and select an aperture with the rear dial (eg. f/11). Trip the shutter, and keep it pressed. Watch the aperture blades while you... Turn the f-stop ring from A towards the stop you selected with the dial. When you turn beyond the selected aperture, the diaphragm opens more. Turn the f-stop ring back and forth a few times and decide if the aperture blades stop moving at exactly the stop it is supposed to. Anyway, My observation with a Sigma 70-200/2.8 was that the aperture was actually at f/13 when set to f/11 on the camera. IE, just the same observation as you made with the FA28-70/4. Jostein - Original Message - From: Taz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 9:36 PM Subject: Re: Re[2]: Diaphragm actuator precision survey Alin How are they running the tests on the PZ-1 and PZ-1p's, which were the cameras that were specifically mentioned as having this problem originally. They have depth of field preview, but it is a manual function rather then electronic, that only works with the aperature ring actually turned to the manual settings according to the manual. It appears to work in the A setting but it actually always goes to the smallest aperature setting of the lense when in the A mode, thus making it useless there. I have noted that the aperature setting noted in the display does not always seem to match the numbers on the dial while in the middle, but rather somewhere close. However the high and low limits are the same. My biggest question in all this is the metering in Program modes going to wind up being off because of this, or is it just the manual modes using an external lightmeter that are messed up. This whole thing is getting a bit confusing the more I think about it. Is the metering even going to be accurate in the manual aperature modes? Which one is the camera going to use for this metering...the actual position of the adjustment lever...or the information the lens is feeding the camera electronically..ugh what a mess You can bet they would be the same, always. The whole problem lies not in what aperture/speed the camera displays, but in what aperture is effectively used when closing down the lens. You can't figure this without actually looking through the lens... Servus,Alin
Re: Pentax SMC A 35-135mm
I'm new to the board and thought I may help. I thought I saw one at Advance Camera in Portland, Oregon but after talking with them found out it was an SMC A 28-135 for $364 on consighnment. He thought it may go for less since it had been there for a couple of months. They are on the web at advancecamera.com and their phone is (503) 292-6996. They are a friendly enough staff should you call, and are the Pentax service center for the Northwest U.S. Hello In my quest for a multi-purpose lens I looked through the PEntax selection. What I know of this lens that it is extremely rare. Anybody have one? How is it? How often does one pop up on the market and what does it cost? Is the zoom push pull or twist the barrel zoom? Can anyone suggest viable alternatives? (don't have to be Pentax, only Pentax mount :)) Any info would be appreciated. thx L
Re: Re[2]: Diaphragm actuator precision survey
How are they running the tests on the PZ-1 and PZ-1p's, which were the cameras that were specifically mentioned as having this problem originally. I think the reason is that the Z-1p is the only body allowed the aperture to be chosen through the bodies. With program or shutter priority mode, the very same problem still exist, but not obvious to the users. I believe, but cannot prove, any Pentax bodies with program or shutter priority modes have the same problem. However, since most users use print films, the difference is too little to be detected on film. They have depth of field preview, but it is a manual function rather then electronic, that only works with the aperature ring actually turned to the manual settings according to the manual. It appears to work in the A setting but it actually always goes to the smallest aperature setting of the lense when in the A mode, thus making it useless there. I have noted that the aperature setting noted in the display does not always seem to match the numbers on the dial while in the middle, but rather somewhere close. However the high and low limits are the same. I disagree. AFAIK, the shutter speed in program aperture priority modes are not discrete. But the chosen aperture is always 1/2 stop difference in any mode. Another way to test is to fire the shutter in a dim room and the camera chosen aperture would be wide open. You would be able to see some lenses didn't fire wide open. My biggest question in all this is the metering in Program modes going to wind up being off because of this, or is it just the manual modes using an external lightmeter that are messed up. This whole thing is getting a bit confusing the more I think about it. Is the metering even going to be accurate in the manual aperature modes? Which one is the camera going to use for this metering...the actual position of the adjustment lever...or the information the lens is feeding the camera electronically..ugh what a mess When the lens is set to non-'A', the aperture resistor determines the chosen shutter speed. When the lens is set to 'A', everything is done electronically. This also raises another problem - sometimes the readings from these 2 methods do not match each other. Confusing huh? :) regards, Alan Chan _ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: Pentax SMC A 35-135mm
Can anyone suggest viable alternatives? (don't have to be Pentax, only Pentax mount :)) I personally really like the A 28-135/4, and the A 35-105/3.5 is a good alternative. Fred
Re: Pentax SMC A 35-135mm
KEH.COM currently has a slew of 35 -105 in A or F mounts and several 35-135 F's. Tom M. ( new member) Can anyone suggest viable alternatives? (don't have to be Pentax, only Pentax mount :)) I personally really like the A 28-135/4, and the A 35-105/3.5 is a good alternative. Fred
Re: Re[2]: KAF3 lens mount already here?
