Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR
Bill, that is shocking! I used to use 67II's and did NOT think they were light or small. At least it had a big negative. That Canon is one BIG camera for having a sensor of that size. I guess that was my point. People don't realize sometimes just how big the big Canon is. It's something to consider when you are wishing for performance enhancement features though. Yeah, and I heard Viagra pills are bigger than one expects, too. John Celio (trying to be silly. failing.) -- http://www.neovenator.com AIM: Neopifex Hey, I'm an artist. I can do whatever I want and pretend I'm making a statement.
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR
I'm no fan of Kodak but hate to see the other full frame sensor discontinued: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0505/05053104kodakslrdisc.asp Folks, what bugs me much more is not the signs of digital age as Shel pointed out. Consider, now we're back to only one company providing (albeit mighty excellent) full frame DSLR... It means - lack of real competition and lack of choice... We're back to 2002 (is it the year when 1Ds was introduced), aren't we? Fascination with incorrectly-named full-frame sensors still irks me. I know this topic has been beaten to death here, but come on, if only ONE company is doing it, there must be good reasons for it. No point in listing what I think those reasons are, though. In my limited experience, those who want a 35mm-size sensor seem to cling to their desire no matter how much sense one tries to talk into them. John Celio ...is really glad to not be working on the sales floor at the camera shop anymore. dealing with self-righteous asshat customers was getting to be too much. the digital lab is much less hostile. (: -- http://www.neovenator.com AIM: Neopifex Hey, I'm an artist. I can do whatever I want and pretend I'm making a statement.
Re: Questions re Pentax made lens filters
Hi! If I may make a suggestion Yes of course... Seriously, don't go out and buy a bunch of clear glass. It's not really time consuming to change filters. If you are in an all fired rush to get some glass, get a really good polarizer in each of the sizes you use, and one protective filter in each of the sizes you use. If you still shoot BW film, consider some filters for that. I have two Cokin A system holders and a good bunch of filters including polarizer... So perhaps it would translate your suggestion to buying just one protective 49 mm and one protective 52 mm... Well, given what eBay/PDML offers I will do more or less just that. May I ask what is it mail order? And can I use mail order from Israel? -- Boris
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR
Hi! Here is a strange comparison for you. The Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II is: 156 x 158 x 80 mm, and 1565 grams, battery in. The Pentax 67II is 185.5mm x 151.0mm x 106.0mm and 1660g with AE Pentaprism Finder, but no batteries. Anyone know what a couple of CR-123 batteries weighs? Just being silly. Bill, I am aware of the sizes of cameras. In my local camera club there is a guy who shoots birds with Canon gear. I've seen his full size backpacks... I even once tried to pick one up... The attempt did not last too long though... That's why I don't think it would make sense for me to buy an *istD battery grip :). I really appreciate the fact that Pentax makes small and light gear... But you pulled the discussion away from the direction of my own pull :). Boris -- Boris
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR
Hi John! :-) Fascination with incorrectly-named full-frame sensors still irks me. I know this topic has been beaten to death here, but come on, if only ONE company is doing it, there must be good reasons for it. No point in listing what I think those reasons are, though. In my limited experience, those who want a 35mm-size sensor seem to cling to their desire no matter how much sense one tries to talk into them. John Celio ...is really glad to not be working on the sales floor at the camera shop anymore. dealing with self-righteous asshat customers was getting to be too much. the digital lab is much less hostile. (: That's my point exactly. There seems to be a difficulty for camera manufacturers to produce so called full-frame DSLR. *Personally* I would *prefer* full frame DSLR so that *personally* I would get the same characteristics from my lenses I am used to shooting film. But that's beside the point. Somehow I think the discontinuation of Kodak cameras means slightly more than just a line in DPReview newscast... Boris -- Boris
Re: SMC pentax 1:3.5 100 mm macro
Hi Toralf, yes, it ist built by Cosina (also one can buy the lens labeled Cosina). It goes down to 1:2. I own one and it performes well. It is very light and small. Price? Something above 100 Euros (in Germany) depending on state for the Pentax version - below 100 Euros for the Cosina version (though only the label is changed). Best regards, Hans. --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --- Von: Toralf Lund [EMAIL PROTECTED] An: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Betreff: SMC pentax 1:3.5 100 mm macro Datum: Tue, 31 May 2005 22:37:43 +0200 What would you pay for it? (See subject)? Is this a lense built by Cosina or whatever? And *not* an 1:1 macro? - Toralf -- Hans Imglueck Weitersagen: GMX DSL-Flatrates mit Tempo-Garantie! Ab 4,99 Euro/Monat: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR
On 31/5/05, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed: I guess that was my point. People don't realize sometimes just how big the big Canon is. It's something to consider when you are wishing for performance enhancement features though. I think it appears big when all one is used to is smaller gear. I enjoy the MX, which is very small. But holding a Canon, I don't consider it unduly big. I must be odd. It feels like any top of the range film SLR with a motor drive and battery attached. It does get a tad heavy with a big lens, but an *ist D with the 80-200 2.8 aboard is no featherweight! relatively speaking of course :-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: RE: My backyard (was RE: Cotty's backyard
I suspected that I was misunderstanding something, but did it anyway .-) I guess Norway is OK, but we haven\t one day with more than 20C yet this year, so you'll need warm clothes... Dag fra: Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi, yes, that looks nice. I've never been to any of the Scandinavian countries, but whenever I think the politics in this country will drive me into exile, I always imagine I will end up in Sweden, Denmark or Norway. They look like nice relaxed countries. By the way, it's a million pound view only because there are 4 houses in it... -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: DagT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 31 May 2005 20:38 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: My backyard (was RE: Cotty's backyard På 30. mai. 2005 kl. 16.35 skrev Cotty: On 30/5/05, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: Hi, this is the view you get in London for about the same money as those properties that Cotty showed: http://www.web-options.com/View2.jpg so in fact that's a million-pound view! Wow, this will cost you 1/4 of that, 40 minutes walk from the central station in Oslo: http://foto.no/cgi-bin/bruker/dittnavn/layout1/show_kategori_i mage.cgi? brukerid=158serieid=0bildeid=5889 By the way, this pictures was taken tonight, at 9:21 pm. It doesn´t get very dark around here at this time of the year... DagT
Re: Seen in this week's Amateur Photographer...
