Re: question about putting pix on memory cards ...
David Madsen wrote: Excellent point. Some of the newer stuff is packaged to work with XP and you would have to download a driver from the manufacturer's web site to use it with earlier versions. Bill Gates really wants you to update your system, Ann, and he's got a lot of helpers trying to twist your arm. Dave I'm afraid, I'm very afraid :) ann -Original Message- From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 7:32 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: question about putting pix on memory cards ... Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have to get the proper card reader - as I have Windoze 98 (NOT SE) the one I bought at first didn't go. Windows 98 doesn't have built-in support for card readers and removable storage volumes. You have to install a driver to get them to work. If you're using Windows 98 you should make sure you buy a card reader that comes with appropriate drivers. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Helios 85mm? Was: 77 vs 85
Frantisek wrote: TL While we're at it: Do you happen to know something about the Jupiter-9, too? Is it the 2/85mm lens? Yes. I did use for a short time the Leica version on a rangefinder, but I had problems with focusing accuracy (which was a bit off due to different focusing cams for Leica and Contax, which was the basis of USSR rangefinder cameras I believe). This is not an issue on SLR though. But I can't comment on the quality because of this. I believe this lens is more represented on PDML than the Helios though. Good light! fra
RE: Non K-mount portrait lenses
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Take a look at the Pentax M 75~150 Zoom. I don't care much for it except as a portrait lens. Seconded, though it's widest aperture is f4. Only came out of my bag when I bought the more versatile and AF F70-210. However, the 75-150 is light and short and also reverses (for macro) very nicely. I am keeping mine, but you can find one in Mint- or so condition around the 40 GBP mark on ebay. Kostas
Re: Russian lenses
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Joseph Tainter wrote: The Zenitar 16mm f2.8 fisheye is sharper than Pentax's F 17-28 fisheye. Fine, but one is a prime and other is a zoom. Has anyone compared it with the A16 or the K17 (or is that the same as the M42 fisheye?) Kostas
Re: Russian lenses
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Steve Jolly wrote: MC Mir-47 Pentax K 2.5/20 Lens I've got the MC Mir snip Contrary to my findings, other people have reported the lens to be very sharp - I *think* I've worked this one out: on many Pentax bodies (certainly M series bodies, with their large, high-magnification viewfinders) using the rear-element filters blocks the mirror, so I've been using the lens without them. However, they are not plain glass - they're slightly concave; I plan to extend the mount out a little (losing true infinity focus, but that's not necessarily a problem with 20mm-lens depths of field) and see if that helps. Steve, Mine's sharp with the filter on (LX). Yes, it fouls the mirror on M's (took a tiny chip out my Program A (Program Plus) mirror :-( You can grind down the outer edge of the filter ring at a 45 degree angle to make it clear as they're quite thick pieces of ally. Chris
Re: Russian lenses
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Frantisek wrote: Personally, I would think that the rear filters are almost surely part of the optical design, and should be there at all times. It's, I think, the more probable option (considering that most lenses that use rear or middle filters require them in place, and provice a clear-glass filter when one doesn't want to use a colour filter. Well I had a Russian colleague read the manual for me and he says no mention is made of them being necessary (and they aren't shown in the optical diagram therin). However, lots of other people (some claiming 'contacts' in the factory) have said they're necessary and since they miss the mirror fine on the LX, I have always used the lens with the clear one on. I'd love to get a definitive answer tho. This could make a big difference in sharpness and another one in the colour fringing. I can feel an experiment coming on... you know I have never done one! Chris
RE: M42 ultra-wide
What other options have I got? Are the 15/3.5 SMC-Takumars actually availible now and then? From what I've seen I'd probably pay less than $1000 if I could find one. Nobody seems to make a 14mm in adaptall or http://www.kevincameras.com has several. His prices are at the high end of the range of SPLOSdb.
Re: Word photo
Jostein wrote: Meow'ing of cracking sausages? If your sausages meow, I'm not eating them. :-) S
Re: [PAW] Ladder to heaven?
Ah! actually it WAS close to a landing airplane!! I like it , btw. Danilo. Danilo, Took this a couple of years back. :-) http://www.oksne.net/foto/html/images/night/images.asp?indeks=3s=0 Jostein
Re: Which wide angle zoom for the *ist D?
Hi, I don't get it. How can a lens make a photograph too dark or cause over exposure problems? Exposure is a function of the metering., is it not? Shel [Original Message] From: Sam Jost [EMAIL PROTECTED] Strange, I remember finding pictures from the 16-45 rather dark, and in a german user forum there had been lots of lengthy discussions and pictures about the 16-45 making too dark pictures. - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Funny how thers overxposure with the 16-45mm. In fact it might be a wide angle problem. I often get overexposed images with my A2.8/20mm - on film
Re: Lens ruminations on a Monday...
David Madsen wrote: I have had some experience with the Tamron SP 24-135 (f4-5.6?). About the same price as the Pentax 28-200 but sharper. I used one to shoot a wedding once and I thought it was very sharp. The only reason I didn't buy one is that I am addicted to wider apertures. It might be worth consideration. Dave Thanks for the words, Dave. My old eyesight is not near what it used to be, and I need larger apertures to focus! That lovely old 85-205 Vivitar is too dim for me, so it's going on the block. Strange, as it's not just aperture alone...or so it seems to me. The lens can SAY 3.8, but it looks dimmer to me than other 3.5s. (I don't have any other 3.8s...) I have a beautiful old Tak 35mm f/3.5. I can see thru that one pretty well! Bottom line? I'd far prefer an f/4 to a 5.6; even a 3.5 to an f/4... To me it's enjoying using a lens as much as it's performance. So, as I said earlier, I'm going to try to find a Tokina 28-105mm, which has an aperture range of 3.5 to 4.5. keith whaley -Original Message- From: Keith Whaley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 4:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Lens ruminations on a Monday... I have the following zooms: M-42: Vivitar 85-205mm f/3.8 Tele-Zoom Auto (Kiron) Literally like new. K-mount: SMC Pentax-FA 28-70mm f/4.0 AL ~ 99%+ (*) Vivitar 28-70mm f/3.5-4.8 MC Macro zoom ~ 99%+ SMC Pentax-A 35-70mm f/4.0 ~ about 95% (*?) SMC Pentax-A 35-80mm f/4.0-5.6 ~ 99%+ (*) Asahi Takumar-A 70-200mm f/4.0 zoom macro ~ about 98% (Identical to Pentax-A zoom, but later production) (*) = going to keep. Others are up for sale... (*?) = I'd keep this one, but it's pretty limited in focal length... Some were intentionally purchased, others were part of package deals. Having used some of them on photo trips, I find I like the 35-80 a lot, but it's slow and plastic-y and I'd prefer a more solid feel. For a walking around zoom, I'd like a little more range, and am thinking of 28mm on the lower end, but beyond 100 at the top. That's at least a 4:1 zoom ratio. Pentax makes a 28-105mm manual zoom in the f/4.0-5.6 range. The only other one I know about is an FA 28-200mm f/3.8-5.6, AL IF. I might like that one, but I think it's pretty expensive. Don't know! Who has opinions on this particular lens? Who has other thoughts? I'm fishing for information... Gotta be 28mm or less on the lower end, and over 100 on top. Prefer an f/3.5, but probably f/4.0 will be okay. Ideas please? Thanks, keith whaley
New toy!
OK, nothing spectacular, especially in digital era :-) But I couldn't resist and bought nice KX Still great camera, with enough features for good photography in its pure form... Beautiful body finishing quality, nice shutter sound. True pleasure to use, despite I have and use DSLR... Are there still any users of this body here? -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Gas Guzzlers
William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Caveman Subject: OT: Gas Guzzlers Now you'll understand why many people panic when noticing they're tailgated by one. Especially when the gals are obviously looking in the vanity mirror while talking on the cell phone and using the lipstick. You wanna see panic? Try tailgating one of those ridiculous little Mercedes Benz Stupid cars while driving a full sized half ton. HAR!!! William Robb Now, just what would a ...ridiculous little Mercedes Benz Stupid car be? I'm afraid I can't see past your prejudice... keith
RE: New toy!
;- Shel [Original Message] From: Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK, nothing spectacular, especially in digital era :-) But I couldn't resist and bought nice KX Still great camera, with enough features for good photography in its pure form... Beautiful body finishing quality, nice shutter sound. True pleasure to use, despite I have and use DSLR... Are there still any users of this body here?
