Re: PESO: The Lake
On 27/7/04, Bruce Dayton, discombobulated, offered: This image was taken a couple of years ago while we were traversing a portion of Lake Powell in southern Utah. I was standing there driving the boat and saw this perspective. I had to shoot one handed while still steering the boat. www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/0093-05.htm Taken with a PZ-1p, F 17-28 fisheye zoom, Konica Impressa 50 Enjoy, Bruce Nice shot Bruce - pity about the vignetting ;-) Is that the famous London Bridge by any chance or have I got the wrong lake? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: PAW Another damn flower v2
In his former life as a egzotic dancer Rob Studdert wrote on 28.07.04 4:44: Just a quick side view of the flower I posted the other day, different light and perspective sure makes a different image. Same actual flower, same lens: http://members.ozemail.com.au/~audiob/temp/_igp5262.jpg The image itself would be just beutiful, front flower composes nicely with background ones. What didn't like however are blown highlights :-( -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Way OT: Armstrong Best Ever? was: Lance gained !!
On 27/7/04, frank theriault, discombobulated, offered: Actually, my cat is fat, stupid, pretty ugly and has few, if any redeeming values. She wakes me up every day at 6:00 am for food, even if I've been out late the night before. She sleeps with me so I can't ever get a good night's sleep. Forget the job applications buddy - there's a great subscription-only web site here. Maybe you could call it 'Purrfection' ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
100/4 Macro?
Anyone know if this is the same optically as the SMC-M 100/4 macro? Can't find this one mentioned anywhere. http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/100macro.jpg Don
Re: PESO: The Lake
In his former life as a egzotic dancer Bruce Dayton wrote on 28.07.04 4:02: This image was taken a couple of years ago while we were traversing a portion of Lake Powell in southern Utah. I was standing there driving the boat and saw this perspective. I had to shoot one handed while still steering the boat. www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/0093-05.htm Taken with a PZ-1p, F 17-28 fisheye zoom, Konica Impressa 50 Impressive (not because it was taken using Konica Impressa ;-)! Looking at this I just want my vacation more than before! Arrrgh! Why you did this to me? :-) I almost feel gust of the wind running by the boat... -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: PESO: The Lake
Thanks Cotty. What vignetting? That was my shade cover on top of the boat - I actually like it there in the pic, sort of emphasizes the fisheye effect. Wrong lake for the bridge. Right river, but I was much further north. Lake Powell, then Lake Mead, then Lake Havasu where the bridge is. -- Best regards, Bruce Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 12:48:12 AM, you wrote: C On 27/7/04, Bruce Dayton, discombobulated, offered: This image was taken a couple of years ago while we were traversing a portion of Lake Powell in southern Utah. I was standing there driving the boat and saw this perspective. I had to shoot one handed while still steering the boat. www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/0093-05.htm Taken with a PZ-1p, F 17-28 fisheye zoom, Konica Impressa 50 Enjoy, Bruce C Nice shot Bruce - pity about the vignetting ;-) C Is that the famous London Bridge by any chance or have I got the wrong lake? C Cheers, C Cotty C ___/\__ C || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche C ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps C _
Re: PESO: The Lake
On 28/7/04, Bruce Dayton, discombobulated, offered: Thanks Cotty. What vignetting? That was my shade cover on top of the boat - I actually like it there in the pic, sort of emphasizes the fisheye effect. Wrong lake for the bridge. Right river, but I was much further north. Lake Powell, then Lake Mead, then Lake Havasu where the bridge is. I was joshing about the vignetting - but I actually thought it was the arch of a bridge! Of course, I can see it is part if the boat now. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: Scratch on rear element
J. C. O'Connell wrote: stopping way down just makes it a larger percentage of lens surface in use. Are you sure that's the case for the rear element? S
Re: 100/4 Macro?
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004, Don Sanderson wrote: Anyone know if this is the same optically as the SMC-M 100/4 macro? Can't find this one mentioned anywhere. http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/100macro.jpg A bayonet SMC lens with no -M or -A designation is commonly known as a K lens. For all the rest. Boj has the answer :-))) http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/short-tele/index.html Kostas
Re: Scratch on rear element
On 28 Jul 2004 at 10:20, Steve Jolly wrote: J. C. O'Connell wrote: stopping way down just makes it a larger percentage of lens surface in use. Are you sure that's the case for the rear element? I'm not sure if it is the case but stopping down sure makes any crud on the rear elements (or film plane) more visible. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: 100/4 Macro?
Don Sanderson a écrit : Anyone know if this is the same optically as the SMC-M 100/4 macro? Can't find this one mentioned anywhere. http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/100macro.jpg Don SMC Pentax Macro is a K seire lens, before the SMC M . Non listed by BDimitrov ! Michel
RE: PESO Flowers
I mainly agree with Boris except I actually prefer the BW one. But I'd like better the BW being a bit brighter as the top of the pic is quite dark. But I quite like it. Thibouille -Message d'origine- De : Boris Liberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Envoyé : mercredi 28 juillet 2004 6:39 À : Don Sanderson Objet : Re: PESO Flowers Hi! DS Here' one I took a couple of weeks ago. DS It's technically pretty bad and I wasn't going to post it. DS But my eye keeps wandering to the print for some reason. DS I think maybe I like the BW version better. DS See what you think. DS http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/Flower.htm Don, the color version is a little bit better than the b/w one. Still in my opinion both are just average. You see, there is a path that eye follows that is made by the flowers. Path from the front bottom to the top middle. But there is nothing except darkness at the end of that path. And the bright flower on the left which pops out does not add anything. So, the whole composition is confusing, at least to me. Please don't be upset or offended as I mean no such thing. HTH. Boris ([EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Scratch on rear element
Thanks JCO, just waiting for some more opinions before I try it (don't have any junk lenses! I'll have a look for a junk filter...) re stopping down, I think it does mean that less of the rear element is used. Just tested it with a lens that has a bit of dust on it (so I could see where the light went). David stopping way down just makes it a larger percentage of lens surface in use. Are you sure that's the case for the rear element? S J. C. O'Connell wrote: Just touch it with the tip of a black permanent marker then lightly wipe with a alcohol moistened tissue not pressing hard enuff to remove the ink from in the scratch. try on a junk lens first (scratch it if you have to) to get the hang of it. I did this on a big LF lens that had several nicks and the lens worked fine with the blacked out nicks. The middle of the lens is no worse than anywhere else except that stopping down does not eliminate it and stopping way down just makes it a larger percentage of lens surface in use. JCO -Original Message- From: David Nelson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 12:57 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Scratch on rear element G'day folks, I recently got an A* 300/4 for a great price in 'bargain' condition, due to a miniscule nick in the centre of the rear element. As I said, it's tiny, not even a milimetre long. I've not noticed any effects in photos taken with it, but such things are supposed to reduce contrast because they scatter light all over the film. I've heard of a fix where the scratch is filled with black ink or paint - the light is therefore stopped rather than scattered. Now, I'm interested in this procedure, but can't find any info about how I should do it. If it's foolproof I'll probably give it a go, but if it is a bit tricky and I risk damaging the lens, I'd let it lie. So has anyone done this and can give me any advice? Any horror stories about ruining lenses in this attempt? Anyone want to tell me to stop being so anal? q-: Thanks, David
RE: Dunno if you'll like....