I AGREE WITH THIS 1000% If they do abandon the K mount on the *ist D, I think it would be a huge mistake. Not only to current Pentax glass owners, but non-owners as well. If they do abandon the K mount, I will abandon Pentax... --- Alin Flaider [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Come on, K mount compatibility is one of the very few Pentax trumps, and they need to play them all. Even if few posses both old lenses and new equipment Pentax still has to proclaim loud and clear our dslr takes whatever glass caries the Pentax name!. Until they come up with serious technological propositions like IS/USM that really tempt the users to buy new lenses, abandoning full K mount compatibility is not an option. BTW, I think you're wrong about the numbers. There are millions of K/M lenses out there and if only 1% (and that's very conservative) end up in the hands of enthusiasts, then Pentax should pay very close attention to satisfying this market segment. Servus, Alin Pål wrote: PJ I personally don't think limiting compatibility of K and M lenses PJ are particularly smart for their first DSLR. On the other hand, K PJ and M lenses were being made for only 6-7 years over 20 years PJ ago. Hardly anyone who still use them have bought a new Pentax PJ product in 20 years or ever. And very few of them will buy a DSLR. PJ I believe such compatibility, and mind you I speak as someone who PJ actually use K lenses, are only for psychological reasons as the PJ real market for DSLR for K and M lens owners is microscopic. __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online http://webhosting.yahoo.com
Re: Long lenses handheld?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wouldn't shoot them at the feeder. A properly placed branch above the feeder with the right background and you are off to the races... I've done that. It can be nice. But I prefer to find birds in their natural habitat. The hunt is part of the fun. Paul
RE: 100/3.5 versus 135/2.8 (was Re: New lenses)
My new(to me) FA 75mm f1.4 for the *ist D. The 77 will be too long a portrait lens on the DSLR to me, so this should replace it nicely. Looks like that is me committed to a degree now, its not a length I would normally use on 35mm, despite its 'standard' tag - it is almost always too short or not wide enough for what I want. Rest assured, I shall be trying to challenge that preconception now that I have what is supposed to be such a fine lens though! -Original Message- From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 11 March 2003 18:50 To: Pentax List Subject: RE: 100/3.5 versus 135/2.8 (was Re: New lenses) BTW cheers - package arrived. Rob C'mon Robbo. Spill the beans! What was in the package?? ;-) Cot Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
RE: 100/3.5 versus 135/2.8 (was Re: New lenses)
Yeah, thanks. To anyone considering buying from Sunny Brighton - I say go for it. I mailed him on Friday agreed a price, phoned on mondya gave the card details and less than 24 hours later the lens is in my hands. Exactly as described. Faultless as always peter - you da man! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 11 March 2003 19:23 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: 100/3.5 versus 135/2.8 (was Re: New lenses) Don't you try to enable me again! Not me squire. Oooh no. Well, not much anyway. Just think, 200mm F2.8 equivalent with min focus at (gets lens out of box and drools) 70cm. The 50 was a good purchase though. Cheers Peter
Re: U.S. Price Of *ist Film
No, I wouldn't call myself a pundit. On Tuesday 11 March 2003 15:36, Peter Alling wrote: No, that was Mike. At 09:53 AM 3/11/2003 -0500, Doug wrote: Or a pendant. At 09:48 AM 3/11/03, you wrote: Hum, my guees was $300, so I was $0.05 off. $1 = £1. And you call yourself a pundit. . . . Steven Desjardins Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx -- Frits Wüthrich Pentaxianado
Tokina 80-200 f/2.8 ATX Pro
What's the general opinion of the above mentioned lens? thanks Paul _ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
Re: Re[2]: KAF3 lens mount already here?