Re: Re: Russian lenses
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2004/10/26 Tue AM 08:48:52 GMT To: pdml [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Russian lenses On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Joseph Tainter wrote: The Zenitar 16mm f2.8 fisheye is sharper than Pentax's F 17-28 fisheye. Fine, but one is a prime and other is a zoom. Has anyone compared it with the A16 or the K17 (or is that the same as the M42 fisheye?) You buy the A16 and the K17 and you can borrow my Zenitar to test. 8-) mike - Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
Re: Russian lenses
Chris Stoddart wrote: Mine's sharp with the filter on (LX). Yes, it fouls the mirror on M's (took a tiny chip out my Program A (Program Plus) mirror :-( You can grind down the outer edge of the filter ring at a 45 degree angle to make it clear as they're quite thick pieces of ally. I did this, but no luck - the mirror fouls on the edge of the filter glass. Obviously there's some variation between lens samples... :-) S
OT Re: Gas Guzzlers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now, just what would a ...ridiculous little Mercedes Benz Stupid car be? I'm afraid I can't see past your prejudice... Obviously not a Smart car. A class? I fitted four adults with enough luggage and kit for a week's ice-climbing into a Mercedes A-class once. And the traction control was vital on those slippery Scottish hills. I wouldn't call them ridiculous :-) S
Re: Which wide angle zoom for the *ist D?
I think everyone is relying too much on autoexposure. My 16-45 takes nice exposures, but as with any lens, one can't rely exclusively on the meter. This is particularly true with wide angles where you might get a lot of sky or a lot of deep shadow in frame due to the wide fov. Paul On Oct 26, 2004, at 1:45 AM, Sam Jost wrote: Strange, I remember finding pictures from the 16-45 rather dark, and in a german user forum there had been lots of lengthy discussions and pictures about the 16-45 making too dark pictures. Sam - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 7:35 AM Subject: RE: Which wide angle zoom for the *ist D? Thanks Mark. Funny how thers overxposure with the 16-45mm. In fact it might be a wide angle problem. I often get overexposed images with my A2.8/20mm - on film too!!?? Jens Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Mark Stringer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 26. oktober 2004 01:43 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Which wide angle zoom for the *ist D? I agree the DA16-45 should be the solution. If you can take one out and shoot in bright sunlight and you are satisfied with the results, go for it. I know there are a lot of satisfied owners of this lens. I am going to send mine to Pentax with a memory card with examples, but they wanted my camera also. I do not want to send my camera at this time. The first link shows the problem http://www.cmstringer.com/pentaxtest/ The second link is all DA16-45 photos but with -1 EV. They look pretty good. http://www.cmstringer.com/abbeville5/ - Original Message - From: Frantisek [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 4:02 PM Subject: Re: Which wide angle zoom for the *ist D? When I had the same problem, I tried several. Several PJs, also myself, tried the Sigma 17-35. We all agreed that it's bad. IMNSHO, stay away from it. It's bad even on APS crop digital. The Sigma 3.5-5.6/18-50 is a cheap lens, not good optically until f/8. But it as you can get it for about 50 euro used, it might be worth a shot until you can get something better (which is why it ended in my bag, for exactly that reason, and I get paid even for images from this lens... gasp! I dislike using it though, and it was only unplanned additional living expenses that kept me so far from buying a 2.8/20-35 Nikkor or better a 2.8/17-35 Nikkor). Still, it was IMO better than the 17-35 DG Sigma... The 2.8/18-50 Sigma is too new to tell anything about. I saw just some sample pictures on the internet which had obvious corner softness wide open, but I distrust internet samples, I prefer using a lens myself. I have no direct experience with the rest (except the, now discontinued, Tokina 3.5-3.5/20-35 which I used on film, bought new, it broke on me three times before returning it for a refund... the 19-35 Tokina is more plasticky than the older 20-35...). Vivitar S1 is AFAIK a rebadged Cosina 19-35. I have saw several torn apart cheap Cosina zooms. It seems they are bottom of the pack (unlike their SL series and rangefinder series primes!). You can also consider used Tokina ATX 2.8/20-35. Used it goes for around 300-350 Euro. I almost got one, one friend from a big daily paper used it with D1X, and said it was good. The only one I tried on my camera was very bad though. Might be sample variance or bad usage by the previous owner. It was very small for a fast wide zoom, but the used sample I tried was optically very bad. Still, I know that judging used lenses is near impossible, their previous life might have ruined it (and believe me, I have myself ruined optically some - before I acquired them - perfectly good lenses vbg) From what I heard, you could make best with the Pentax DA 16-45. No personal experience with it though. This is all very subjective, and thus my opinions may be totally unusable for your situation. I do mostly photojournalism type jobs, so I need best performance near wide open, and I don't care a bit about geometric distortions. You might do more architecture, and geometric distortions might make an otherwise fine lens unsuitable for you. Or you might be better with a 20mm prime? who knows ;-) Try to get to a good shop who carries most of them and ask them to test them outside on your camera. They should cooperate. That's the best way. Good light! fra
Re: New toy!
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: Shel Belinkoff wrote on 26.10.04 11:56: ;- Does this smile mean that you have KX or you are laughing at me (poor Sylwek, bought this old crap)? ;-) Not a chance! The KX is one of the classics, and still a very capable camera... In this case, I'm sure Shel won't mind my speaking for him ~ adding my own opinion! keith whaley
Re: Gas Guzzlers
The cars that burn 16 gallons on a single drag racing run run use a fuel that's a mixture of nitromethane and methanol, not gasoline. What's more, the amount of fuel used by all motorsports combined in an entire year is a drop in the bucket compared to what is used in a single day by commercial airlines. No reason to be disgusted. Paul On Oct 26, 2004, at 6:04 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Talking about gas guzzlers, I watched a drag racing programme the other week. One of the guys with the fast cars pointed out that he uses 16 gallons of fuel per run. To put it in perspective he said if you put 16 buckets of fuel on the ground, I burn it in my run faster than you can kick the buckets over I'm not sure whether to be impressed or disgusted. mike - Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
Re: More homework: Frick Park 360
Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Very nice panoramas, Mark. Not easy to do that well. I've been doing a lot of these (not 360 degerees though) - and it a lot of work. I guess they kind of compensates for my missing wideangles for the APS-C size sensor of the *ist D. They are one of the rasons I've passed 5500 shots in less than two months :-) (Someday I may even get to wear out a Pentax camera - I never managed to do that before). Mine have become better since I bought a water level for the flash shoe :-) See my latest PESO Yes, I've noticed that a bubble level on the tripod only helps so much. I'll probably get a level for the hot shoe if I do many more of these. I don't think I'll do any more 360 degree pano's though - the aspect ratio is just too extreme. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Crunchy focusing on Optio S5i
Hi all, Back from a quick biz trip to Hong Kong. On the way (in Sydney, rather than HK), I picked up an Optio S5i to play with. Not really my first digcam, but at least one that I can have on me all the time. I didn't notice it at first, because I was playing with it on the plane, but once I got into a quiet room, I noticed that the focusing on the cam has a curious rattling sound, like little grains of rice being shaken inside the camera. It's been behaving normally - the pix are fine. But before I embarrass myself in front of the saledroids at the duty free shop, I thought I might ask this learned group, is this normal? Didn't see that much in the HK shops to interest me - things were about the same price as duty free here. Then again, I only had time to wander around Stanley St in Central Hong Kong, so this was probably a bit more expensive than out in Kowloon. What was with this odd public holiday last saturday that meant 2nd hand gear couldn't be sold? D -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~derbyc
At the park this weekend
The weather was gorgeous and the fall colors perfect this weekend, so to a small local park we did go. I was _amazed_ at the number of cameras and photographers around. At least 20 tripods, all of them propping up film cameras. Hassies, Nikon, Olympus, and Pentax. Didn't see a single DLSR, and nary a Canon in the crowd. I felt underequipped with my SuperA, tabletop tripod, and A35-70, but managed to shoot about 20 frames. The more I shoot this nice little zoom, the handier it seems to get. Your SW Ohio reporter on the scene, -Lon
Re: New toy!