Thanks to all for your very nice words.
To partly ('cos I don't remember the rest) answer the 'how to do such thing'
question, I'll say that when softness is more important than sharpness,
sometime a non-smc lens is your friend :) In this case, the standard P30t
kit lens, a Pentax A 28-80mm 1:3.5-4.5
Also, the other half of the room (behind me) has no white walls but wall
covered with varnished wood and I didn't use any flash. I think that the
main reason for the 'redish' colours.
I should add that my wife turned red when I told her the comments some of
you made about her :D Unfortunately my camera was not with me at that
instant...
Regards,
Thibouille
Ps: sorry for the rough English...
Re: 1/2 OT: Sigma Tamron 14/2.8 ?
In his former life as a egzotic dancer Alan Chan wrote on 28.07.04 10:14: I suppose this is not entirely off topic because I am considering to buy one for my Pentax film cameras (since an affordable K/A15/3.5 is impossible). However, there is no review I could find about the Tamron, other than the pretty low score (2.6) from Photodo. There are many happy Sigma users but someone who owned both said the Tamron was optically better, while Sigma should be used at f11 but had better built quality. So, anyone here actually used any of these lenses? I am particularly interested to know the light-fall-off issue (gone at which f-stop?) and wide open sharpness. Most of the users give more praise to Tamron. Accidentally I have German foto-magazin with me, so if you want I can scan and send you test of this Tamron (it got 9.0 for optics, while Sigma 8.4). -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: 100/4 Macro?
The SMC Pentax Macro is listed by Boz at www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/. His site shows six variants of 100/4 with the same optical formula: SMCP, SMCP-M, SMCP-A, SMCP-M dental, SMCP-A Dental and SMCP Bellows. Jim www.jcolwell.ca
Re: Scratch on rear element
I have a SMCP-A 50/1.7 with a very small chip near the centre of the rear element. It normally has no effect, but sometimes 'lights up' when the sun is in-picture and produces a pattern of reflected hot spots (not flare, but certainly related). I plan to do a resolution test of this lens and two other SMCP-A 50/1.7, before and after the 'black marker' fix on the damaged one. Jim www.jcolwell.ca
OT: BBC Street photograph of the year
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/3927869.stm Not my thing - wasn't really keen on any of them that much, but may be of interest to our 'street people'.
WTB - K15mm 3.5
If anyone is thinking of selling an SMC K 15mm f/3.5 lens in the future, please email me off list. Discretion assured. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: OT: BBC Street photograph of the year
On 28/7/04, Rob Brigham, discombobulated, offered: http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/3927869.stm Not my thing - wasn't really keen on any of them that much, but may be of interest to our 'street people'. I like 5, 6, 8, 11, 13. 5 the best. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 200/2.8
I am casually looking for a good 200 lens at a good price. I really like underrated stuff. The 200/4 is not considered great and the K200/2.5 is far too expensive (and rare) for me to contemplate. I see that ebay occasionally has Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 180/2.5 (both the old zebra and the newer version) and a few Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 200/2.8. Has anybody got any experience with these lenses? They are old implementations (I don't think I can get a K-mount specimen) of even older designs (Olympia, 1936, I believe). Do these still hold their own? Eg, is there a point shooting these at full aperture, or does on just bare the weight of the 2.8 glass for a lens useful from (say) 5.6 onwards? Asking before I get involved in an overseas ebay transaction for a bad lens, Kostas
Re: 100/4 Macro?
Michel Carrère-Gée a écrit : Don Sanderson a écrit : Anyone know if this is the same optically as the SMC-M 100/4 macro? Can't find this one mentioned anywhere. http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/100macro.jpg Don SMC Pentax Macro is a K seire lens, before the SMC M . Non listed by BDimitrov ! Errare humanum est. Listed by B.Dimitrov ! http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/short-tele/K100f4-Macro.html
PESO: The Lake
Very nice, Bruce! It does show a vacation spirit. Wish I had been there with you. I understand that the Pentax zoom fisheye was/is a good lens. Do you still have it? John Power Racehorse in the Desert -Original Message- From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 1:00 AM To: Cotty Subject: Re: PESO: The Lake Thanks Cotty. What vignetting? That was my shade cover on top of the boat - I actually like it there in the pic, sort of emphasizes the fisheye effect. Wrong lake for the bridge. Right river, but I was much further north. Lake Powell, then Lake Mead, then Lake Havasu where the bridge is. -- Best regards, Bruce Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 12:48:12 AM, you wrote: C On 27/7/04, Bruce Dayton, discombobulated, offered: This image was taken a couple of years ago while we were traversing a portion of Lake Powell in southern Utah. I was standing there driving the boat and saw this perspective. I had to shoot one handed while still steering the boat. www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/0093-05.htm Taken with a PZ-1p, F 17-28 fisheye zoom, Konica Impressa 50 Enjoy, Bruce C Nice shot Bruce - pity about the vignetting ;-) C Is that the famous London Bridge by any chance or have I got the wrong lake? C Cheers, C Cotty C ___/\__ C || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche C ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps C _
Re: WTB - K15mm 3.5
What do you usually buy Cotty? Norm Cotty wrote: Discretion assured.
Re: Scratch on rear element
Send it to Pentax for replacement of the rear element. It probably cost about $50 and well worth it. I did that on the A* 135/1.8. Except for large diametre ED glass, individual lens elements are dirt cheap. Pål
Re: WTB - K15mm 3.5
On 28/7/04, Norm Baugher, discombobulated, offered: What do you usually buy Cotty? Norm Har, nobody here sells that sorta stuff ;-) Some people don't like the fact they want to sell / are selling / have sold broadcast about - just hinting that I can keep my mouth shut when I need to ...unlike some...! Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 200/2.8
You will be loosing automatic aperture, which can be a pain or not. It was for me, but then, I shot them mostly wide open. I would advise the same, as it's a PITA to close the lenses manually before shooting (at least the 180 has a pre-set aperture, which works better than the 200) 180 is great lens, but due its age, it can have lower contrast (it also needs a really big lenshood), until f/4.5-5.6. Details are still very well rendered, but the maximum black rendered is lighter. Depends on light and lenshood a bit, and stopping down helps. It's big and heavy. This lens is great even on Pentax 67, without any problems. It does have a very nice and pleasing character, making me use it time to time on a DSLR even if I have a good 80-200/2.8 zoom. Do get the MC version, though. It's a Sonnar design, derived from Tessar, something that can still hold its own pretty well (Leitz Elmarit 2.8/50, as well as Voigtlander Cosina 3.5/50 Heliar, all counted among the best lenses ever, are derived from Tessar designs) 200 is said to be even better, it is an gaussian design, Biotar in fact. That is, it bears similarities to Planars of Western Zeiss. It's supposed to be very good as well, but I never tried the lens myself with film in camera. Both of the lenses are true longfocus lenses, not telephotos. That means that they are actually _faster_ at closest focus than a telephoto of the same 2.8 aperture. The 180 also has some of the nicest character I have seen. The fact that it covers much larger image circle means there is little vignetting. However, they ain't no SMC. But their low element count offsets that a little, as there aren't so many reflections as in a big telephoto. However, their large front elements do need a long lenshood. Otherwise, overall lowering of maximum black will occur. Carl Zeiss Jena's multicoating (MC mark) is pretty good, but not up to SMC or similar. If you are interested, I can send you a file from my 6MP DSLR shot with the 2.8/180 Sonnar. Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: the prettiest sibling!