This is marketing. It means nothing. Dario - Original Message - From: Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 4:50 AM Subject: Seen in this week's Amateur Photographer... ...a full-page Pentax advert containing the following copy: At Pentax we've been making some of the world's finest lenses for over 50 years. Now, with the *istDS we've created a digital SLR that's compatible with all of them, with just a few limitations in functions. Am I the only person to find it amusing that one of the least elegant features of the Pentax digital SLRs (the automatic stop-down metering mode that works around the lack of an aperture indicator coupler) is now one of their major selling points? Conspiracy theories: * This proves that Pentax aren't planning to release any new lenses in the near future. * This proves that Pentax realise the importance of backwards compatibility; we can expect future bodies to feature the reappearance of the aperture indicator coupler. * This is marketing. It means nothing. S
Full Frame - What's the problem?
Why is it seemingly so difficult to produce a camera with a full frame (35mm) sensor, if Pentax and many others have/will have MF digitals surely one of these sensors could be used, even if it has to be masked? CN III -- Whatever you Wanadoo: http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/time/ This email has been checked for most known viruses - find out more at: http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/help/id/7098.htm
Re: Seen in this week's Amateur Photographer...
On Jun 1, 2005, at 2:50 PM, Steve Jolly wrote: Am I the only person to find it amusing that one of the least elegant features of the Pentax digital SLRs (the automatic stop- down metering mode that works around the lack of an aperture indicator coupler) is now one of their major selling points? I'm still wondering where their image stabilising and ultrasonic lenses are. If Pal is correct and Pentax is working on an EOS-killer, I guess we can expect to see these features soon... any day now... just around the corner... Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Re: Full Frame - What's the problem?
--- Cornelius Nuzzlemuff III [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why is it seemingly so difficult to produce a camera with a full frame (35mm) sensor, if Pentax and many others have/will have MF digitals surely one of these sensors could be used, even if it has to be masked? I imagine current full frame lenses designed for film might not do well with full frame digital, especially the corners of wide angles? Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan __ Discover Yahoo! Stay in touch with email, IM, photo sharing and more. Check it out! http://discover.yahoo.com/stayintouch.html
Re: Seen in this week's Amateur Photographer...
--- David Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm still wondering where their image stabilising and ultrasonic lenses are. If Pal is correct and Pentax is working on an EOS-killer, I guess we can expect to see these features soon... any day now... just around the corner... IMHO, Pentax desperately need IS/VR type technology to kill anything. Anything else w/o IS/VR first is a waste of resource. Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan __ Discover Yahoo! Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM and more. Check it out! http://discover.yahoo.com/online.html
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams
Shel Belinkoff wrote on 01.06.05 1:34: Camera bodies are discontinued. Kodak will continue to develop CCD and CMOS image sensors. Here's the part that's most discouraging: Kodak will only support the cameras through 2008. So, the cameras are what, about a year or so old, making it that Kodak will only support what is arguably their flagshio camera for a total of four or five years. That's todays digital world, I guess. So long for FF sensor cameras popularity. It seems that popularity of 35 mm sized sensor cameras will decline. Nikon has sold 4 times more D1X than Canon their EOS 1Ds and sales of D2X are much higher than that of 1Ds Mk II. Not to mention millions of already sold cheaper cameras with APS-C sized sensors. Sometimes I think that Canon keeps production of FF DSLR just for prestige and to keep amateurs thinking that they'll have upgrade path in the future. Now it seems that FF DSLRs will just remain as expensive professionals' specialized tools and will never gain any popularity among amateurs like us. FF is dead - long live APS-C! ;-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Seen in this week's Amateur Photographer...