I got my KX via PDML. A KX was my 3rd Pentax SLR (K-1000, A-3000, KX) back in the 80s. Mine has one unfortunate feature. It seems that the mirror rest is back a little too far. As a consequence it won't focus @ infinity and is alway off. If I shoot @ f11 it's compensated for, but any wider and I have to focus further away to get it right. Checking it out it seems that the bumper is worn/bent/whatever back and out of place. Sort of like LX with worn bumpers. Some experimentation has determined the distance error. So to compensate I'm going to glue a piece of paper to the sides of the back of the mirror make it as good as new. I tried to move the bumpers forward but that wasn't working as the went back rather quickly. Any one know of another suitable fix? I like the KX size. (Though not necessarily the shape.) Sincerely, C. Brendemuehl 'Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.' Ronald Reagan Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net
Re: Re: Russian lenses
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You buy the A16 and the K17 and you can borrow my Zenitar to test. 8-) Why, what's wrong with mine? :-))) K
Re: New toy!
Hi, Laughing at you? Nope, just smiling because you got hold of a neat, classic camera. Remember, some of my daily shooters are even older than the KX by quite a margin. I never had a K camera, but recently got to test and use a few that were donated to the 6th Street Photo Workshop, where I volunteer and teach a basic photo class. I was impressed by these swell cameras, and decided that I want to get one for myself, and at some point down the line am looking to have my very own KX or KM And, the person most responsible for this infatuation is Keith Whaley. Keith donated a K1000 and a KM, and I ran a roll of film thru each, which got me hooked. Using the KM was especially sweet - loved the DOF preview - with an old K55/1.8 lens I found in the back of my closet. That lens has a particularly nice character, not overly sharp or contrasty, but able to resolve a good amount of detail. The K bodies and some of the K lenses make a wonderful combination, so much so that I just grabbed a nice looking K50/1.4 off eBay (I've always wanted that lens but missed a few opportunities) to supplement the 1.8 And I don't need no steenkin' batteries, either ;-)) Shel [Original Message] From: Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 10/26/2004 3:37:39 AM Subject: Re: New toy! Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: Shel Belinkoff wrote on 26.10.04 11:56: ;- Does this smile mean that you have KX or you are laughing at me (poor Sylwek, bought this old crap)? ;-) Not a chance! The KX is one of the classics, and still a very capable camera... In this case, I'm sure Shel won't mind my speaking for him ~ adding my own opinion! keith whaley
Re: Re: Gas Guzzlers
Hi, From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2004/10/26 Tue AM 10:34:58 GMT To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Gas Guzzlers The cars that burn 16 gallons on a single drag racing run run use a fuel that's a mixture of nitromethane and methanol, not gasoline. What's more, the amount of fuel used by all motorsports combined in an entire year is a drop in the bucket compared to what is used in a single day by commercial airlines. No reason to be disgusted. It's not exactly promoting fuel economy, is it? Plus, neither of the chemicals are exactly pleasant to handle or store. Being somewhat of a sceptic by nature, I want to see some benefit from an activity like this before I feel like endorsing it. Sheer enjoyment from mechanical things, I can get from stuff already in existence. The benefits from present day drag racing seem to be wholly outweighed by environmental and other concerns. I'm not too keen on giant jetliners, either 8-) mike - Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)
I'm pretty sure K bodies can do this, too. I once tested a KM, firing at a white wall using flash, from 1/60th to 1/1000, including guestimated half-stops. The shutter progressed smoothly in the sequenced photos, ie the guestimate 1/90 showed a little less shutter than 1/125, etc. I don't know if the K shutter is stepless below synch, though. William Robb wrote: The Nikon F2 shutter was able to give infinitely variable shutter speeds from it's sync speed up to it's top speed.
Re: At the park this weekend
Lon, SW Ohio, huh? I'm in Westerville (NE Columbus). You down by Cinci? Sincerely, C. Brendemuehl 'Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to being a Buckeye fan.' not Ronald Reagan Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net
Re: Re: Russian lenses
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2004/10/26 Tue AM 11:36:28 GMT
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Re: Russian lenses
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You buy the A16 and the K17 and you can borrow my Zenitar to test. 8-)
Why, what's wrong with mine? :-)))
K
Curses, foiled again! 8-{
-
Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
Re: Mechanical Camera Shutter Cams - was MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)
Can you give us a list of the cameras you're aware of? And is this true for the slow speeds as well? Mark Roberts wrote: In all the Pentax cameras I'm aware of, shutter speed is controlled by a *single* cam. Having a continuous surface, this cam can give in-between shutter speeds simply by setting it between the settings on the shutter speed dial.
Re: Crunchy focusing on Optio S5i
Derby, Optio S4 doesn't make that noise, at least my daughter's didn't when I 'borrowed' it. How do you like the S5i? Any way to get raw pix from it? I took some shots with the S4 on a visit to Washington, DC. After lugging around a PZ-1p with a 28-70 zoom, it was a real treat. Fit neatly in my shirt pocket. Can you help enable me??? :-) Regards, Bob S. On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 21:21:27 +1000, Derby Chang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, Back from a quick biz trip to Hong Kong. On the way (in Sydney, rather than HK), I picked up an Optio S5i to play with. Not really my first digcam, but at least one that I can have on me all the time. I didn't notice it at first, because I was playing with it on the plane, but once I got into a quiet room, I noticed that the focusing on the cam has a curious rattling sound, like little grains of rice being shaken inside the camera. It's been behaving normally - the pix are fine. But before I embarrass myself in front of the saledroids at the duty free shop, I thought I might ask this learned group, is this normal? Didn't see that much in the HK shops to interest me - things were about the same price as duty free here. Then again, I only had time to wander around Stanley St in Central Hong Kong, so this was probably a bit more expensive than out in Kowloon. What was with this odd public holiday last saturday that meant 2nd hand gear couldn't be sold? D -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~derbyc
Re: New toy!
Shel Belinkoff wrote on 26.10.04 13:37: Laughing at you? Nope, just smiling because you got hold of a neat, classic camera. Remember, some of my daily shooters are even older than the KX by quite a margin. relief ;-) I never had a K camera, but recently got to test and use a few that were donated to the 6th Street Photo Workshop, where I volunteer and teach a basic photo class. I was impressed by these swell cameras, and decided that I want to get one for myself, and at some point down the line am looking to have my very own KX or KM Exactly that's what I felt when I held KX for the first time :-) And, the person most responsible for this infatuation is Keith Whaley. Keith donated a K1000 and a KM, and I ran a roll of film thru each, which got me hooked. Using the KM was especially sweet - loved the DOF preview - with an old K55/1.8 lens I found in the back of my closet. That lens has a particularly nice character, not overly sharp or contrasty, but able to resolve a good amount of detail. The K bodies and some of the K lenses make a wonderful combination, so much so that I just grabbed a nice looking K50/1.4 off eBay (I've always wanted that lens but missed a few opportunities) to supplement the 1.8 K50/1.4 would be nice... But what do you think about K50/1.2??? I suspect it is quite soft wide open, but I wouldn't care if I'd have more opportunities to take unblurred photos at dark places ;-) And I don't need no steenkin' batteries, either ;-)) Yup, that was important reason for me to buy KX ;-) -- Best Regards Sylwek
PAW PESO - Jesse at the Shore
Been suffering from insomnia lately, which allows some uninterrupted time to play around with Photoshop. I've always liked this pic, although technically it leaves a bit to be desired. Still, the mood and the memories it evokes made me want to put it up ... maybe you'll enjoy it as well. http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/at_shore.html Shel
Re: New toy!
Keith Whaley wrote on 26.10.04 12:32: Not a chance! The KX is one of the classics, and still a very capable camera... In this case, I'm sure Shel won't mind my speaking for him ~ adding my own opinion! I knew that! ;-) Shel seems to me such eccentric person, so I should feel that at the first time :-) It's no offence Shel of course, I appreciate and like your photo works very much :-) -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: New toy!