Ryan wrote: Found excellent pictures of the LX Limited Y2K Edition! (with a pretty lens on it too...) http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/pentaxlx/pentaxy2k/index.htm http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/pentaxlx/pentaxy2k/htmls/2.htm Gosh! I wish I had one of those Pål
Re: PESO: The Lake
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:42:11 +0400, Boris Liberman wrote: Fascinating. Recently I had a chance to hold Zenitar 16/2.8 fisheye lens. Very compact and very fisheye g... I am not sure I would want to try this myself as I am still learning the mere 24 mm focal length... My PUG entry for this month was taken with the Zenitar, if you're looking for an example. I shot the best part of a roll in that cemetary with that lens. It's tough to use to good effect and tougher to keep my feet, knees, fingers, and knuckles out of the frame. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
RE: 100/4 Macro?
Thanks all, I didn't see it listed there the first time either. Have to stop looking at this stuff at 3 in the morning! Don -Original Message- From: Michel Carrère-Gée [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 6:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: 100/4 Macro? Michel Carrère-Gée a écrit : Don Sanderson a écrit : Anyone know if this is the same optically as the SMC-M 100/4 macro? Can't find this one mentioned anywhere. http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/100macro.jpg Don SMC Pentax Macro is a K seire lens, before the SMC M . Non listed by BDimitrov ! Errare humanum est. Listed by B.Dimitrov ! http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/short-tele/K100f4-Macro.html
Question-LargeFormatEnlargements
So, Rob, William, JCO, et al - How much of an enlargement do you feel you can get with landscapes from 35mm before you're disappointed? 5x7? 8x10? Surely not 11x14, or so I would think. I've only ever shot 35mm, so I'd like to know your personal experience.
Re: Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 200/2.8
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004, Frantisek Vlcek wrote: telephoto of the same 2.8 aperture. The 180 also has some of the nicest character I have seen. The fact that it covers much larger image circle means there is little vignetting. Many thanks for the very detailed answer. Can you elaborate on the passage above a bit, please: what do you mean covers much larger image circle? Are you using a Pentacon 6 lens? I was think M42 implementations. If you are interested, I can send you a file from my 6MP DSLR shot with the 2.8/180 Sonnar. Yes please :-) Regards, Kostas
Re: PESO: The Lake
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004, Doug Franklin wrote: My PUG entry for this month was taken with the Zenitar, if you're looking for an example. Does the colour of the poppies match your recollection of them? Regards, Kostas
Re: 35 v. MF v. LF (was Film vs Digita)
My 6x7 works fine for landscapes, probably not as cool as LF, but the camera in general is more versatile i.e. shooting situations. And what do you mean by movements? My 6x7 has a lot of stuff that moves on it! (buy a shift lens?) Norm David Mann wrote: On Jul 28, 2004, at 6:11 AM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: sure you CAN do landscape on a P67, but WHY? There are other reasons why I didn't buy a 4x5 rig but the ongoing cost is the main one. It's a pity really as the lack of movements on a Pentax 67 can be a real hassle.
Re: Question-LargeFormatEnlargements
--- Lon Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, Rob, William, JCO, et al - How much of an enlargement do you feel you can get with landscapes from 35mm before you're disappointed? 5x7? 8x10? Surely not 11x14, or so I would think. I've only ever shot 35mm, so I'd like to know your personal experience. the maths* suggest that around 12inches along the long side is the limit, and I have had some good prints from Fuji Velvia of technical shots enlarged to this size. Landscape depends a lot on the subject and the viewer, one chap I know has a huge print of a local beach at sunset over his mantle, must be 3x2 feet at least, looks fine, very attractive, of course, if you get up close you can almost count the grains... Use a tripod, fine grained film, best lenses at optimum aperture (8,11??) get out when there is not too much wind, find a decent processor, (not always easy) and the results should be useable up to 12 or 15 inches. *50lpmm = 100dpmm 100x36 = 3600, 3600/300dpi = 12inches... Cheers from Tom who has been far to busy doing music and stuff for the 50th aniversary of Sidmouth Folk Festival to do more than take a few snaps with the *istD let alone finish setting up his darkroom and take some 5x7s ___ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: the prettiest sibling!
--- Pål_Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ryan wrote: Found excellent pictures of the LX Limited Y2K Edition! (with a pretty lens on it too...) Help Help!!! I am drowning in a pool of lust induced DROOL! ___ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 200/2.8
KK Many thanks for the very detailed answer. Can you elaborate on the KK passage above a bit, please: what do you mean covers much larger KK image circle? Are you using a Pentacon 6 lens? I was think M42 KK implementations. Lenses have an circle of acceptable* coverage, that is inherent in the lens design, and doesn't change with focal length. (*: acceptable means that the image is still usable, while the lens might still show more of the world outside this circle, it will be too much blurred or darker to be usable). For example, the 2.8/180mm Sonnar design has an angle of coverage of about 30 degrees. When scaled to 50mm lens, it will still cover just 30 degrees, the same when scaled to 300mm lens. The 1.5/50mm Sonnar is somewhat different design, made to cover ~50 degrees, thus making it a normal lens. 30 degrees with 180mm lens means that the 6x7cm film area still fits in the circle produced by the lens (if not obstructed by internal baffle or the lens barrel). The Olympia Sonnar, the 2.8/180mm was originally produced for Contax rangefinder camera (which could still focus a 2.8/180mm lens at longer distances like sports somewhat accurately!), but it was made so it covers even medium format film with ease. The second version (black, with large protruding tripod foot, pre-set aperture) actually had unscrewing rear mount which you could exchange for many other mounts. The third version, sold as 6x6cm lens for Pentacon 6, is still optically the very same, just in a barrel for P6. Longfocus lenses (whose physical length is the same as their focal length) often do have much larger coverage then the telephoto type lenses of same focal length (telephoto types have much shorter physical length then their focal length, extreme example is the mirror lens, which is 500mm focal length but much much shorter physically). Some longfocus lenses for 35mm film were often adapted for larger formats. However, the 2.8/200mm CZJ lens, is made specifically for 35mm film, and has (supposedly) less coverage. Anyway, one would have to change the barrel to avoid vignetting on larger format. If you are interested, I can send you a file from my 6MP DSLR shot with the 2.8/180 Sonnar. KK Yes please :-) I will try to find a good one, at low ISO. Focusing that lens on APS dslr is a little hard (the Nikon has pretty bad viewfinder). Best regards, Frantisek Vlcek
Re: 100/4 Macro?