Quoting Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [...] Conspiracy theories: [...] I think the most likely conspiracy theory is that Pentax Japan is holding their cards to tightly to their chest as usual. Pentax UK sounds like they don't know what's coming, so they choose to focus on the past. Pentax Japan is extremely inept at making use of buzz for creating interest about coming products. If the worlwide distributors were fed with little bits of information they were allowed to pass on to dealers and customers, the whole brand-name would suddenly be more active and viable. Jostein This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
Re: Questions re Pentax made lens filters
Quoting Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED]: May I ask what is it mail order? And can I use mail order from Israel? Mail order is what you do when you buy things from shops and have them sent to you by mail. Like BH. :-) Jostein This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
Battery Grip ist D
I just have got the battery grip for the ist D, it looks and feels wonderful. I have a couple of questions though. Does the switch on the top of the camera have to be on and the switch on the bottom of the grip have to be on for it to work. The controls on the battery grip don't work without the control on top of the camera being set to on. Not sure if this is normal or a fault in my unit. Regards Charles Wilson Sydney, Australia
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR
On 1 Jun 2005 at 9:26, Boris Liberman wrote: That's my point exactly. There seems to be a difficulty for camera manufacturers to produce so called full-frame DSLR. Hi Boris, In my opinion it would be no more difficult to produce a FF DSLR than a partial frame DSLR but it's guaranteed to be a heck of a lot more expensive because of the sensor and has limited market target hence risk. *Personally* I would *prefer* full frame DSLR so that *personally* I would get the same characteristics from my lenses I am used to shooting film. But that's beside the point. My fish-eye just never feels the same on my *ist D ;-) Somehow I think the discontinuation of Kodak cameras means slightly more than just a line in DPReview newscast... More FF market share for Canon and hopefully price drops along the way or alternately room for another player? Cheers, 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: Full Frame - What's the problem?
Alan Chan wrote: --- Cornelius Nuzzlemuff III [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why is it seemingly so difficult to produce a camera with a full frame (35mm) sensor, if Pentax and many others have/will have MF digitals surely one of these sensors could be used, even if it has to be masked? I imagine current full frame lenses designed for film might not do well with full frame digital, especially the corners of wide angles? This issue has been discussed *a lot* on this list an other places, hasn't it? And yes, as far as I understand, the corners/border areas is a problem; electronic sensors (or the ones currently used, anyway) are more sensitive to the angle of incident of the light, than traditional film is. But, they still probably *could* use the MF sensors. The real issue is the price, I think. Again, this has been discussed a lot. Some argue that its always going to be prohibitively expensive - for the price range of 35mm SLRs - to produce 35mm sensors, and that digital chips have become more affordable over the years mainly because they have become smaller, so we really want components like the CMOS/CCD sensor to be as small as possible - or something like that. I don't quite agree with that reasoning; I think we have also seen that large components have become less expensive over the years, and that the improvements in production techniques that allow smaller units/higher integration, have actually also made it easier to produce larger ones. However, I think it's fair to say that the price of (for instance) the sensor is always going to go up as its size increases. - Toralf
Re: Full Frame - What's the problem?
Cornelius Nuzzlemuff III wrote: Why is it seemingly so difficult to produce a camera with a full frame (35mm) sensor, if Pentax and many others have/will have MF digitals surely one of these sensors could be used, even if it has to be masked? The larger the sensor the lower the production yield and hence the higher the cost. Currently it's only possible to produce full-frame sensors in camera bodies that are priced for the professional market. Pentax have chosen to make their first large-sensor camera a medium format body rather than a 35mm one because they have judged that the people who will buy such a camera (from Pentax) are more likely to have an existing investment in MF lenses than 35mm ones. S
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR
Why not try to be optimistic: They may have decided to drop the Nikon og Canon based full frame cameras in order to concentrate on the cooperation with Pentax for developing the 18MP 645D. That way they don't have to deal with the problems concerning FF and wide angles, as Pentax will be able to design a 645 version of the 14mm in stead. Pentax never lets us know much of their plans anyway, so why not let the speculations be positive... DagT fra: Alin Flaider [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm no fan of Kodak but hate to see the other full frame sensor discontinued: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0505/05053104kodakslrdisc.asp Servus, Alin
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams
Quoting Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED]: FF is dead - long live APS-C! ;-) I think you're right. Now that the MedF systems are entering the market with cameras more suited for work outside studios, chances are they will put the FF high-pixel cameras in a squeeze. Jostein This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
Re: Seen in this week's Amateur Photographer...