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: Shel Belinkoff wrote on 26.10.04 13:37: Laughing at you? Nope, just smiling because you got hold of a neat, classic camera. Remember, some of my daily shooters are even older than the KX by quite a margin. relief ;-) I never had a K camera, but recently got to test and use a few that were donated to the 6th Street Photo Workshop, where I volunteer and teach a basic photo class. I was impressed by these swell cameras, and decided that I want to get one for myself, and at some point down the line am looking to have my very own KX or KM Exactly that's what I felt when I held KX for the first time :-) And, the person most responsible for this infatuation is Keith Whaley. Keith donated a K1000 and a KM, and I ran a roll of film thru each, which got me hooked. Using the KM was especially sweet - loved the DOF preview - with an old K55/1.8 lens I found in the back of my closet. That lens has a particularly nice character, not overly sharp or contrasty, but able to resolve a good amount of detail. The K bodies and some of the K lenses make a wonderful combination, so much so that I just grabbed a nice looking K50/1.4 off eBay (I've always wanted that lens but missed a few opportunities) to supplement the 1.8 K50/1.4 would be nice... But what do you think about K50/1.2??? I suspect it is quite soft wide open, but I wouldn't care if I'd have more opportunities to take unblurred photos at dark places ;-) The 50/1.2 lenses are only 1/3 of a stop faster than the K50/1.4, and *much* softer wide open - you'd be far better off pushing the film 1/3 of a stop to get the extra speed. S
Re: PAW PESO - Jesse at the Shore
Shel Belinkoff wrote: http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/at_shore.html Love it. S
Re: New toy!
I have one and don't use it too often, but I like it quite a bit. I don't mind a little softness at times, and it really lights up the viewfinders on those older cameras. I should probably use it more you'd probably like it, too. Shel [Original Message] From: Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... But what do you think about K50/1.2??? I suspect it is quite soft wide open, but I wouldn't care if I'd have more opportunities to take unblurred photos at dark places ;-) And I don't need no steenkin' batteries, either ;-)) Yup, that was important reason for me to buy KX ;-)
Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)
Mark Roberts wrote: In all the Pentax cameras I'm aware of, shutter speed is controlled by a *single* cam. Having a continuous surface, this cam can give in-between shutter speeds simply by setting it between the settings on the shutter speed dial. I assume you're only talking about cameras with mechanical shutter speed controls? (M42, K-series, and MX? Others?) S
RE: M42 ultra-wide
There is a 15mm SMCT on ebay now but the bids over $1100. JCO -Original Message- From: Eugene Homme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 5:25 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: M42 ultra-wide What other options have I got? Are the 15/3.5 SMC-Takumars actually availible now and then? From what I've seen I'd probably pay less than $1000 if I could find one. Nobody seems to make a 14mm in adaptall or http://www.kevincameras.com has several. His prices are at the high end of the range of SPLOSdb.
ES battery/circuitry (was RE: Lens ruminations on a Monday ...)
Hi, JCO, I just completed an on-line purchase of an ES -- I wanted to give it a try after using a couple of ESII's over the last few years. I am holding on to the ESII, though! What is the number/size of this lithium battery that works in the ES? The circuitry handles it fine, even though there were no lithium batteries in existence when the ES circuitry was designed? Also, I've read either online or in one of the Pentax books that the late ES models had improved circuitry that is identical to the ESII circuitry (this is above and beyond the original ES circuitry, which was an improvement on the first Electro Spotmatic models produced in Japan). Does anyone know what serial number or range would represent a late ES? Joe trade it for a ES instead of the ESII. the ES has a 6v battery that you can get a lithium that lasts for years JCO -Original Message- From: Keith Whaley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 9:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Lens ruminations on a Monday... Jim Colwell wrote: Here is my review of the SMC Pentax-FA 28-200/3.8-5.6. I bought a 28-200mm zoom that turned out to be very unsatisfactory. Very few of the many pictures that I took were in sharp focus. The few pictures in sharp focus were probably those that I took with the SMCP-A 50/1.7. I did a little online research and soon found a number of things, including: (i) the zoom lens I bought is generally regarded as having poor optical quality; (ii)... This review is in the introduction to SPLOSdb. It does not explicitly identify it as the -FA lens, but it is. This lens was made by Tamron for Pentax, to specs defined by Pentax. The Tamron branded 28-200 lens made at the same time to Tamron's own specs was sold at the same price and is reputed to be very good, especially in comparison with the -FA. Jim www.jcolwell.ca Very interesting. I think I'll forego both of those lenses... I was heading over to the SPLOS database next. But you brought it here! Many thanks... keith
Re: New toy!
I disagree, Steve ... that extra bit of speed brightens the view thru the finder on these older cameras, which is an asset, especially when photographing during the magic hours or in the evening. Plus, a touch of softness may be most appropriate for many photographs. And the very limited DOF offers some creative benefits as well as some challenges. The world isn't always best represented by sharp images. Shel [Original Message] From: Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] The 50/1.2 lenses are only 1/3 of a stop faster than the K50/1.4, and *much* softer wide open - you'd be far better off pushing the film 1/3 of a stop to get the extra speed.
Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)
Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mark Roberts wrote: In all the Pentax cameras I'm aware of, shutter speed is controlled by a *single* cam. Having a continuous surface, this cam can give in-between shutter speeds simply by setting it between the settings on the shutter speed dial. I assume you're only talking about cameras with mechanical shutter speed controls? (M42, K-series, and MX? Others?) Well the K2 has electronic shutter speed control and the in-between technique works with that camera, too. The shutter speed control is a potentiometer inside the shutter speed dial which naturally is capable of an infinite number of settings. And *any* electronically-controlled shutter offers stepless speeds when in autoexposure mode :) -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Mechanical Camera Shutter Cams - was MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)
Lon Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mark Roberts wrote: In all the Pentax cameras I'm aware of, shutter speed is controlled by a *single* cam. Having a continuous surface, this cam can give in-between shutter speeds simply by setting it between the settings on the shutter speed dial. Can you give us a list of the cameras you're aware of? K1000, KM and KX (and by extension, the Spotmatics, since they were mechanically pretty much the same) as well as the MX. Also the K2, even though its shutter was controlled electronically. And is this true for the slow speeds as well? I think so but I'd have to check. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
RE: PAW PESO - Jesse at the Shore
Shel, I think it's a great photo! If anything maybe a little TOO perfect. I tried cropping the top and left side a bit to get Jesse a bit off center and a little more dominant in the frame and I think it worked very well: http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/at_the_shore2.jpg All in all a wonderful shot, belongs on a wall in a very prominent spot. Made me think of some I have of my daughter when she was that age, still exploring her new surroundings. I understand what you mean by mood and memories. Don -Original Message- From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 7:30 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PAW PESO - Jesse at the Shore Been suffering from insomnia lately, which allows some uninterrupted time to play around with Photoshop. I've always liked this pic, although technically it leaves a bit to be desired. Still, the mood and the memories it evokes made me want to put it up ... maybe you'll enjoy it as well. http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/at_shore.html Shel
Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)
Mark Roberts wrote: And *any* electronically-controlled shutter offers stepless speeds when in autoexposure mode :) Interesting - you're saying that the shutter speeds are only *shown* quantised, in the viewfinder (and other) displays? If so, does the same principle apply to automatically-controlled apertures on cameras with Tv and P exposure modes? S
Re: M42 ultra-wide
On 25/10/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed: Are the 15/3.5 SMC-Takumars actually availible now and then? I've seen one in a long time and that was actually a K mount. They do exist apparently. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
RE: PAW PESO - Jesse at the Shore
I see what you're trying to do, and my first reaction was quite positive. But then I flipped between the two and decided that having Jesse less dominant works better for me. It's not a pic of Jesse, but a pic of Jesse at the shore exploring his new-found world. To constrict that world, imo, takes something away from the mood. It may, however, be a worthwhile exercise to see if there's a middle ground, for I like the slightly off center location of Jesse. Thanks for the suggestion. Shel [Original Message] From: Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Shel, I think it's a great photo! If anything maybe a little TOO perfect. I tried cropping the top and left side a bit to get Jesse a bit off center and a little more dominant in the frame and I think it worked very well: http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/at_the_shore2.jpg All in all a wonderful shot, belongs on a wall in a very prominent spot. Made me think of some I have of my daughter when she was that age, still exploring her new surroundings. I understand what you mean by mood and memories. http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/at_shore.html
Re: New toy!