I think they are kind of rare. I have no specific information. Generally, SMC Pentax (K) lenses are considered to be slightly better than the smaller SMC Pentax M lenses model for model as they were suposedly optimised for performance while the M lenses were optimised for size. -- Don Sanderson wrote: Anyone know if this is the same optically as the SMC-M 100/4 macro? Can't find this one mentioned anywhere. http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/100macro.jpg Don -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
the prettiest sibling!
Found excellent pictures of the LX Limited Y2K Edition! (with a pretty lens on it too...) http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/pentaxlx/pentaxy2k/index.htm http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/pentaxlx/pentaxy2k/htmls/2.htm I told Boz and maybe he'll arrange to put it on the site. The old pic is disgraceful! Oooh... Ryan
Re: PESO: The Lake
Hi! This image was taken a couple of years ago while we were traversing a portion of Lake Powell in southern Utah. I was standing there driving the boat and saw this perspective. I had to shoot one handed while still steering the boat. www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/0093-05.htm Taken with a PZ-1p, F 17-28 fisheye zoom, Konica Impressa 50 Fascinating. Recently I had a chance to hold Zenitar 16/2.8 fisheye lens. Very compact and very fisheye g... I am not sure I would want to try this myself as I am still learning the mere 24 mm focal length... Thanks for the lesson. Boris
Re: PAW Another damn flower v2
On 28 Jul 2004 at 9:51, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: The image itself would be just beutiful, front flower composes nicely with background ones. What didn't like however are blown highlights :-( I should have added that it was not a particularly well crafted shot, it was posted more to indicate the depth of the flower. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
1/2 OT: Sigma Tamron 14/2.8 ?
I suppose this is not entirely off topic because I am considering to buy one for my Pentax film cameras (since an affordable K/A15/3.5 is impossible). However, there is no review I could find about the Tamron, other than the pretty low score (2.6) from Photodo. There are many happy Sigma users but someone who owned both said the Tamron was optically better, while Sigma should be used at f11 but had better built quality. So, anyone here actually used any of these lenses? I am particularly interested to know the light-fall-off issue (gone at which f-stop?) and wide open sharpness. Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan _ Powerful Parental Controls Let your child discover the best the Internet has to offer. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-capage=byoa/premxAPID=1994DI=1034SU=http://hotmail.com/encaHL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN® Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*.
Re: PESO: The Lake
I wish I was there now. I have to wait until next summer to make it there again. When I viewed this at full screen on my monitor, it really made me feel like I was there. Bruce Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 12:59:21 AM, you wrote: SP In his former life as a egzotic dancer Bruce Dayton wrote on 28.07.04 4:02: This image was taken a couple of years ago while we were traversing a portion of Lake Powell in southern Utah. I was standing there driving the boat and saw this perspective. I had to shoot one handed while still steering the boat. www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/0093-05.htm Taken with a PZ-1p, F 17-28 fisheye zoom, Konica Impressa 50 SP Impressive (not because it was taken using Konica Impressa ;-)! Looking at SP this I just want my vacation more than before! Arrrgh! Why you did this to SP me? :-) I almost feel gust of the wind running by the boat...
Re: 35 v. MF v. LF (was Film vs Digita)
- Original Message - From: Norm Baugher Subject: Re: 35 v. MF v. LF (was Film vs Digita) My 6x7 works fine for landscapes, probably not as cool as LF, but the camera in general is more versatile i.e. shooting situations. And what do you mean by movements? My 6x7 has a lot of stuff that moves on it! (buy a shift lens?) Being able to tilt the film plane in relation to the lens is a real plus for securing more depth of field. William Robb
Re: Question-LargeFormatEnlargements
On 28 Jul 2004 at 13:49, Tom Addison wrote: --- Lon Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, Rob, William, JCO, et al - How much of an enlargement do you feel you can get with landscapes from 35mm before you're disappointed? 5x7? 8x10? Surely not 11x14, or so I would think. I've only ever shot 35mm, so I'd like to know your personal experience. the maths* suggest that around 12inches along the long side is the limit, and I have had some good prints from Fuji Velvia of technical shots enlarged to this size. Landscape depends a lot on the subject and the viewer, one chap I know has a huge print of a local beach at sunset over his mantle, must be 3x2 feet at least, looks fine, very attractive, of course, if you get up close you can almost count the grains... Handheld shots using the A16/2.8 fisheye on K25 at 910mm/34 on the long side with pretty impressive resolution. Cheers from Tom who has been far to busy doing music and stuff for the 50th aniversary of Sidmouth Folk Festival to do more than take a few snaps with the *istD let alone finish setting up his darkroom and take some 5x7s I've got some nice 67 Provia slides of Sidmouth Beach early morning, even managed to catch a full rainbow with my 43mm :-) Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Way OT: Armstrong Best Ever? was: Lance gained !!
--- mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, frank theriault wrote: Actually, my cat is fat, stupid, pretty ugly and has few, if any redeeming values. She wakes me up every day at 6:00 am for food, even if I've been out late the night before. She sleeps with me so I can't ever get a good night's sleep. She needs more exercise. You should buy her a bicycle. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=3738151135category=10164#ebayphotohosting mike Yeah, We could go on rides together... vbg -frank = The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
PAW - Tractor Pull
Last night at the Rockbridge County Fair: http://home.wlu.edu/~desjardins/ This was the the antique tractor pull, and you're looking at some of the boys watching the competition.