One of our local dealers' (Citizen's Photo) salesman was at PMA and handled the D *ist and said all current lenses would fit as well as the screw mounts. tomM I AGREE WITH THIS 1000% If they do abandon the K mount on the *ist D, I think it would be a huge mistake. Not only to current Pentax glass owners, but non-owners as well. If they do abandon the K mount, I will abandon Pentax... --- Alin Flaider [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Come on, K mount compatibility is one of the very few Pentax trumps, and they need to play them all. Even if few posses both old lenses and new equipment Pentax still has to proclaim loud and clear our dslr takes whatever glass caries the Pentax name!. Until they come up with serious technological propositions like IS/USM that really tempt the users to buy new lenses, abandoning full K mount compatibility is not an option. BTW, I think you're wrong about the numbers. There are millions of K/M lenses out there and if only 1% (and that's very conservative) end up in the hands of enthusiasts, then Pentax should pay very close attention to satisfying this market segment. Servus, Alin Pål wrote: PJ I personally don't think limiting compatibility of K and M lenses PJ are particularly smart for their first DSLR. On the other hand, K PJ and M lenses were being made for only 6-7 years over 20 years PJ ago. Hardly anyone who still use them have bought a new Pentax PJ product in 20 years or ever. And very few of them will buy a DSLR. PJ I believe such compatibility, and mind you I speak as someone who PJ actually use K lenses, are only for psychological reasons as the PJ real market for DSLR for K and M lens owners is microscopic. __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online http://webhosting.yahoo.com
The really difficult question
How many of you think you have enough equipment? You may upgrade or transition to another medium or format, but the quantity and class of hardware suits you. Who will face the hardest question of all? :)
RE: The really difficult question
Collin.. tut tut tut... you can NEVER have enough toys... Never.. never I say Booowahahahahahahahaa!!! Insanely yours, Dave -Original Message- From: collinb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 8:36 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: The really difficult question How many of you think you have enough equipment? You may upgrade or transition to another medium or format, but the quantity and class of hardware suits you. Who will face the hardest question of all? :)
RE: The really difficult question
I have WAY TOO MUCH equipment, but I know for sure I will be buying more! JCO -Original Message- From: collinb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 8:36 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: The really difficult question How many of you think you have enough equipment? You may upgrade or transition to another medium or format, but the quantity and class of hardware suits you. Who will face the hardest question of all? :)
Re: The really difficult question
I can't imagine that anyone (especially on this list!g) will say they have enough! There's always something longer, wider, faster, more compact, more features, better reliability, better suited to a particular use, etc... Every piece if equipment that I have, I'll eventually discover it's limitations, and realize that if only I had such and such, I could ~really~ nail this shot. That being said, compared to many here, and many of my friends, I'm no equipment junkie vbg. That goes not only for photography, but other hobbies and endeavors as well. It's like a disease, really... cheers, frank collinb wrote: How many of you think you have enough equipment? You may upgrade or transition to another medium or format, but the quantity and class of hardware suits you. Who will face the hardest question of all? :) -- Honour - that virtue of the unjust! -Albert Camus
Re: The really difficult question
That, from a man who changes systems as often as most people change underwear... vbg -frank David Chang-Sang wrote: Collin.. tut tut tut... you can NEVER have enough toys... Never.. never I say Booowahahahahahahahaa!!! Insanely yours, Dave -- Honour - that virtue of the unjust! -Albert Camus
Re: The really difficult question
I'll be a dissenting voice. I have enough equipment. That doesn't mean that there aren't one or two more things I might want. At 08:36 PM 3/11/2003 -0500, you wrote: How many of you think you have enough equipment? You may upgrade or transition to another medium or format, but the quantity and class of hardware suits you. Who will face the hardest question of all? :) Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
Re: Alternative to the 360 FGZ AF flash on Mz 6
Try Sigma, Sunpak, Metz. Joe
Re: The really difficult question
When I have one of everything Pentax made, then that will be enough! (Well, maybe one A*135/1.8 to use and another to keep in the closet.) (And I'll need a M85/2 to use, and - and - and... ) (I can say I definitely don't need three of anything, ...except maybe LX'es) Bob S. How many of you think you have enough equipment? You may upgrade or transition to another medium or format, but the quantity and class of hardware suits you. Who will face the hardest question of all? :)
Re: The really difficult question
- Original Message - From: collinb Subject: The really difficult question How many of you think you have enough equipment? You may upgrade or transition to another medium or format, but the quantity and class of hardware suits you. Who will face the hardest question of all? :) I would like a larger format than 4x5. I would like to go to 11x14, as that is the size of print I like the most. William Robb
Re: Long lenses handheld?