Shel Belinkoff wrote: I disagree, Steve ... that extra bit of speed brightens the view thru the finder on these older cameras, which is an asset, especially when photographing during the magic hours or in the evening. Plus, a touch of softness may be most appropriate for many photographs. And the very limited DOF offers some creative benefits as well as some challenges. The world isn't always best represented by sharp images. I take your points, Shel. Sylwester was only asking if it would improve his ability to take unblurred low-light photos, but I guess the extra viewfinder brightness might be a useful aid to accurate focussing. You've tried it and I haven't. :-) I do prefer my M50/1.4 to my M50/1.7 for that reason though, and that's also only 1/3 of a stop. S
RE: ES battery/circuitry (was RE: Lens ruminations on a Monday ...)
The lithium replacement for the old everready 544 is the PX28L by duracell but there may be others. I could have sworn I have used everready lithiums too. The lithiums are same voltage and since the camera is a very low current device there is no danger in using them instead of the silver or alkaline versions. I never had a problem with them. I have no knowledge of improved ES models so I cant comment on that. JCO -Original Message- From: Joe Wilensky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 8:43 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: ES battery/circuitry (was RE: Lens ruminations on a Monday ...) Hi, JCO, I just completed an on-line purchase of an ES -- I wanted to give it a try after using a couple of ESII's over the last few years. I am holding on to the ESII, though! What is the number/size of this lithium battery that works in the ES? The circuitry handles it fine, even though there were no lithium batteries in existence when the ES circuitry was designed? Also, I've read either online or in one of the Pentax books that the late ES models had improved circuitry that is identical to the ESII circuitry (this is above and beyond the original ES circuitry, which was an improvement on the first Electro Spotmatic models produced in Japan). Does anyone know what serial number or range would represent a late ES? Joe trade it for a ES instead of the ESII. the ES has a 6v battery that you can get a lithium that lasts for years JCO -Original Message- From: Keith Whaley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 9:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Lens ruminations on a Monday... Jim Colwell wrote: Here is my review of the SMC Pentax-FA 28-200/3.8-5.6. I bought a 28-200mm zoom that turned out to be very unsatisfactory. Very few of the many pictures that I took were in sharp focus. The few pictures in sharp focus were probably those that I took with the SMCP-A 50/1.7. I did a little online research and soon found a number of things, including: (i) the zoom lens I bought is generally regarded as having poor optical quality; (ii)... This review is in the introduction to SPLOSdb. It does not explicitly identify it as the -FA lens, but it is. This lens was made by Tamron for Pentax, to specs defined by Pentax. The Tamron branded 28-200 lens made at the same time to Tamron's own specs was sold at the same price and is reputed to be very good, especially in comparison with the -FA. Jim www.jcolwell.ca Very interesting. I think I'll forego both of those lenses... I was heading over to the SPLOS database next. But you brought it here! Many thanks... keith
Re: More homework: Frick Park 360
On 25/10/04, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed: PS - Have you received your magazine cover print yet? I put another item into the envelope for further revenge evil grin Actually it arrived yesterday, thanks. I was going to write last night but got sidetracked. The cover is in a frame and hangs over my desk :-) As to the other 'item' - actually a CD with our dear Mr Roberts' efforts - I had a listen last night. I think your influences include Arthur Lee from 'Love', no? ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Loading Jobo spirals
Developed my first C41 film yesterday - with *mostly* successful results, although I think I'll do a couple more test rolls before I trust myself with anything I care about. The thing I found hardest was loading the film onto the plastic Jobo spirals - I'm used to the Patterson system, which I find much easier. Is there a knack that I'm missing? S
RE: M42 ultra-wide
are there no APS format prime lenses with the KA mount wider than 20mm? It seems absurd to use a huge expensive lens like the 15mm SMCT/K/KA for APS sensor format. JCO -Original Message- From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 9:22 AM To: pentax list Subject: Re: M42 ultra-wide On 25/10/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed: Are the 15/3.5 SMC-Takumars actually availible now and then? I've seen one in a long time and that was actually a K mount. They do exist apparently. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: MZ-S exposure compensation (WAS: Re: One Last Film Body Survey)
Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mark Roberts wrote: And *any* electronically-controlled shutter offers stepless speeds when in autoexposure mode :) Interesting - you're saying that the shutter speeds are only *shown* quantised, in the viewfinder (and other) displays? Yes. If so, does the same principle apply to automatically-controlled apertures on cameras with Tv and P exposure modes? Good question. I'd assume so, mainly because it would require *more* work from the designers to limit the control mechanisms to just certain specific values. It's easier from an engineering standpoint to make these things continuously variable and it works better (potentially, at least) for the photographer, too. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: More homework: Frick Park 360
On 25/10/04, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed: How 'bout another? http://www.robertstech.com/temp/pano1_sm.jpg :-P the first one was MAGIC. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Pentax at COSTCO
Some time ago there was a post here that major discount stores, including Costco, no longer carry Pentax cameras. I replied that our local store was still carrying them as of a few weeks back. I was at Costco yesterday, and decided to check up on the cameras again. Among about a dozen offerings were the Optio S40 and the MZ-60. So, Pentax is still out there with the mass market stores, if not as heavily as we would like.
RE: ES battery/circuitry (was RE: Lens ruminations on a Monday ...)
FYI, Energizer L544 is the lithium version replacement for the 544. JCO -Original Message- From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 9:27 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: ES battery/circuitry (was RE: Lens ruminations on a Monday ...) The lithium replacement for the old everready 544 is the PX28L by duracell but there may be others. I could have sworn I have used everready lithiums too. The lithiums are same voltage and since the camera is a very low current device there is no danger in using them instead of the silver or alkaline versions. I never had a problem with them. I have no knowledge of improved ES models so I cant comment on that. JCO -Original Message- From: Joe Wilensky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 8:43 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: ES battery/circuitry (was RE: Lens ruminations on a Monday ...) Hi, JCO, I just completed an on-line purchase of an ES -- I wanted to give it a try after using a couple of ESII's over the last few years. I am holding on to the ESII, though! What is the number/size of this lithium battery that works in the ES? The circuitry handles it fine, even though there were no lithium batteries in existence when the ES circuitry was designed? Also, I've read either online or in one of the Pentax books that the late ES models had improved circuitry that is identical to the ESII circuitry (this is above and beyond the original ES circuitry, which was an improvement on the first Electro Spotmatic models produced in Japan). Does anyone know what serial number or range would represent a late ES? Joe trade it for a ES instead of the ESII. the ES has a 6v battery that you can get a lithium that lasts for years JCO -Original Message- From: Keith Whaley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 9:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Lens ruminations on a Monday... Jim Colwell wrote: Here is my review of the SMC Pentax-FA 28-200/3.8-5.6. I bought a 28-200mm zoom that turned out to be very unsatisfactory. Very few of the many pictures that I took were in sharp focus. The few pictures in sharp focus were probably those that I took with the SMCP-A 50/1.7. I did a little online research and soon found a number of things, including: (i) the zoom lens I bought is generally regarded as having poor optical quality; (ii)... This review is in the introduction to SPLOSdb. It does not explicitly identify it as the -FA lens, but it is. This lens was made by Tamron for Pentax, to specs defined by Pentax. The Tamron branded 28-200 lens made at the same time to Tamron's own specs was sold at the same price and is reputed to be very good, especially in comparison with the -FA. Jim www.jcolwell.ca Very interesting. I think I'll forego both of those lenses... I was heading over to the SPLOS database next. But you brought it here! Many thanks... keith
Re: More homework: Frick Park 360
Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 25/10/04, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed: How 'bout another? http://www.robertstech.com/temp/pano1_sm.jpg :-P the first one was MAGIC. Interesting. I prefer the second one. I'll have to go have another look . -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
RE: PAW PESO - Jesse at the Shore
You're welcome, just a take it as you like it suggestion. I'm very much into tight crops and shallow focus, every time I try to set the mood with a wider view I seem to wind up with a photo that's too busy to focus attention where I wanted it. I'm very poor at composition so I tend to stick with the Focus on the eyes, keep it tight and you can't go too wrong theory. ;-) Don -Original Message- From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 8:25 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: PAW PESO - Jesse at the Shore I see what you're trying to do, and my first reaction was quite positive. But then I flipped between the two and decided that having Jesse less dominant works better for me. It's not a pic of Jesse, but a pic of Jesse at the shore exploring his new-found world. To constrict that world, imo, takes something away from the mood. It may, however, be a worthwhile exercise to see if there's a middle ground, for I like the slightly off center location of Jesse. Thanks for the suggestion. Shel [Original Message] From: Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Shel, I think it's a great photo! If anything maybe a little TOO perfect. I tried cropping the top and left side a bit to get Jesse a bit off center and a little more dominant in the frame and I think it worked very well: http://www.donsauction.com/PDML/at_the_shore2.jpg All in all a wonderful shot, belongs on a wall in a very prominent spot. Made me think of some I have of my daughter when she was that age, still exploring her new surroundings. I understand what you mean by mood and memories. http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/at_shore.html
Re: New toy!