Re: PESO: The Lake
--- Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nice shot Bruce - that the famous London Bridge by any chance or have I got the wrong lake? Cotty, I think that's Lake Havasu (sp?). I remember when I was a kid, we'd get these glossy things in the mail, exhorting my parents to buy land on Lake Havasu. They kept going on and on about London Bridge being there. I didn't get it. I still don't. I thought it pretty bizarre. Still do. cheers, frank = The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
Some of that cost is offset but lower flim use. With the larger format you tend to work far more carefully and once you are experienced enough to really know what you are doing film use can approach 1:1. I usually think of it in film units. e.g. 1-8x10 = 2-5x7 = 4-4x5 = 8 t0 12-120 = 36-35mm. That means the actual cost of all of them film wise is about the same. Of course if a film unit costs you $48nz in 4x5 and $20nz in 6x7 as you indicate then you have a problem. I have to develop my own 4x5 bw now because the few places I can get it processed know they have no competetion and charge $5us a sheet. It actually costs me about 25 cents a sheet to do it myself and I do not process with clips which punch holes in the negative. (Maybe there is a business opportunity there? No, not in a town as small as this one.) -- David Mann wrote: On Jul 28, 2004, at 6:11 AM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: sure you CAN do landscape on a P67, but WHY? In my case, it's because 4x5 is very expensive. Last time I checked the film and processing costs NZ$12 per sheet. Compare that with 6x7 at NZ$2 a shot, and 35mm at about NZ$1. There are other reasons why I didn't buy a 4x5 rig but the ongoing cost is the main one. It's a pity really as the lack of movements on a Pentax 67 can be a real hassle. Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/ -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: 100/4 Macro?
graywolf a écrit : I think they are kind of rare. I have no specific information. Generally, SMC Pentax (K) lenses are considered to be slightly better than the smaller SMC Pentax M lenses model for model as they were suposedly optimised for performance while the M lenses were optimised for size. -- Don Sanderson wrote: Anyone know if this is the same optically as the SMC-M 100/4 macro? Can't find this one mentioned anywhere. http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/100macro.jpg I believe that since 1964, with the 4/100mm Bellows Takumar (not SMC), until 1989 with SMC A 4/100mm, all lenses use the same optical formula: 5 lenses in 3 groups. Michel
Re: 35 v. MF v. LF (was Film vs Digita)
My 4x5 is somewhere in the garage in a box after moving last summer. Haven't used it in years but after reading that C-41 processing is about as easy as E-6 my interest has been piqued. And I can use my PENTAX spotmeter or LX as a meter! Can anyone recommend a service to CLA and test view camera lens/shutters? Thanks, = jb `:^)
Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004, graywolf wrote: which punch holes in the negative. (Maybe there is a business opportunity there? No, not in a town as small as this one.) Mail order? Kostas
Re: OT: BBC Street photograph of the year
--- Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/3927869.stm Not my thing - wasn't really keen on any of them that much, but may be of interest to our 'street people'. Some pretty good stuff, but I wouldn't say anything earthshattering. Except maybe that kid in Phnom Pen. That one's very good. The others? Well, I've seen better on this list, either PAW's or PUG's. I enjoyed the link, though, Rob. Thanks. -frank = The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Re: PESO: The Lake
On 28/7/04, frank theriault, discombobulated, offered: I think that's Lake Havasu (sp?). I remember when I was a kid, we'd get these glossy things in the mail, exhorting my parents to buy land on Lake Havasu. They kept going on and on about London Bridge being there. I didn't get it. I still don't. I thought it pretty bizarre. Still do. Here ya go Frank: http://www.outwestnewspaper.com/london.html Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: OT: BBC Street photograph of the year
--- frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some pretty good stuff, but I wouldn't say anything earthshattering. Except maybe that kid in Phnom Pen. That one's very good. The others? Well, I've seen better on this list, either PAW's or PUG's. I enjoyed the link, though, Rob. Thanks. Went back to look again, and I also really like the child and the water fountain. That one's good, too. Some of them are growing on me... g -frank = The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Boone PDML (almost)
ERNReed, and family, was in Boone. She called last night about 9 as they came into town. I gave them directions to the Holiday Inn, and we arranged to meet this morning. About 3AM I woke up coughing, sneezing, my head aching, cramps in my legs and stomach, etc. I had to call them and cancel (about 30% because I feel like hell, and 70% because I did not want to give their kids whatever bug this was). I feel bad about it because they made Boone a stop on their vacation trip mainly just to meet me. I got up at seven to call them. Got dressed to make the call, then afterwards undressed and went back to bed. Does that behavior seem as strange and illogical to others as it does to me? Why do I have to get dressed to talk on the telephone? As events unfolded I had to be here at the apartment anyway as maintenence showed up banging on the door about an hour ago to fix some things need by HUD before renewing he lease. Then he left to get some stuff, and was just back a few minutes ago. Now I can go back to bed. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: Boone PDML (almost)
--- graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ERNReed, and family, was in Boone. She called last night about 9 as they came into town. I gave them directions to the Holiday Inn, and we arranged to meet this morning. About 3AM I woke up coughing, sneezing, my head aching, cramps in my legs and stomach, etc. I had to call them and cancel (about 30% because I feel like hell, and 70% because I did not want to give their kids whatever bug this was). I feel bad about it because they made Boone a stop on their vacation trip mainly just to meet me. snip Sorry you didn't get to meet ERN and the fam, Tom. We don't get to meet list people that often (unless we're lucky enough to live in a big city where several of us live), so it's a great shame that you couldn't rendezvous. Hope you feel better soon. cheers, frank = The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Re: 35 v. MF v. LF (was Film vs Digita)
SK Grimes in NYC seems to have a very good reputation. http://www.skgrimes.com/ johnbailey wrote: My 4x5 is somewhere in the garage in a box after moving last summer. Haven't used it in years but after reading that C-41 processing is about as easy as E-6 my interest has been piqued. And I can use my PENTAX spotmeter or LX as a meter! Can anyone recommend a service to CLA and test view camera lens/shutters? Thanks, = jb `:^) -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: PESO: The Lake
--- Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here ya go Frank: http://www.outwestnewspaper.com/london.html Geez. They even have a Walmart! g -frank = The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
FS: Pentax SMC-M 35mm f/2.0 lens
I finally, finally found an A series 35mm f/2 lens on eBay, so I'm putting my M series one up for sale. I originally purchased it in bargain condition from KEH, which as usual means the glass is beautiful and there's only a bit of visible external wear on the sharp edges of the lens barrel (aperture ring, etc.). Includes front and rear caps. A beautiful compact lens that gives you all the speed you need for available light shooting! $125 plus shipping. Joe -- Joe Wilensky Staff Writer Communication and Marketing Services 1150 Comstock Hall Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853-2601 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel: 607-255-1575 fax: 607-255-9873
Re: Boone PDML (almost)
On 28/7/04, graywolf, discombobulated, offered: I got up at seven to call them. Got dressed to make the call, then afterwards undressed and went back to bed. Does that behavior seem as strange and illogical to others as it does to me? Yes. Why do I have to get dressed to talk on the telephone? Unless it is a videophone, only *you* know the answer to that ;-) get well soon GW Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: PESO: The Lake
On 28/7/04, frank theriault, discombobulated, offered: http://www.outwestnewspaper.com/london.html Geez. They even have a Walmart! LOL. Hey, you need that with an RV. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: Vivitar 2X teleconverer?