Paul Stenquist wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wouldn't shoot them at the feeder. A properly placed branch above the feeder with the right background and you are off to the races... I've done that. It can be nice. But I prefer to find birds in their natural habitat. The hunt is part of the fun. I like fuzzy animals, too, and I've spent many hours in the woods looking for them. Then it occured to me I could go to the zoo and get lots of fuzzy animals just sitting there for me. And I had absolutely no desire to go. It's better to watch yet another sunset, hoping again to ambush a fox that didn't show. I don't head into the woods so I'll have something to do with my camera, I bring my camera so I'll have something to do in the woods. Besides, feeders limit your targets. I was going after a great blue heron Sunday morning, then a kingfisher made an appearance. I think those are two that you wouldn't find at a feeder.
Re: The really difficult question
give me a budget. reminds me of a story: a teacher was teaching an English as a Second Language writing class and gave them a writing assignment to be completed in class. they were asked what they would do if they had a million dollars (this apparently was a story from the early 70's). the class busily got to work trying to express their hopes and dreams in a new language. about 2/3rd of the way through the class, a student came up to the teacher and showed them a piece of paper full of scribble calculations. they exclaimed to the teacher, not enough, teacher, i need another three hundred thousand. from somewhere in Readers Digest. Herb - Original Message - From: collinb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 20:36 Subject: The really difficult question How many of you think you have enough equipment? You may upgrade or transition to another medium or format, but the quantity and class of hardware suits you. Who will face the hardest question of all? :)
Re: Tokina 80-200 f/2.8 ATX Pro
- Original Message - From: Paul Eriksson Subject: Tokina 80-200 f/2.8 ATX Pro What's the general opinion of the above mentioned lens? I may have this lens. Mine is an ATX SD 80-200 f/2.8. If this is the one you are asking after, it is very good. William Robb
Re: eBay Boz's site
Well I have to get in on this discussion. Firstly, people have been using the displays of other ebayer's without permission. One New York TImes writer did an article on ebay - it was supposed to be this cute thing about ebay and how clever she was to link to another ebayer's display. I wrote an overly polite letter to her pointing out that I spent a lot of time creating a nice display for each item I sell and it was not considered very nice to use the work of someone else without permission. (I would not have minded if someone selling something who had no way to show it asked me if they could tell people I had one for sale, too, and they could look at my picture - you know , like a Scrabble set or a set of dishes, etc.) They didnt print my letter, but they did print one who blasted her soundly for the reasons we have been discussing here. After reading a while back about the guy who had used one of the photos of a camera from one of our guys and the funny tricks that were played on him, I decided it was time to discourage use of mine by others by putting my copyright on all the displays I do (Now and then I don't bother, because it is an item someone else is very unlikely to be offering - one of a kind something,etc.) No one should be using other people's art to sell anything without permission of the artist. Chances are there are situations where the owner of the copyright might give permission to use it in exchange for - at the very least - credit; But would respect the owner's wishes not to use it. annsan
Help Me ID a Camera
Ok, here are the details: It's a polaroid. It had a 127mm/4.7 Rodenstock on the front. It's a big gray folding rangefinder. Seperate windows for rangefinding and composing. Any ideas? Thanks. tv
Re: Elliott Erwitt on NPR
tom wrote: In case you missed it, Elliott Erwitt talked a little about photography and his new book: http://www.npr.org/display_pages/features/feature_1186040.html tv And I taped it when it was on. I really thought Lopate did a pathetically poor interview of my personal idol. I could hear Erwitt cringe and a couple of the stupid things Lopate said. Just wondered if others who listened had a similar reaction. (I'm rather anti Lopate anyway, so I'll have to say I didn't cut him much slack.) annsan
Re: Alternative to the 360 FGZ AF flash on Mz 6
Thanks Joe, I will look into those. Peter - Original Message - From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pdml [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 7:18 PM Subject: Re: Alternative to the 360 FGZ AF flash on Mz 6 Try Sigma, Sunpak, Metz. Joe
Re: Alternative to the 360 FGZ AF flash on Mz 6
Hi Lawrence, I think you are right in suggesting that I would be giving up allot by not going with the 360 FGZ. I guess there are only so many corners to cut. So it is time to be patient and save a bit longer and get the proper flash. Thanks Peter - Original Message - From: Lawrence Kwan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 9:16 PM Subject: Re: Alternative to the 360 FGZ AF flash on Mz 6 On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Peter Patershuk wrote: I am not sure if I should save for longer and buy the 360 FGZ flash for my Mz 6. Are there any real alternatives. But if you want to take advantage of MZ-6's (ZX-L in US) advanced flash feature, you really have no alternatives. All the other flash and 3rd party ones can do the traditional TTL flash. On the other hand, if you want P-TTL, High speed sync and wireless flash, AF360FGZ is your only choice. Depending on your application, it may be worth the extra expense. -- --Lawrence Kwan--SMS Info Service/Ringtone Convertor--PGP:finger/www-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.vex.net/~lawrence/ -Key ID:0x6D23F3C4--
smc 28-80
I find two lenses 28-80 listed in Photodo Pentax lens test as below: SMC-A 28-80/3.5-4.5 rating 2.1 SMC-F 28-80/3.5-4.5 rating 3.3 Does it mean that SMC-F 28-80 is far better than SMC-A 28-80 as above? Thanks Swades Get Your Private, Free E-mail from Indiatimes at http://email.indiatimes.com Buy the best in Movies at http://www.videos.indiatimes.com Bid for for Air Tickets @ Re.1 on Air Sahara Flights. Just log on to http://airsahara.indiatimes.com and Bid Now !