On 6/1/05, Alan Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IMHO, Pentax desperately need IS/VR type technology to kill anything. Actually, they only need some nukes grin More good lenses, an MZ-S-like DSLR, accesoriesflashes - that will keep me away from the dark side. Uh, and money to buy them ;) Alex Sarbu
Re: Battery Grip ist D
Charles Wilson a écrit : I just have got the battery grip for the ist D, it looks and feels wonderful. I have a couple of questions though. Does the switch on the top of the camera have to be on and the switch on the bottom of the grip have to be on for it to work. The controls on the battery grip don't work without the control on top of the camera being set to on. Not sure if this is normal or a fault in my unit. The switch on the boby is a master switch for both body and grip. The swith on the grip is only for the grip. Michel
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR
On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Boris Liberman wrote: That's my point exactly. There seems to be a difficulty for camera manufacturers to produce so called full-frame DSLR. Difficulty? Expense, and particularly return on investment. Kodak was not selling lenses together with their body. Somehow I think the discontinuation of Kodak cameras means slightly more than just a line in DPReview newscast... What then? Kostas
Re: SMC pentax 1:3.5 100 mm macro
On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Hans Imglueck wrote: It is very light and small. Price? Something above 100 Euros (in Germany) depending on state for the Pentax version - below 100 Euros for the Cosina version (though only the label is changed). Is the Cosina SMCed? Kostas
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: Shel Belinkoff wrote on 01.06.05 1:34: Camera bodies are discontinued. Kodak will continue to develop CCD and CMOS image sensors. Here's the part that's most discouraging: Kodak will only support the cameras through 2008. So, the cameras are what, about a year or so old, making it that Kodak will only support what is arguably their flagshio camera for a total of four or five years. That's todays digital world, I guess. So long for FF sensor cameras popularity. [ ... ] amateurs like us. FF is dead - long live APS-C! ;-) Hmmm... I've been thinking that camera producers are bound to increase the sensor size soon because the megapixel race won't stop, and sensor elements much smaller than the ones used today are quite pointless (as far as I understand - not due to the component size or anything, but pretty hard optical limitations.) Or do you think they'll keep squeezing more pixels into the current size, not caring about the fact that the quality/dynamics of each pixel will deteriorate? - T
Pentax *ist-DL
I haven't seen this anywhere else, but someone found this on the swedish pentax site. It looks like another entry level model, targeted even lower than the DS. http://www.pentax.se/index.asp?url=http://www.pentax.se/default.asp?cat_id=491 6.1mpix, 2.8 frames/sec, 2.5 lcd, SD, PentaMIRROR, pretty much the same really. /Henri
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
Henri Toivonen wrote: I haven't seen this anywhere else, but someone found this on the swedish pentax site. It looks like another entry level model, targeted even lower than the DS. http://www.pentax.se/index.asp?url=http://www.pentax.se/default.asp?cat_id=491 6.1mpix, 2.8 frames/sec, 2.5 lcd, SD, PentaMIRROR, pretty much the same really. /Henri http://www.pentax.se/default.asp?cat_id=491
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams
Jostein wrote on 01.06.05 10:11: I think you're right. Now that the MedF systems are entering the market with cameras more suited for work outside studios, chances are they will put the FF high-pixel cameras in a squeeze. Yup, it seems so. Pros demanding high resolution will choose portable MF systems rather. All others will choose smaller, lighter and cheaper APS-C sensor cameras. So who knows if in the future FF DSLRs would disappear completely... -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
Henri, That link doesn't seem to work. Neither of them, actually. Cory - Original Message - From: Henri Toivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 6:12 AM Subject: Re: Pentax *ist-DL Henri Toivonen wrote: I haven't seen this anywhere else, but someone found this on the swedish pentax site. It looks like another entry level model, targeted even lower than the DS. http://www.pentax.se/index.asp?url=http://www.pentax.se/default.asp?cat_id=491 6.1mpix, 2.8 frames/sec, 2.5 lcd, SD, PentaMIRROR, pretty much the same really. /Henri http://www.pentax.se/default.asp?cat_id=491 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.3.3 - Release Date: 5/31/2005
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR
However, APS offerings continue to proliferate. Which probably indicates which way the DSLR market is going to go. Full frame sensors aren't as important as we once thought. And as the technology improves, they'll probably become less expensive. Even among Canon's high end offerings, only the S is full frame. That too may pass. On Jun 1, 2005, at 1:05 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: Hi! I'm no fan of Kodak but hate to see the other full frame sensor discontinued: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0505/05053104kodakslrdisc.asp Folks, what bugs me much more is not the signs of digital age as Shel pointed out. Consider, now we're back to only one company providing (albeit mighty excellent) full frame DSLR... It means - lack of real competition and lack of choice... We're back to 2002 (is it the year when 1Ds was introduced), aren't we? Boris
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