Peter J. Alling wrote: Which one? There were a number of vivitar TC's. Good question. How many have there been? All I know is that it's (unfortunately) not the 7-element macro focusing one mentioned by someone else on the list. Toralf Lund wrote: I also saw a used Vivitar 2X teleconverter today. Apart from the conventional wisdom about teleconverters in general, can anyone tell me anything about it? - Toralf
Re: PESO: The Lake
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004, Cotty wrote: I thought it pretty bizarre. Still do. Here ya go Frank: http://www.outwestnewspaper.com/london.html I think the guy is wrong about that particular bridge inspiring the nursery rhyme London Bridge Is Falling Down - I think that was the Mk1 that this one (Mk2) replaced. Still, if you look at the current London Bridge over the Thames (Mk3), it's just a boring pile of concrete, bland even compared with the rather plain Arizona one. You got a good deal there IMHO. Chris
Re: 100/4 Macro?
That is like saying a 1950 Fiat 500, 1957 Ferrari Tessa Rosa, a 1970 Ford Pinto all have a inline 4 cylinder engine. There is a lot of room for variation in performance there, and it does not mean they are exactly the same. A 5 element 3 group lens can very a lot in glass, curves, and spacing. On the other hand they could all be exactly alike. You could not tell from just looking at the generic layout drawings. You would have to have the exact optical specifications, and they are not going to publish those. -- Michel Carrère-Gée wrote: I believe that since 1964, with the 4/100mm Bellows Takumar (not SMC), until 1989 with SMC A 4/100mm, all lenses use the same optical formula: 5 lenses in 3 groups. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: OT: Paypal Class Action
Interestingly enough I received one also . . . mine arrived later at night, after 10:00 Central time zone . . . this must indicate how many people PayPal has to notify. IL Bill On Jul 27, 2004, at 9:25 PM, Alan Chan wrote: I just got one this afternoon but haven't had the time to see what it was. Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan From: Ryan Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PDML [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: OT: Paypal Class Action Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 09:07:01 +1000 I just received a bizarre email from Paypal stating that I might be entitled to a claim in a class action. Anyone else get the same one? If it's a hoax, it looks really well thought out.. Regards, Ryan _ Take charge with a pop-up guard built on patented Microsoft® SmartScreen Technology. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-capage=byoa/ premxAPID=1994DI=1034SU=http://hotmail.com/ encaHL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN® Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*.
Re: WTB - K15mm 3.5
oh god! another lens to be sacrificed in the lab of Dr. Frankencamera! Christian -Original Message- From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Jul 28, 2004 6:57 AM To: pentax list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: WTB - K15mm 3.5 If anyone is thinking of selling an SMC K 15mm f/3.5 lens in the future, please email me off list. Discretion assured. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: SMC-A 1:3.5 35-105--As great as it's supposed to be?
This is interesting: I bought my specimen of this lens from a gentleman who took very good care of his equipment, and there were no signs of damage to the lens. My lens has NEVER maintained focus throughout a zoom. Are you sure it's supposed to do so? Il Bill On Jul 27, 2004, at 9:29 PM, Alan Chan wrote: I would like to add that if the focus did change when zoom, don't be tempted to have it serviced afterward because it is a complex lens to work with (and I think most technicans won't bother to spend enough time to calibrate it properly). Besides, this lens appears on eBay regularly. Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan Thanks Alan, that gives me a couple of good questions to ask the seller. Don _ Scan and help eliminate destructive viruses from your inbound and outbound e-mail and attachments. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-capage=byoa/ premxAPID=1994DI=1034SU=http://hotmail.com/ encaHL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN® Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*.
Re: OT: BBC Street photograph of the year
Is that (number 3) one of tv's? Definitely has his style Christian On 28/7/04, Rob Brigham, discombobulated, offered: http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/3927869.stm
Re: Boone PDML (almost)
Would you be referring to Boone, NC? If so, then wow, the NC mountains just seem to be the PDML hotspot. I very nearly decided to go to school there at ASU, but I ended up here in Cullowhee instead, attending WCU. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Boone PDML (almost)
graywolf wrote: ERNReed, and family, was in Boone. She called last night about 9 as they came into town. I gave them directions to the Holiday Inn, and we arranged to meet this morning. About 3AM I woke up coughing, sneezing, my head aching, cramps in my legs and stomach, etc. Musta been that home made bouillabaisse! I had to call them and cancel (about 30% because I feel like hell, and 70% because I did not want to give their kids whatever bug this was). I feel bad about it because they made Boone a stop on their vacation trip mainly just to meet me. Really sorry to hear that! I got up at seven to call them. Got dressed to make the call, then afterwards undressed and went back to bed. Does that behavior seem as strange and illogical to others as it does to me? Why do I have to get dressed to talk on the telephone? Only do that if I use the front porch phone! g As events unfolded I had to be here at the apartment anyway as maintenence showed up banging on the door about an hour ago to fix some things need by HUD before renewing he lease. Then he left to get some stuff, and was just back a few minutes ago. Now I can go back to bed. Good idea, Tom. I hope the malady is not a serious one, and you can get back to the job... keith whaley
Re: Conversation with small Photo Development shop owner: future of film
Which pretty much goes to show that the people in the business have about as much of a clue about this as we do. David Miers wrote: I had an interesting chat with the owner of a 1 hour photo shop owner yesterday. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: FS: Pentax SMC-M 35mm f/2.0 lens
Gore and blimey, now I really feel bad about being poor. That used to be my favorite lens when I had one. You don't often find one at this price. I wish... -- Joe Wilensky wrote: I finally, finally found an A series 35mm f/2 lens on eBay, so I'm putting my M series one up for sale. I originally purchased it in bargain condition from KEH, which as usual means the glass is beautiful and there's only a bit of visible external wear on the sharp edges of the lens barrel (aperture ring, etc.). Includes front and rear caps. A beautiful compact lens that gives you all the speed you need for available light shooting! $125 plus shipping. Joe -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: OT: BBC Street photograph of the year
Hum... I thought that about 6 and 12. GRIN! Christian wrote: Is that (number 3) one of tv's? Definitely has his style Christian On 28/7/04, Rob Brigham, discombobulated, offered: http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/3927869.stm -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
RE: OT: BBC Street photograph of the year
I have a foot photo and I'm not afraid to use it, so be careful... tv -Original Message- From: graywolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 12:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: BBC Street photograph of the year Hum... I thought that about 6 and 12. GRIN! Christian wrote: Is that (number 3) one of tv's? Definitely has his style Christian On 28/7/04, Rob Brigham, discombobulated, offered: http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/3927869.stm -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: Boone PDML (almost)
Bummer you didn't get to see them, Tom. I had a nice visit with them the other day when they drove up. Hope you get feeling better.