Sylwek wrote: OK, nothing spectacular, especially in digital era :-) But I couldn't resist and bought nice KX Not _spectacular_ in any era, but _sweet_ in every era. there still any users of this body here? If mine hadn't been stolen, I'd still be using it. I'm keeping my eye out for another. Though admittedly having a second K2 would work at least as well for me as replacing the KX. (It's tempting to digress into a description of my current kit vs. what I'd like to wind up with eventually, but I'll try to stick to how wonderful the KX is for now...) It's funny how little difference there is on paper between the KX and the K1000, yet how large a difference in how I feel about *using* the two cameras. I've been treating my K1000 as a backup instead of being part of the regular rotation, mostly because of the lack of DOF preview -- I'm just not as comfortable using a K1000. When I had the KX it got a lot of use. (When I shoot screwmount, I have DOF preview as a lens feature even when it's not present as a body feature, so (oddly or not) I feel more comfortable using an S1a than a K1000.) But I loved the KX. Felt very good in my hands and did what I needed it to do. -- Glenn
Re: Word photo -- food for five senses
On 25/10/04, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: for hundreds of years Europeans believed that Ethiopians (or Abyssinians as they were then called) cut steaks from the sides of their still-living cattle, and ate the steaks warm and raw. I seem to remember Dr. Johnson may have used the story in 'Rasselas, or The Happy Valley', or possibly it came from James Bruce (the 'pale Abyssinian'). Certainly they do eat raw meat, a dish called 'kitfo', which is somewhat like steak tartare. I've always had a pet theory that the idea of them taking a slice from a living beast is some sort of amalgam from kitfo, and the practice of cattle herders in the south of draining blood from the animal to mix with milk as a source of food. Bob I'm going to get you on the BBCs 'Call My Bluff' if it kills me. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: More homework: Frick Park 360
On 26/10/04, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed: Interesting. I prefer the second one. I'll have to go have another look . Sure thing Arthur ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Older Series 1 lenses on the ist-D
Don, I've done this to my Series 1 Macro (I think it is the 90-180 Flat-Field). Not sure of the range, but I know it's the Flat-Field. As far as I can tell, it hasn't affected the lens in the least. I just filed it down with a metal file to an appropriate size . . . oh, and I protected the rear elements and openings with electrical tape. Good Luck, IL Bill On Oct 25, 2004, at 5:10 PM, Don Sanderson wrote: I have several older Vivitar lenses I'd like to try on the D. Problem is the flange that protects the aperture control lever on the rear side won't let them mount. Does anyone know of any downside to cutting this flange down to the size it is on newer lenses? It'll probably wreck the resale value but I'm really curious to see how they do on the digi. Don
RE: Loading Jobo spirals
Nope, no knack that I ever found. I just sat in a dark room with a waste roll of film till I got used to it. I'll probably have to learn all over again now. Just ordered some Tri X, Plus X and soup mix. IIRC I did used to cut the leader slightly rounded, that seemed to help getting it started. Cut before I opened the cassette, of course. Unfortunately that means a camera where you can leave the leader out a bit when you rewind. Rats! Never thought about that, the 5n's won't do it. I WILL have to learn over again. Don -Original Message- From: Steve Jolly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 8:28 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Loading Jobo spirals Developed my first C41 film yesterday - with *mostly* successful results, although I think I'll do a couple more test rolls before I trust myself with anything I care about. The thing I found hardest was loading the film onto the plastic Jobo spirals - I'm used to the Patterson system, which I find much easier. Is there a knack that I'm missing? S
RE: Loading Jobo spirals
You can purchase an inexpensive leader retriever which solves that problem ;-)) I've got a couple of small ones, one that stays with the camera bag and the other that lives in the darkroom. Shel [Original Message] From: Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] IIRC I did used to cut the leader slightly rounded, that seemed to help getting it started. Cut before I opened the cassette, of course. Unfortunately that means a camera where you can leave the leader out a bit when you rewind. Rats! Never thought about that, the 5n's won't do it. I WILL have to learn over again.
Re: At the park this weekend
Yeah, just outside the I-275 beltway. The park I went to was a Hamilton County park; the same county Cincy is in. Collin Brendemuehl wrote: Lon, SW Ohio, huh? I'm in Westerville (NE Columbus). You down by Cinci? Sincerely, C. Brendemuehl 'Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to being a Buckeye fan.' not Ronald Reagan Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net
RE: Loading Jobo spirals
What brand are they Shel? I've never been able to make one work, takes me about 25 tries to get the leader out. Always afraid I'll scratch the film. Don -Original Message- From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 9:00 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Loading Jobo spirals You can purchase an inexpensive leader retriever which solves that problem ;-)) I've got a couple of small ones, one that stays with the camera bag and the other that lives in the darkroom. Shel [Original Message] From: Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] IIRC I did used to cut the leader slightly rounded, that seemed to help getting it started. Cut before I opened the cassette, of course. Unfortunately that means a camera where you can leave the leader out a bit when you rewind. Rats! Never thought about that, the 5n's won't do it. I WILL have to learn over again.
Re: Re: Gas Guzzlers
Because a supercharged fuel drag racing engine produces close to 7000 horsepower from just 7 liters, some important research in component design has been conducted in conjunction with various racing teams. I know, for example, that Sealed Power did extensive piston ring research with John Force's crew chief some years ago. Today, a lot of advanced friction materials are being tested in the effort to achieve accurate clutch operation under those conditions. Conditions that really can't be duplicated in labs or on dynonometers. However, most importantly, drag racing is watched with great enthusiasm by millions of people in America and elsewhere. That in itself makes it worthwhile. Its contribution to resource depletion and air pollution has been shown to be insignificant. Less significant, I'm told than that of major league baseball. Of course we could all just stay home and read. Paul PS: I'm sure that the drag racing sanctioning bodies are not awaiting your endorsement g. Hi, From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2004/10/26 Tue AM 10:34:58 GMT To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Gas Guzzlers The cars that burn 16 gallons on a single drag racing run run use a fuel that's a mixture of nitromethane and methanol, not gasoline. What's more, the amount of fuel used by all motorsports combined in an entire year is a drop in the bucket compared to what is used in a single day by commercial airlines. No reason to be disgusted. It's not exactly promoting fuel economy, is it? Plus, neither of the chemicals are exactly pleasant to handle or store. Being somewhat of a sceptic by nature, I want to see some benefit from an activity like this before I feel like endorsing it. Sheer enjoyment from mechanical things, I can get from stuff already in existence. The benefits from present day drag racing seem to be wholly outweighed by environmental and other concerns. I'm not too keen on giant jetliners, either 8-) mike - Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
Re: Loading Jobo spirals
Don Sanderson wrote: IIRC I did used to cut the leader slightly rounded, that seemed to help getting it started. Cut before I opened the cassette, of course. Is there an advantage to cutting it before opening the cassette? I always do it afterwards... :-) S
C-41 Process Black and White
To those BW purists out there, the PX, TX, TM folks: (You KNOW who you are!) ;-) Is the C41 BW film even worth a try? I understand a mini lab will probably give me off color prints. How does it behave when printing yourself, or at a good lab? Is the tonality and sharpness any good? Any special tricks? (Over/Under expose, filters, etc.) Don
Re: Word photo -- food for five senses
On 25/10/04, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: Certainly they do eat raw meat, a dish called 'kitfo', which is somewhat like steak tartare. I discovered Ethiopian food before I went vegetarian. I've tasted kitfo; didn't care much for it, but it was better than I'd expected. Back then my favourite Ethiopian meat dish was zilzil tibs. Fortunately Ethiopian cuisine is so rich in flavourful vegetarian dishes that I don't particularly miss the meat, but at a time when most of the meat I ate was because it was convenient rather than because I liked it (realizing that was one part of my decision to give it up), all but one of the meat dishes I actually _enjoyed_ were in Ethiopian restaurants. (The other was a burger as prepared at one particular ski lodge that I've only ever been to twice in my life (when an employer paid for the trip). I sometimes also liked orange beef or kung pao beef, but I liked both of those dishes despite the meat, not because of it.) I've always had a pet theory that the idea of them taking a slice from a living beast is some sort of amalgam from kitfo, and the practice of cattle herders in the south of draining blood from the animal to mix with milk as a source of food. Whatever the source of the idea, the meme is old enough to be in the Kosher laws in the Old Testament. Now I'm wondering whether it was ever practiced or if the prohibition was based on the type of misunderstanding you suggested. -- Glenn, craving stuffed jalapenos
Assessing the KX
My favorite feature of the KX has always been my favorite feature of the MX. The Shutter Lock switch. Used to use DOF preview. Haven't for years. Only use a self-timer once a decade or thereabouts. MLU? It's been almost 20 years since I've used it. And ... the lock on the KX doesn't wear out like the MX lock does. What's your KX assessment? Sincerely, C. Brendemuehl 'Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to owners of Canon Nikon.' really not Ronald Reagan Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net
RE: [PAW] Ladder to heaven?