http://81.92.66.63/index.asp?url=http://81.92.66.63/default.asp?cat_id=491 here is the correct link... DNS servers seem not to work - Original Message - From: Henri Toivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 12:11 PM Subject: Pentax *ist-DL I haven't seen this anywhere else, but someone found this on the swedish pentax site. It looks like another entry level model, targeted even lower than the DS. http://www.pentax.se/index.asp?url=http://www.pentax.se/default.asp?cat_id=491 6.1mpix, 2.8 frames/sec, 2.5 lcd, SD, PentaMIRROR, pretty much the same really. /Henri
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams
Toralf Lund wrote on 01.06.05 11:57: Hmmm... I've been thinking that camera producers are bound to increase the sensor size soon because the megapixel race won't stop, and sensor elements much smaller than the ones used today are quite pointless (as far as I understand - not due to the component size or anything, but pretty hard optical limitations.) Or do you think they'll keep squeezing more pixels into the current size, not caring about the fact that the quality/dynamics of each pixel will deteriorate? Theoritecally yes. But in practice there is sensible limit of used megapixels. Megapixel race is mostly visible in compact digicams. Somehow manufacturers don't want to screw-up quality delivered by much bigger sensors in DSLRs even though they could make now 24 MPix APS-C sensor with photodiodes as small as in current 2/3 8MPix sensors. 6 MPix is good enough to make 30x45 cm prints comparable to output from good slide film. So bigger sensors would be neccessary only in case you do a lot of cropping or bigger size prints. Even then - 12 MPix as used in Nikon D2X - would be more than enough for 99,99% of us and would compete output from at least 6x4.5 cm MF film. Even Michael Reichmann who uses 1Ds was impressed by quality of 20x24 (50x60 cm) prints from D2X. Yes, it has more noise than 1Ds mk II but lower than original 1Ds. In direct comparison these two cameras perform very close - each has its strong and weak points. Here is small comparison of these both cameras: http://www.naturfotograf.com/D2X_rev06.html#top_page -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Full Frame - What's the problem?
The size of the lens mount factors into the equation. The large sensor works on the 645 because it has a large lens mount. Ditto the Canon. Paul On Jun 1, 2005, at 3:17 AM, Cornelius Nuzzlemuff III wrote: Why is it seemingly so difficult to produce a camera with a full frame (35mm) sensor, if Pentax and many others have/will have MF digitals surely one of these sensors could be used, even if it has to be masked? CN III -- Whatever you Wanadoo: http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/time/ This email has been checked for most known viruses - find out more at: http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/help/id/7098.htm
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
David Sládek wrote on 01.06.05 12:33: http://81.92.66.63/index.asp?url=http://81.92.66.63/default.asp?cat_id=491 here is the correct link... DNS servers seem not to work Thanks David for IP :-) For me it seems to be just silver version of *istDs and nothing more... -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR
I meant to say, And as the sensor technology improves, full frame will probably become less important. On Jun 1, 2005, at 6:32 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote: However, APS offerings continue to proliferate. Which probably indicates which way the DSLR market is going to go. Full frame sensors aren't as important as we once thought. And as the technology improves, they'll probably become less expensive. Even among Canon's high end offerings, only the S is full frame. That too may pass. On Jun 1, 2005, at 1:05 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: Hi! I'm no fan of Kodak but hate to see the other full frame sensor discontinued: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0505/05053104kodakslrdisc.asp Folks, what bugs me much more is not the signs of digital age as Shel pointed out. Consider, now we're back to only one company providing (albeit mighty excellent) full frame DSLR... It means - lack of real competition and lack of choice... We're back to 2002 (is it the year when 1Ds was introduced), aren't we? Boris
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
Well, it is downgraded with the AF points at least... It is a budget model and its price should beat both Cannon 350 and Nikon D50... - Original Message - From: Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 12:45 PM Subject: Re: Pentax *ist-DL David Sládek wrote on 01.06.05 12:33: http://81.92.66.63/index.asp?url=http://81.92.66.63/default.asp?cat_id=491 here is the correct link... DNS servers seem not to work Thanks David for IP :-) For me it seems to be just silver version of *istDs and nothing more... -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: David Sládek wrote on 01.06.05 12:33: http://81.92.66.63/index.asp?url=http://81.92.66.63/default.asp?cat_id=491 here is the correct link... DNS servers seem not to work Thanks David for IP :-) For me it seems to be just silver version of *istDs and nothing more... I don't think the s had pentamirror, but I may be wrong. Kostas
Re: Full Frame - What's the problem?
On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Paul Stenquist wrote: The size of the lens mount factors into the equation. The large sensor works on the 645 because it has a large lens mount. Ditto the Canon. So, is a FF sensor bigger in actual dimensions than film? Why the difference? Kostas (depth, that brings it closer to the lens even if there is no pressure plate?)
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: I don't think the s had pentamirror, but I may be wrong. The DS has a pentaprism. However, according to the technical specs linked from that webpage*, so does the *istDL... S *assuming my attempts to interpret Swedish don't mislead me - I'm assuming prism implies a prism of some kind...