RE: OT: BBC Street photograph of the year
ha! so do i! t -Original Message- From: tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 29 July 2004 3:00 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: OT: BBC Street photograph of the year I have a foot photo and I'm not afraid to use it, so be careful... tv -Original Message- From: graywolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 12:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: BBC Street photograph of the year Hum... I thought that about 6 and 12. GRIN! Christian wrote: Is that (number 3) one of tv's? Definitely has his style Christian On 28/7/04, Rob Brigham, discombobulated, offered: http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/3927869.stm -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: Question-LargeFormatEnlargements
That depends upon a lot ot things. Your quality standards. The particular image. I have never felt bad about good quality 5x7's (5x) from 35mm. If the image is strongly graphical (bold shapes, shadows, etc.) rather than detailed, I have found 16x prints work OK. However, it should be noted that back when I had some mounted and framed 16x24 35mm prints on the wall they were hung behind the sofa so people could not press their noses up against them. However, note that those same magnification limits tend to apply to larger formats to, and a 16x 64x80 inch print from a 4x5 negative is definately a big print. -- Lon Williamson wrote: So, Rob, William, JCO, et al - How much of an enlargement do you feel you can get with landscapes from 35mm before you're disappointed? 5x7? 8x10? Surely not 11x14, or so I would think. I've only ever shot 35mm, so I'd like to know your personal experience. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: OT: BBC Street photograph of the year
the order seems to change (or at least it did since I posted my comment). for clarification i was refering to the single BW foot photo... Christian -Original Message- From: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Jul 28, 2004 12:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: BBC Street photograph of the year Hum... I thought that about 6 and 12. GRIN! Christian wrote: Is that (number 3) one of tv's? Definitely has his style Christian On 28/7/04, Rob Brigham, discombobulated, offered: http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/3927869.stm -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: PAW - Tractor Pull
To respond to both you and Ken, I have some with just tractors (I went back after the event and the tractor were still in the arena) but I preferred the people shots. This was the antique (old) tractor class, and there weren't nearly as many spectators as there will be tonight with the modern tractors. These people were deadly serious, however, and they all knew each other. which made the event fun. I uses a small equipment choice, an *istD with an A50 1.7. The light was low (f2.4, 1/30, iso 400) but the different format gave the 50 a little more reach, although I could get all the way to the very front rail of the stands. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 7/28/2004 12:14:57 PM Steve, I rather like this one. The tractors lined up, the casual look of the drivers, the 3 guys turned away and the empty stands. There is a fun little story here. -- Best regards, Bruce Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 6:35:04 AM, you wrote: SD Last night at the Rockbridge County Fair: SD http://home.wlu.edu/~desjardins/ SD This was the the antique tractor pull, and you're looking at some of SD the boys watching the competition.
Re: OT: help identifying subject
I don't think it's attached to any particular SciFi show or series, it's just a stylized Roswell Grey in fact it is probably a souvenir from Roswell NM, although I've seen in junk/tourist shops from Bangor to Miami to LA. In fact there's a bar in Memphis TN called, I kid you not, the Flying Saucer that sells a similar t-shirt with the bar's logo, (guess), on the back. Ann Sanfedele wrote: I thought Cotty would know, so started with him in a private post but, alas, he is clueless. Will one of you sci-fi fan types help me out here? This is on a T shirt I bought recently - thought of putting it on ebay but don't really know what I've got here - except that little green (or gray) men are involved. anyone? http://users.rcn.com/annsan/greenman2.jpg p.s. I bet you thought I was gonna show a picture of a moth or butterfly :)
Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
Gonz wrote: graywolf wrote: Look, here, us folks in the boonies are already reduced to buying BW, 120, and 4x5 via mail order. As long as there are a few stores someplace in the world selling the stuff at anything near reasonable prices, I and probably the other 10-15 serious photographers here in town will continue to use the stuff. The snapshooters will quit when they can not get it at the local Wal-Mart, that seems to be coming real soon now, just as they quit using their Box Brownies when they could no longer get 620 at the local drug store. And the folks that buy digital will sneer at film cameras, just as we did at those Box Brownies when I was a kid. Nothing has changed any more than it did in the past. Another thing to think about, watches are all digital now. Except for some reason there are a few very expensive mechanical watches still made and sold. No, someone who is in the market for a plastic Timex probably never even heard of a Patti-Phillip, but that does not mean there is no market for them. No, you modern guys go digital. I will continue to use film (except eventually for snapshots), only wishing I still had my Linhof Super Technika, and Rolleiflex 2.8E-2; or could afford to replace them. For those who have never had the pleasure of using top of the line mechanical cameras from the late 50's, I feel sorry. Build quality has just never been up to that level since. You mean like this one? : http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemcategory=30076item=3829210996rd=1 Yeikes... Its not a pentax, and it costs $3500 bucks so I hope I haven't violated the spirit of the FAQ! Wow though, nice setup. rg
Pentax Sighting
My wife is watching series 2 of Six Feet Under and the daughter is using what looks like a K1000 on a tripod to photograph herself. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: Boone PDML (almost)
Yep, that's the place. I imagine the Reeds are doing the Blue Ridge Parkway this summer which puts Boone, and Grandfather Mountain where we were intending to go, right along their route. Many of the folks on this list including the listguy himself, have a long time connection with the 2 annual photo programs at GFM. I live here in Boone (actually just barely outside of the town limits) myself. I had to look up Cullowhee, over near Franklin is it? -- Jon M wrote: Would you be referring to Boone, NC? If so, then wow, the NC mountains just seem to be the PDML hotspot. I very nearly decided to go to school there at ASU, but I ended up here in Cullowhee instead, attending WCU. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: WTB - K15mm 3.5
On 28/7/04, Christian, discombobulated, offered: oh god! another lens to be sacrificed in the lab of Dr. Frankencamera! Christian Not necessarily... Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: PAW: He's My Pal
This is a great photo, the dog looking for reassurance the man giving it sort of, shows what a great deal we've struck with dogs. They give us everything they can, we give them what we can spare... frank theriault wrote: I'm not sure about this one: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2560881 Be brutal as you want. I can take it. (of course if you actually like it, you can say that, too vbg) cheers, frank = The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Re: Boone PDML (almost)
Thanks, Doug. Yes, it is a bummer. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bummer you didn't get to see them, Tom. I had a nice visit with them the other day when they drove up. Hope you get feeling better. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: OT: Wish me Luck
Sorry Frank, I could never give a Photographic reference to someone who might take me seriously, but good luck anyway. frank theriault wrote: Just fired off a resume/application to a local firm that's looking for a catalogue photographer (full-time, employee position). Maybe I should have named this list-at-large as a reference vbg. Wish me luck; I've applied for several non-photography jobs, this is the first photo job I've taken a shot at. I read that Elliott Erwitt made his money doing advertising photography, and that his street stuff (for lack of a better word) was what he considered his hobby. In fact, he called his Leica his hobby camera g. Not that I'd dare mention myself in the same breath as Elliott, but if he had to finance his hobby photography with a mundane job, I guess that's good enough for me. Now all I have to do is get the job. Oh well, back to the on-line job search (it's pissing rain today, so it's an indoor day g). cheers, frank = The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Re: OT: BBC Street photograph of the year