without a 360gz flash how do i get a flash sync of 1/500 or higher
is there any way?
Re: New lenses (was Re: KAF3 lens mount already here?)
At 10:05 11.3.2003 -0500, caveman wrote: Antti-Pekka Virjonen wrote: Why would you want a sharp portrait lens anyway ? I bet the FA 135/2.8 is too sharp for those really good portraits... My reasoning is that there are many ways to soften a sharp image (optical filters on lens, photoshop, lab manip or just use an 1-hour lab with poorly calibrated machine) but it's impossible to to get more, crisp details from a soft image. Regarding the really good portraits: several months ago our very own Saskatchewan Bill had a beautiful portrait on PUG: http://pug.komkon.org/02jun/virginia.html I was curious how he managed to get that gorgeous skin rendition, while having superb textures and details. His answer: good make-up artist. Note that he was using an 100mm macro, which is the sharpest lens that one may use for portraits. Cheers, caveman Ok, I understand :-) I was just puzzled when you listed all those very sharp lenses and then said the FA 135/2.8 is a bit soft... well, this is true compared to the FA 100/2.8 macro at close range shooting. Actually, I have made my best portraits (not actually set-up portraits but more like candids) with the A* 85/1.4 and A* 135/1.8. I think the 135/1.8 is sharper than my FA 100/2.8 macro. My best models for extra sharp portrait lenses have been old people. Sharp lenses make the models so alive... 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: without a 360gz flash how do i get a flash sync of 1/500 or higher
At 17:03 12.3.2003 +1030, you wrote: is there any way? With a Pentax 6x7 leaf shutter lens and adapter to 35mm you should get 1/500 (?) Not very practical and it would be cheaper to get the 360gz... 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: The really difficult question
Hi! I must join Peter Alling here. Somehow my lenses cover 28-222 range which is enough for my ability and even has some room for growing. Of course, given three hundred thousand more I would like to get some more fixed focal lenses, since by now I have only two and a half - one 50 mm, one soft focus (70 or so mm) and one macro converter... But even with the very modest stuff I have (at least by PDML measure as I see it) I can take pictures, enjoy the process and even enjoy the results. See - I can answer difficult questions some times bg. --- Boris Liberman www.geocities.com/dunno57 www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625
Re: New lenses (was Re: KAF3 lens mount already here?)
Sharp lenses make the models so alive... Yet so angry... regards, Alan Chan _ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: Pentax SMC A 35-135mm
Hi Levi, on 11 Mar 03 you wrote in pentax.list: What I know of this lens that it is extremely rare. Yes it is. Anybody have one? How is it? How often does one pop up on the market and what does it cost? I have one and you might be lucky - I want to sell it ;-) It is in mint condition, (see www.mycroft.de/sale.html) and it is a really great lens. It is sharp, contrasty and has a very solid built quality. I'm asking for 145,- Euro plus shipping (I'm living in Germany). Cheers, Heiko
Re: New lenses (was Re: KAF3 lens mount already here?)