If I see a bird in the sky, that I cannot identify - it's a UFO, right? I'm not a bird expert. So, I see quite a few UFO's every day! Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 25. oktober 2004 16:30 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: RE: [PAW] Ladder to heaven? There's NO SUCH THING as UFO's! NASA -Original Message- From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 9:06 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [PAW] Ladder to heaven? Reflexes off a fishing rod moving across the frame is perhaps not unlikely. Other than that it could have been a UFO just landding on the right hand side of the photographer. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Doug Franklin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 25. oktober 2004 14:30 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: [PAW] Ladder to heaven? On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 12:22:29 +0100, Steve Jolly wrote: Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: http://republika.pl/sylwekp/PAW/stairway_th.jpg Will anybody guess how the ladder appeared on the photo? ;-) Comments welcome! Lights on the mast of a sinking ship? :-) Aircraft landing at a nearby airport? TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: Gas Guzzlers
We have drag racing as well. http://www.santapod.com/ Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: C-41 Process Black and White
It's a mixed bag. Some labs handle it well and give you nice results. Tones are really soft but even. So it works well for many portrait situations and the results are very predictable. A good thing. And using the ubiquitous C-41 process is a very convenient feature. Not much of a toe or shoulder, IIRC. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong on that.) Sincerely, C. Brendemuehl 'Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.' Ronald Reagan Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net
Re: Russian lenses
Hi, I have the zenitar fisheye and really like it... here are some older pics with it (I think I've posted them before) http://www.xjapan.de/fotopage/div/palmen.html http://www.xjapan.de/fotopage/div/schlossplatz.html http://www.xjapan.de/fotopage/div/schlossplatzbw.html http://www.xjapan.de/fotopage/div/fisheye1.html http://www.xjapan.de/fotopage/div/bhf1.html bye Katrin Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 20mm is a monster, very large (I thnk, something like 82mm fron diameter). Cannot be used on LX with rear filters (but I don't think that's neccessary). The front cap slips off too easily. Quite sharp in the center, so so at the edges, quite a bit of color fringing. Hi David, I had both in the past (still have the 16mm). I second what Mishka writes about the 20mm, especially the front cap part... It was a real pain to find anoter one when I lost the original cap somewhere in Wien... I made a side by side comparison with the screwmount Mir 20/3.5. The screwmount lens was (slightly) better in the edges at every aperture wider than f/8. My 47 K also had a stiff aperture ring so I decided to get rid of it. No problem mounting it on the Z-1p. Otoh, the fisheye is just superb. I cannot see any flaws in it. Get one, you'll love it. Again, I agree. One of the best Russian lenses ever. I had two of them (the first one stolen) and the second one is still in my bag when the need arises. Probably the only non Pentax lens with a coating at the same level of the SMC. HTH. Ciao, Gianfranco = _ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail -- Geschenkt: 3 Monate GMX ProMail + 3 Ausgaben der TV Movie mit DVD Jetzt anmelden und testen http://www.gmx.net/de/go/mail
RE: Loading Jobo spirals
I could see what I was doing! Less nicked fingers. ;-) Don -Original Message- From: Steve Jolly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 9:18 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Loading Jobo spirals Don Sanderson wrote: IIRC I did used to cut the leader slightly rounded, that seemed to help getting it started. Cut before I opened the cassette, of course. Is there an advantage to cutting it before opening the cassette? I always do it afterwards... :-) S
Re: C-41 Process Black and White
Most of them will give you peculiar shadow noise when scanned. It's relatively easy to print through with photoshop, but some folks like to give extra exposure to avoid this. I've had some nice results with the latest Kodak BW400CN. I haven't tried wet printing any of them, so couldn't comment on that. Neil On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 10:40:36 -0400, Collin Brendemuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's a mixed bag. Some labs handle it well and give you nice results. Tones are really soft but even. So it works well for many portrait situations and the results are very predictable. A good thing. And using the ubiquitous C-41 process is a very convenient feature. Not much of a toe or shoulder, IIRC. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong on that.) Sincerely, C. Brendemuehl 'Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.' Ronald Reagan Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net -- http://www.pixpopuli.com
Re: C-41 Process Black and White
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Don Sanderson wrote: To those BW purists out there, the PX, TX, TM folks: (You KNOW who you are!) ;-) You weren't thinking of me, were you? :-) Is the C41 BW film even worth a try? I understand a mini lab will probably give me off color prints. How does it behave when printing yourself, or at a good lab? Is the tonality and sharpness any good? Any special tricks? (Over/Under expose, filters, etc.) I have never used chromogenic. I have seen it and prints change colour noticeably under different light. I thought it was Khaki and White instead of BW. You also cannot push to get grain (I only shoot 4-5 rolls a year, but it's usually TX @ 800). On a tangent: I have found a lab that still run an optical machine and I ask them to do my BW there. The digital machine has nice (to me) contrast but sharpens the grain. Nasty. They don't do matt, but hey-ho. YMMV, Kostas
RE: C-41 Process Black and White
Hi Collin, Don't understand toe or shoulder, is this steep highlight/shadow curve? Don -Original Message- From: Collin Brendemuehl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 9:41 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: C-41 Process Black and White It's a mixed bag. Some labs handle it well and give you nice results. Tones are really soft but even. So it works well for many portrait situations and the results are very predictable. A good thing. And using the ubiquitous C-41 process is a very convenient feature. Not much of a toe or shoulder, IIRC. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong on that.) Sincerely, C. Brendemuehl 'Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.' Ronald Reagan Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net
Re: Pentax at COSTCO
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 09:38:27 -0400, Daniel J. Matyola wrote: I was at Costco yesterday, and decided to check up on the cameras again. Among about a dozen offerings were the Optio S40 and the MZ-60. So, Pentax is still out there with the mass market stores, if not as heavily as we would like. Our local BJs, which is similar to Costco, has the Optio S4, but that's it. Still, I guess it's better than nothing. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: C-41 Process Black and White
Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have never used chromogenic. I have seen it and prints change colour noticeably under different light. Easy to solve that problem: Shoot chromogenic film and print it on traditional silver photo paper. I do this sometimes. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Loading Jobo spirals
Don Sanderson wrote: I could see what I was doing! Less nicked fingers. ;-) Ah. Safety scissors! :-) S
RE: Non K-mount portrait lenses
I know you asked about lenses other than K-mount, but ... The A100/2.8 goes $200 on eBay. There's one from GB listd right now. It's just a little long, but still very good for bust shots. And the contrasty A coatings help. Interestingly, M100/2.8 lenses, with slightly warmer coatings, have been going for more. I may give the M75-150 a go for a portrait. It's reasonably sharp and a good range, with optimum sharpness definitely from 80-120mm. Sincerely, C. Brendemuehl 'Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.' Ronald Reagan Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net
Re: C-41 Process Black and White
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: I have never used chromogenic. I have seen it and prints change colour noticeably under different light. I thought it was Khaki and White instead of BW. You also cannot push to get grain (I only shoot 4-5 rolls a year, but it's usually TX @ 800). With chromagenics, you pull to get grain instead. IIRC. Most minilabs with reasonably modern equipment can push the b+w effect button to give you true b+w prints - I've had these once or twice, and while they're no substitute for a proper hand-prepared darkroom print, I haven't noticed any of the colour shifting you mention. S