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
David Sládek wrote on 01.06.05 12:52: Well, it is downgraded with the AF points at least... Is there anything in this text about AF system? Sorry, I don't understand Swedish so I couldn't find this info :-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote on 01.06.05 12:56: I don't think the s had pentamirror, but I may be wrong. Does pentaprismasökare mean pentamirror? Who speaks Swedish here? -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
SV: Pentax *ist-DL
It means penta prism viewfinder. Paul Eriksson -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från: Sylwester Pietrzyk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Skickat: den 1 juni 2005 13:15 Till: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Ämne: Re: Pentax *ist-DL Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote on 01.06.05 12:56: I don't think the s had pentamirror, but I may be wrong. Does pentaprismasökare mean pentamirror? Who speaks Swedish here? -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote on 01.06.05 12:56: I don't think the s had pentamirror, but I may be wrong. Does pentaprismasökare mean pentamirror? Who speaks Swedish here? I think that's what Henri (the OP) suggested. I think his surname is Finnish :-) http://www.mail-archive.com/pentax-discuss@pdml.net/msg253937.html Kostas
Re: SV: Pentax *ist-DL
Eriksson Paulus wrote on 01.06.05 13:16: It means penta prism viewfinder. Thanks Paul!!! So aparrently this is not pentamirror as some suggested :-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote on 01.06.05 13:19: I think that's what Henri (the OP) suggested. I think his surname is Finnish :-) http://www.mail-archive.com/pentax-discuss@pdml.net/msg253937.html I think Paul knows better as he comes from polypeptide.SE ;-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Full Frame - What's the problem?
Wednesday, June 1, 2005, 12:57:43 PM, Kostas wrote: KK On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Paul Stenquist wrote: The size of the lens mount factors into the equation. The large sensor works on the 645 because it has a large lens mount. Ditto the Canon. KK So, is a FF sensor bigger in actual dimensions than film? Why the KK difference? Optics. The wider the lens mount, the more freedom have the optical designers. And as digital sensors do need optics that have more coincident rays than say a film Leica, larger lens mount means benefits in that. Personally, I would like a FF sensor just because there currently are no superfast lenses in APS format. Like Nikon's excellent 1.4/28mm or Canon's 1.4/24mm lenses, which quite loose their purpose on 1.5/1.6 crop cameras... Once we get f/1 16mm lenses for APS, that could change. Good light! fra
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Does pentaprismasökare mean pentamirror? Who speaks Swedish here? It means pentaprism viewfinder. -tih -- Don't ascribe to stupidity what can be adequately explained by ignorance.
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote on 01.06.05 13:31: It means pentaprism viewfinder. Thanks Tom :-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
And the price is... Regards, Bob S. On 6/1/05, Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote on 01.06.05 13:31: It means pentaprism viewfinder. Thanks Tom :-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
Well, yes. I don´t speak Swedish either but as far as I follow the dpreview talk the AF will have only three instead of 11 focusing points (not known in what possition). - Original Message - From: Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 1:14 PM Subject: Re: Pentax *ist-DL David Sládek wrote on 01.06.05 12:52: Well, it is downgraded with the AF points at least... Is there anything in this text about AF system? Sorry, I don't understand Swedish so I couldn't find this info :-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Later folks
I'll be unsubbing shortly and head for GFM. For those of you who are coming, I look forward to seeing all of you. Bill
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
The L looks like yet another attempt to compete for entry level customers coming from digital compacts. What's odd, though, is that there are no other pages at the Swedish Pentax site pointing to this particular page. No press, no news, no product spec... Looks like an info leak. :-) Jostein Quoting David Sládek [EMAIL PROTECTED]: http://81.92.66.63/index.asp?url=http://81.92.66.63/default.asp?cat_id=491 here is the correct link... DNS servers seem not to work - Original Message - From: Henri Toivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 12:11 PM Subject: Pentax *ist-DL I haven't seen this anywhere else, but someone found this on the swedish pentax site. It looks like another entry level model, targeted even lower than the DS. http://www.pentax.se/index.asp?url=http://www.pentax.se/default.asp?cat_id=491 6.1mpix, 2.8 frames/sec, 2.5 lcd, SD, PentaMIRROR, pretty much the same really. /Henri This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Jostein wrote: Looks like an info leak. :-) I was looking for the 1 April date, but it was nowhere to be seen :-) Kostas
back from the UK
Yesterday I got back from my week in the UK. I spent most of my time in London, but on Saturday, Nate and I went to Oxford to hang out with Cotty, Alma, Godfrey and a couple of Godfrey's friends from the DPreview boards. It was great to finally meet Cotty - he's a gentle giant! :) Alma was very nice and we enjoyed chatting with both of them at the pub. Godfrey's a really smart guy and I got to pick his brain about some things. I have a couple thousand exposures to go through now. Ouch! I also have to rethink my travel kit. More on that later. Amita
digital zoom?