At 23:19 11.3.2003 -0800, you wrote: Sharp lenses make the models so alive... Yet so angry... regards, Alan Chan :-) 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: Pentax SMC A 35-135mm
At 08:22 12.3.2003 +0100, you wrote: I have one and you might be lucky - I want to sell it ;-) It is in mint condition, (see www.mycroft.de/sale.html) and it is a really great lens. It is sharp, contrasty and has a very solid built quality. I'm asking for 145,- Euro plus shipping (I'm living in Germany). Cheers, Heiko That looks like the SMC A 28-105, not the A 35-135 he was looking for... 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: Pentax SMC A 35-135mm
I am also interested in other, non Pentax brand options. Then you might be interested in the Tamron 35-135/3.5-4.2 (sorry guys, I know I shouldn't post eBay auctions here, but this is the only pic I have found)? http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=2916542261category=707 regards, Alan Chan _ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
Re: Pentax SMC A 35-135mm
At 09:26 12.3.2003 +0200, I wrote: That looks like the SMC A 28-105, not the A 35-135 he was looking for... Should have been: That looks like the SMC A 35-105, not the A 35-135 he was looking for... 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: Pentax SMC A 35-135mm
Ups - I was a bit too fast as I didn't read your subject line correct. So see my offered 35-105 as good alternative to the 35-135 you've asked for ;-) Cheers, Heiko
Re: Pentax SMC A 35-135mm
Hi Antti-Pekka, on 12 Mar 03 you wrote in pentax.list: That looks like the SMC A 28-105, not the A 35-135 he was looking for... Should have been: That looks like the SMC A 35-105, not the A 35-135 he was looking for... LOL. Great confusion here ;-) But you're right, of course. Cheers, Heiko
Re: Re[2]: Diaphragm actuator precision survey
Well I'm glad you brought all this up as I've learned a bunch from all this. I tend to notice problems that I am not supposed to, or I don't want to. But I do notice them somehow... :( Is f11 to f13 a full or half stop? 1/2 I think? f11 f16 is 1 stop difference, f22 is another. regards, Alan Chan _ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
Re: The really difficult question
How many of you think you have enough equipment? You may upgrade or transition to another medium or format, but the quantity and class of hardware suits you. Who will face the hardest question of all? :) Good question, I have never thought about this. Let me check with eBay and see if I'll find the answer... :) regards, Alan Chan _ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: The really difficult question
When I have one of everything Pentax made, then that will be enough! (Well, maybe one A*135/1.8 to use and another to keep in the closet.) Very good point! One set to use regularly, one set as backup, and of course, the 3rd set is 100% brand new and for private collection only. Ah... I feel so great... regards, Alan Chan _ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: The really difficult question
I have everything I can use and most of the things I want. The * ist D will almost certainly be my next purchase and I have already bought a 35f2 to go on it. With 5 MXs, an LX, MZ5n and Spotmatic I have 35mm well and truly covered and there aren't any real gaps in my lense lineup considering what I normally shoot. I may upgrade my 6x7 in the future (add a 67 or 67II), but for now it is good enough. My Speedgraphic is still good enough for 4x5 and I am using my Instantograph as well now that I have worked out what speed the old roller-blind shutter is working at. If I had the room I would be looking at monoblocs and backdrops, but they won't fit in my loungeroom so that is that. As for things I want but won't really use, well there's always a 1000f8 or perhaps complete the full set of 500's, but nothing much that is remotely sensible. Oh yeah, there is still that Battery Grip M to go with the MX motordrive and 250 shot back, but hopefuilly eBay will provide... Paul Ewins Melbourne, Australia - Original Message - From: collinb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 12:36 PM Subject: The really difficult question How many of you think you have enough equipment? You may upgrade or transition to another medium or format, but the quantity and class of hardware suits you. Who will face the hardest question of all? :)
Re: The really difficult question
On 11 Mar 2003 at 20:36, collinb wrote: How many of you think you have enough equipment? You may upgrade or transition to another medium or format, but the quantity and class of hardware suits you. Who will face the hardest question of all? :) I have too much gear (I have recently sold a lot of it off) and the only new gear that I really need is a full frame DSLR, how ironic. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html Pentax user since 1986 PDMLer since 1998
Re: smc 28-80
I find two lenses 28-80 listed in Photodo Pentax lens test as below: SMC-A 28-80/3.5-4.5 rating 2.1 SMC-F 28-80/3.5-4.5 rating 3.3 Does it mean that SMC-F 28-80 is far better than SMC-A 28-80 as above? These 2 lenses should be optically identical. 'A' lenses were usually better built than 'F' lenses so the 'A' should score higher. It could be just another mistake they made (like SMC-A 70-200/4 which doesn't exist)? I don't know. regards, Alan Chan _ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
Question about megapixels
I was talking to someone far more knowledgeable than myself and he was saying that there is a difference in the quality of the pixel rating between professional digital cameras and the garden variety point and shoot digitals. Something to do with algorithms. For example, would a Nikon D1 or D1H with less than 3 megapixels produce better photos than a Kodak DX3900 with 3.3 megapixels? Sometimes it's hard to understand why some of the professional digitals are so expensive when their megapixels are so ordinary. Thanks. Stephen