Re: Russian lenses
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 16:50:02 +0200 (MEST), Katrin Mller-Sauer wrote: I have the zenitar fisheye and really like it... here are some older pics with it (I think I've posted them before) bye Katrin I also have the Zenitar 16/2.8 fisheye and have been really pleased with it. As someone else mentioned, the colors are a bit more vivid through this lens than my others, but it's also a sharp lens that handles flare better than most of my non-Pentax lenses. It's built like a tank, and my aperture ring is a little notchy, as someone else also mentioned. But overall, it's the best $130 I've spent on a single piece of camera gear, with the possible exception of the battery grip for the MZ-S. Just remember that there are only so many uses for a fisheye as compared to, say a 50/1.4. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: Non K-mount portrait lenses
Collin Brendemuehl wrote: I know you asked about lenses other than K-mount, but ... I may give the M75-150 a go for a portrait. It's reasonably sharp and a good range, with optimum sharpness definitely from 80-120mm. Sincerely, C. Brendemuehl I got me one for portraits, it has a nice feel and can't complain about the sharpness. And I didn't pay much for it, some $40. In mint condition. /Henri
Re: Re: Gas Guzzlers
- Original Message - From: Subject: Re: Re: Gas Guzzlers Hi, Talking about gas guzzlers, I watched a drag racing programme the other week. One of the guys with the fast cars pointed out that he uses 16 gallons of fuel per run. To put it in perspective he said if you put 16 buckets of fuel on the ground, I burn it in my run faster than you can kick the buckets over I'm not sure whether to be impressed or disgusted. Be impressed. They burn alcohol, Mother Natures fuel. William Robb
Re: M42 ultra-wide
- Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell Subject: RE: M42 ultra-wide There is a 15mm SMCT on ebay now but the bids over $1100. Sheesh, if thats US$, it's not far off what I paid for my brand new in the box A15/3.5 this past spring. William Robb
Re: M42 ultra-wide
- Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell Subject: RE: M42 ultra-wide are there no APS format prime lenses with the KA mount wider than 20mm? It seems absurd to use a huge expensive lens like the 15mm SMCT/K/KA for APS sensor format. DA14mm, DA 16-45, A 18-55 (covers full frame, but not well). I like the 15mm because I can use it on my film cameras as well, so it makes sense to me. William Robb
Re: Re: Gas Guzzlers
- Original Message - From: Subject: Re: Re: Gas Guzzlers Obviously not a Smart car. Thats what they are called. MB just started importing them to these parts. I don't think in my neck of the woods they are a Smart car, though I do hope to be proven wrong. William Robb
Re: Non K-mount portrait lenses
- Original Message - From: Kostas Kavoussanakis Subject: RE: Non K-mount portrait lenses On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Take a look at the Pentax M 75~150 Zoom. I don't care much for it except as a portrait lens. Seconded, though it's widest aperture is f4. Only came out of my bag when I bought the more versatile and AF F70-210. However, the 75-150 is light and short and also reverses (for macro) very nicely. I am keeping mine, but you can find one in Mint- or so condition around the 40 GBP mark on ebay. You guys both missed the subject line William Robb
Re: Re: Gas Guzzlers
- Original Message - From: Subject: Re: Re: Gas Guzzlers It's not exactly promoting fuel economy, is it? Plus, neither of the chemicals are exactly pleasant to handle or store. Being somewhat of a sceptic by nature, I want to see some benefit from an activity like this before I feel like endorsing it. Sheer enjoyment from mechanical things, I can get from stuff already in existence. The benefits from present day drag racing seem to be wholly outweighed by environmental and other concerns. I'm not too keen on giant jetliners, either 8-) Pretty much every engineering and safety improvement in automobiles got it's start in motorsports. Even just seeing how much raw power can be eked out of an engine will (and has) trickle down to the consumer eventually in engines with better efficiency. William Robb
Re: Gas Guzzlers
- Original Message - From: Keith Whaley Subject: Re: Gas Guzzlers Now, just what would a ...ridiculous little Mercedes Benz Stupid car be? I'm afraid I can't see past your prejudice... Be afraid. http://www.smart.com/ I am pretty sure I could carry one in the back of my truck. William Robb
Re: Loading Jobo spirals
- Original Message - From: Steve Jolly Subject: Loading Jobo spirals Developed my first C41 film yesterday - with *mostly* successful results, although I think I'll do a couple more test rolls before I trust myself with anything I care about. The thing I found hardest was loading the film onto the plastic Jobo spirals - I'm used to the Patterson system, which I find much easier. Is there a knack that I'm missing? Keep your Jobo reels clean. Soak them in vinegar now and again, and scrub them with a kitchen brush. They don't work at all when wet. Other than that, just push the film onto the reels. I never bother to walk them on. I have found that putting a slight backwards bend onto the film tongue helps them load more smoothly. William Robb
Re: Loading Jobo spirals
- Original Message - From: Steve Jolly Subject: Re: Loading Jobo spirals Don Sanderson wrote: IIRC I did used to cut the leader slightly rounded, that seemed to help getting it started. Cut before I opened the cassette, of course. Is there an advantage to cutting it before opening the cassette? I always do it afterwards... :-) Being able to work in a lit room is an advantage. William Robb
Re: Loading Jobo spirals
- Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff Subject: RE: Loading Jobo spirals You can purchase an inexpensive leader retriever which solves that problem ;-)) I've got a couple of small ones, one that stays with the camera bag and the other that lives in the darkroom. Dymo label tape makes great leader retriever as well. William Robb
Re: Lens ruminations on a Monday...
Here's my thoughts, FWTW: 1. Part with all of them except the 28-70/4AL. That little thing looks pretty convenient, given its size. 2. Especially part with the Tak-A70/200. Replacing it with the SMC70-210/4 will be a real improvement. 3. Get the good FA24-90 for wider shooting range. 4. For $200ish pick up a (manual focus) Tokina 80-200/2.8. It's big but pretty sharp and gives your eyes that bright finder. My main thought is to both reduce lens count (thus improving the lugging factor) and improving the quality for not a lot more money. Even to forego #2 #4 you can have a really good outfit with only 2 zoom lenses. Sincerely, C. Brendemuehl 'Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to people who like Canon's color reproduction.' not really Ronald Reagan Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net
Re: Gas Guzzlers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2004/10/26 Tue AM 10:34:58 GMT To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Gas Guzzlers The cars that burn 16 gallons on a single drag racing run run use a fuel that's a mixture of nitromethane and methanol, not gasoline. What's more, the amount of fuel used by all motorsports combined in an entire year is a drop in the bucket compared to what is used in a single day by commercial airlines. No reason to be disgusted. It's not exactly promoting fuel economy, is it? Fuel economy in a RACE car? Not even a blip on the chart. A meaningless goal. Plus, neither of the chemicals are exactly pleasant to handle or store. Uhhh, so what? Who in the population runs across them, ever? The people that DO, are trained in their dangerous characteristics and use. Another meaningless concern. Being somewhat of a sceptic by nature, I want to see some benefit from an activity like this before I feel like endorsing it. Sheer enjoyment from mechanical things, I can get from stuff already in existence. The benefits from present day drag racing seem to be wholly outweighed by environmental and other concerns. I'm not too keen on giant jetliners, either 8-) mike Benefits? People are entertained, all without harm to anybody else. What other benefits are you after? Entertainment must reap benefits in order to be acceptable to you? Never heard of such a thing... Do you belong to GreenPeace, by any chance? I'll bet you do. You'd be taken in by their advertising... Ah well, be good... keith whaley
Re: C-41 Process Black and White
Here are a couple of pix on chromogenic - http://tinyurl.com/4tsev - done with a cheapie Nikon PS and processed at a local mini-lab. Adjusted in PS-Elements for levels. Paul - Original Message - From: Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PDML [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 9:19 AM Subject: C-41 Process Black and White To those BW purists out there, the PX, TX, TM folks: (You KNOW who you are!) ;-) Is the C41 BW film even worth a try? I understand a mini lab will probably give me off color prints. How does it behave when printing yourself, or at a good lab? Is the tonality and sharpness any good? Any special tricks? (Over/Under expose, filters, etc.) Don