LOL! tom wrote: I have a foot photo and I'm not afraid to use it, so be careful... tv -Original Message- From: graywolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 12:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: BBC Street photograph of the year Hum... I thought that about 6 and 12. GRIN! Christian wrote: Is that (number 3) one of tv's? Definitely has his style Christian On 28/7/04, Rob Brigham, discombobulated, offered: http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/3927869.stm -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: Scratch on rear element
The classic way to do this is to use black india ink applied with the point of of a small needle in dabs. One needs to be careful not to make more scratchs with the needle, or to smear the ink all over. Other than that it is not difficult. - David Nelson wrote: G'day folks, I recently got an A* 300/4 for a great price in 'bargain' condition, due to a miniscule nick in the centre of the rear element. As I said, it's tiny, not even a milimetre long. I've not noticed any effects in photos taken with it, but such things are supposed to reduce contrast because they scatter light all over the film. I've heard of a fix where the scratch is filled with black ink or paint - the light is therefore stopped rather than scattered. Now, I'm interested in this procedure, but can't find any info about how I should do it. If it's foolproof I'll probably give it a go, but if it is a bit tricky and I risk damaging the lens, I'd let it lie. So has anyone done this and can give me any advice? Any horror stories about ruining lenses in this attempt? Anyone want to tell me to stop being so anal? q-: Thanks, David -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: OT: Wish me Luck
Auto parts are tough, especially if they are highly chromed performance parts. Most art directors don't want to see the photographer or his equipment on the product. frank theriault wrote: --- Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Luck! What kind of catalog? Steve( hoping fo a cheap thrill) Well, it can't get more mundane than this: Auto Parts! I'm just trying to figure out how I'll explain to them the concept of creative blurring vbg. What do you mean, you want the whole brake caliper to be in focus? Do you want an edgy catalogue, or what? g cheers, frank = The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
One should never eschew an opportunity to use eschew. It's another excellent word. John On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 10:08:56 -0600, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You are talking discipline in one post, and eschewing it in another. William Robb I knew someone would pickup on that. It's because the thread took two divergent paths. My tongue isn't forked, really. Tom C. -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
This is much more information than we needed. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: RE: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying? Shooting a landscape with an SLR on a tripod is useful for the same reason as putting any camera on a tripod... stability... a more deliberate composition... works especialy well with a ballhead IMO. I hate ball heads... Maybe it's because my own head looks like one. WW
Re: OT: Wish me Luck
Well we know where that pesky r got to... William Robb wrote: That would be the Strap On tools calender.. WW - Original Message - From: Don Sanderson To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 2:26 PM Subject: RE: OT: Wish me Luck Holding a what Don -Original Message- From: Steve Desjardins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 3:17 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Wish me Luck Actually, some of the auto parts calendars I see in garages feature some fairly spectacular models (holding a wench, of course). Try to convince then to do one of these.
Hubble Photoshop Plugin Re: We're back home, photos later
Speaking of the Hubble, a new Photoshop plugin was released that allows users to make their own photos from the Hubble data . . . . http://www.spacetelescope.org/news/html/heic0412.html IL Bill On Jul 26, 2004, at 5:25 PM, Bill Owens wrote: We returned home from an extremely enjoyable weekend with our son and his wife in Maryland. We were able to tour both the Goddard Space Flight Center and the US Naval Academy, and the Goddard tour was by far the best. One of the most interesting things I learned there was that the Hubble telescope's camera is only 16 megapixels. IMO, if 16 is good enough for NASA, then 6 is enough for me :-). They will be updating both the software and camera in 2007, but nothing definite about the new camera yet. Also, future Hubble updates will be done remotely from Goddard instead of sending astronauts to do the work. Bill
Re: OT: Tans prattling again (RE: not particularly Re: Digital vs Film)
All I have to say to that is Eeeuuccc. Paul Sorenson wrote: SUBTERFUDGE - a chocolate flavored food made by putting it in a clay pot and burying it in the ground for 30 days - tastes similar to kimchi Paul - Original Message - From: Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 9:47 AM Subject: Re: OT: Tans prattling again (RE: not particularly Re: Digital vs Film) Lets all put away the thesauri and make up words, I personally like subterfudge, (put definition here). frank theriault wrote: --- Norm Baugher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Obtuse. Love that one. Norm Subterfuge. -frank = The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Re: Dunno if you'll like....
This is very good a very nicely executed portrait. Thibouille wrote: This is my first submission so please, be gentle, I'm about total newbie. That said, any comment is welcome. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2562662 The effect was NOT wanted. I wouldn't be able to do another alike ;) Thibouille
Re: OT: Paypal Class Action
I haven't gotten anything like this, and I get a lot of stupid things from Paypal. Ryan Lee wrote: I just received a bizarre email from Paypal stating that I might be entitled to a claim in a class action. Anyone else get the same one? If it's a hoax, it looks really well thought out.. Regards, Ryan
Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
Actually... not to disagree with William, I love ball heads... the Bogen tripod I usually use has the legs that can extend at different angles and of course variable length. With a ball head I don't care that my tripod is perfectly level... I waste no time with that anymore... I get it close and then adjust in any direction using the ball head. I have the grip ball heads which makes the adjustment a one handed operation. Tom C. From: Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying? Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:02:29 -0400 This is much more information than we needed. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: RE: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying? Shooting a landscape with an SLR on a tripod is useful for the same reason as putting any camera on a tripod... stability... a more deliberate composition... works especialy well with a ballhead IMO. I hate ball heads... Maybe it's because my own head looks like one. WW
Re: SMC-A 1:3.5 35-105--As great as it's supposed to be?
Alan Chan wrote: If you are getting one, just make sure the focus is unchanged through the whole zoom range. If it did, it meant the lens had received some improper service. Illinois Bill asks: My lens has NEVER maintained focus throughout a zoom. Are you sure it's supposed to do so? It may be vari-focus. The 1983 operation manual for this lens states When the focal length of a zoom lens is changed by zooming, a slight shift of focus is unavoidable. To obtain accurate focus with zoom lenses, first set the lens at the desired focal length, then focus on the subject before actual shooting. This manual covers many of the classic SMC A zooms such as 24-50mm f/4, 28-135mm f/4, 35-70mm f/4, 35-105mm f/3.5, 70-210mm f/4, etc. In contrast, the version of the K lenses manual I have states SMC Pentax zoom lenses maintain the focus setting even while zooming. It is a good practice to focus at the maximum focal length, i.e. with the largest possible image, and then zoom back to the desired focal length. This ensures maximum focusing accuracy. Lenses such as SMC P 45-125mm f/4 and 85-210mm f/3.5 are included among others. Mark Rofini