I had an interesting week shooting in London. My kit performed as expected and I didn't miss my macro, but I think my needs for travel in a city are different than those in the country. In a nutshell, I think I need something like an 18-75 or slightly greater zoom, and I wouldn't mind getting a digital-only lens for this purpose. I just got sick of having to switch lenses whenever I wanted to go wider than 28 (42)mm. I am eyeing the Sigma 18-125mm. Does anyone have any experience with this lens? The Pbase samples look good. My only misgiving about this lens is the long minimum focus distance, because I like to take pictures of food in restaurants. Could anyone recommend an alternative? I'm open to suggestions. I thought about the DA 16-45, but I'd still have to swap lenses to go over 45mm. Thanks, Amita
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams
Toralf Lund wrote on 01.06.05 11:57: Hmmm... I've been thinking that camera producers are bound to increase the sensor size soon because the megapixel race won't stop, and sensor elements much smaller than the ones used today are quite pointless (as far as I understand - not due to the component size or anything, but pretty hard optical limitations.) Or do you think they'll keep squeezing more pixels into the current size, not caring about the fact that the quality/dynamics of each pixel will deteriorate? Theoritecally yes. But in practice there is sensible limit of used megapixels. Definitely. But when I call it a race, what I mean to say is that what's sensible isn't necessarily a consideration. Megapixel race is mostly visible in compact digicams. Maybe you are right... But surely a continued race on the compact market, will also have an effect on DSLR design? I'm not sure if people will want to buy a 6MP pixel DSLR if and when, say, 20MP PS cameras become available, even though the DSLR will probably have a much better overall picture quality, really. And even if some might, will the camera manufacturers trust their potential customers to be that sensible? Somehow manufacturers don't want to screw-up quality delivered by much bigger sensors in DSLRs even though they could make now 24 MPix APS-C sensor with photodiodes as small as in current 2/3 8MPix sensors. Yup. As I was trying to say, it's probably not about how small you can make the photodiode from a purely technological perspective, but how small it can be when you consider the fact that it has to collect a certain amount of light in order to be effective at all. The amount of light needed depends on the sensor design, of course, but there also some definitive limits imposed by quantum mechanics, and I've been lead to believe that you start reaching those with elements not that much smaller than the ones used today. 6 MPix is good enough to make 30x45 cm prints comparable to output from good slide film. So bigger sensors would be neccessary only in case you do a lot of cropping or bigger size prints. Even then - 12 MPix as used in Nikon D2X - would be more than enough for 99,99% of us and would compete output from at least 6x4.5 cm MF film. Even Michael Reichmann who uses 1Ds was impressed by quality of 20x24 (50x60 cm) prints from D2X. Yes, it has more noise than 1Ds mk II but lower than original 1Ds. In direct comparison these two cameras perform very close - each has its strong and weak points. Here is small comparison of these both cameras: http://www.naturfotograf.com/D2X_rev06.html#top_page OK... - T
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams
Hi! Sylwek, I think the main issue here is like this. Imagine for a moment, just for sake of this discussion, that Pentax or Minolta are considering investing into development of FF DSLR, but still on the marketing level. Now they read the news. What would they say - these guys at Kodak are not stupid, and they've just cancelled the FF DSLR they had... Perhaps the technology is not still there, not from the cost effectiveness point of view. So they decide to not even think of pursuing a FF DSLR... Is it good? Is it bad? I've no clue. But I think it is a plausible scenario. That by the way would be my response to Kostas' question as well... Who knows, perhaps development of FF DSLR is *the* next breakthrough which now will be postponed, perhaps indefinitely... Or may be not... -- Boris
Re: digital zoom?
Amita, will 24-90 do? And it would not have to be digital only lens... What about 24-135 offerings by Tamron et al? -- Boris
Re: peso: Stupid dog picture.
Is Mr Robb being silly again? ;-) -- Boris
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
David Sládek wrote: Well, yes. I don´t speak Swedish either but as far as I follow the dpreview talk the AF will have only three instead of 11 focusing points (not known in what possition). From the technical specs:* Autofokus* TTL (SAFOX VIII) kontrastavkännande autofokus med 3-punkter eller spotmätning. Meaning 3 point or spot autofocus... - Original Message - From: Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 1:14 PM Subject: Re: Pentax *ist-DL David Sládek wrote on 01.06.05 12:52: Well, it is downgraded with the AF points at least... Is there anything in this text about AF system? Sorry, I don't understand Swedish so I couldn't find this info :-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek -- Toralf Lund [EMAIL PROTECTED] +47 66 85 51 22 ProCaptura AS +47 66 85 51 00 (switchboard) http://www.procaptura.com/~toralf +47 66 85 51 01 (fax)
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
Looks like web preparation in advance of a new product announcement got indexed though it is not directly linked to. Shame on the web admin! Sincerely, Collin Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
Toralf Lund wrote on 01.06.05 14:16: Meaning 3 point or spot autofocus... So it seems Pentax was left with a stock of used in MZ-5N/6 Safox IV circuits... -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
street shooting lens
While I was in London this past week, I tried to do some street portraits, but I wasn't very successful. I think part of the problem was that my zoom was too obvious when extended to 75mm. Also, 75mm didn't reach quite far enough. Nate got some good candids with his Canon 85mm prime. The barrel is pretty short, so it's nice and unobtrusive. I think I would like something comparable. I don't really feel like springing for the FA 85mm (and it's backordered anyway). Can anyone suggest an alternative lens or focal length or whatever? I'd love to hear what works for different people. Thanks, Amita
I too will be headed to GFMtn.
I have had difficulty keeping up with the list, what with my being away for the weekend. I will respond to some, but of course it will be late. I will unsubscribe later today since I hope to be headed to Grandfather Mountain in time to find its gate open tomorrow. I still do not know if I will be arriving with Cory. I hope to hear soon; if not, it will be a long, long ride :-) I quickly threw my stuff together last night, some things I did not unpack from this weekend. I should have my 67, three finders, 90mm lens a 645n (the second one will stay home), with 45, 75, 300, and the two zooms I picked up recently *ist D, Optio S I think all my LXen, with certain accessories K-mount and M42 lenses galore - just tossed in for good measure no screwmount cameras :-( no space numerous flashes and batteries Tonight the fun will be getting it into the trunk of the car. I am so looking forward to meeting up with the PDML family, to include some new faces!!! I will keep collecting messages until tonight, César
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams
Boris Liberman wrote on 01.06.05 14:12: Sylwek, I think the main issue here is like this. Imagine for a moment, just for sake of this discussion, that Pentax or Minolta are considering investing into development of FF DSLR, but still on the marketing level. Now they read the news. What would they say - these guys at Kodak are not stupid, and they've just cancelled the FF DSLR they had... Perhaps the technology is not still there, not from the cost effectiveness point of view. So they decide to not even think of pursuing a FF DSLR... Is it good? Is it bad? I've no clue. But I think it is a plausible scenario. That by the way would be my response to Kostas' question as well... Who knows, perhaps development of FF DSLR is *the* next breakthrough which now will be postponed, perhaps indefinitely... Or may be not... Who really knows? For now it seems unlikely that FF will ever be popular. Demand is low and thus production too hence price high... And it seems that pros prefere cameras as good photographics tools - that's why APS-C sensor based D2X is and was selling much better than FF Kodaks even though their price was very similar. -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams
On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Boris Liberman wrote: Sylwek, I think the main issue here is like this. Imagine for a moment, just for sake of this discussion, that Pentax or Minolta are Or Nikon :-) considering investing into development of FF DSLR, but still on the marketing level. Now they read the news. What would they say - these guys at Kodak are not stupid, and they've just cancelled the FF DSLR they had... Perhaps the technology is not still there, not from the cost effectiveness point of view. So they decide to not even think of pursuing a FF DSLR... You assume that the news were unexpected or inexplicable to them; I am not sure about that. You see, these people are no little-Kostases[1] with all talk and no walk asking for a FF solution yesterday or else. They know how much what costs and how far they can go, and make their decisions accordingly. Who knows, perhaps development of FF DSLR is *the* next breakthrough which now will be postponed, perhaps indefinitely... Or may be not... To me, the question has been answered already (Paal?): Pentax has no market penetration to sell enough FF DSLRs and is better off waiting for other factors to drop the price of the sensor. Pentax is not in the market for people in need of bragging rights. Sod the FF and bring back the bloody actuator! (said he, stirring the fight from a suitable distance :-) Kostas [1] Name picked randomly :-o
Re: digital zoom?
When I want to travel light, I carry the Pentax DA 16-45/5 (a great lens) and the Pentax FA 28-105/3.2-4.5 (a very good lens). Paul On Jun 1, 2005, at 8:14 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: Amita, will 24-90 do? And it would not have to be digital only lens... What about 24-135 offerings by Tamron et al? -- Boris
Re: PESO:first impressions from Mt. Pilatus
Can't say about PanoraMaker in this regard, as I've never stitched with anything wider than about 28mm. Kenneth Waller -Original Message- From: Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: May 31, 2005 9:39 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: PESO:first impressions from Mt. Pilatus all the good panorama programs reproject the lens onto the surface of a cylinder or a sphere and correct for distortions including a fisheye's severe barrel distortion. if using Quicktime or for printing, the proper projection is cylindrical. i regularly shot 3 or 5 image 360-degree panoramas using my Nikon Coolpix 995 with the fisheye adapter lens. Herb - Original Message - From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 10:56 AM Subject: RE: PESO:first impressions from Mt. Pilatus I would think, you should be able to shoot it with a lens as wide as around 24mm and avoid distortion. PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: street shooting lens
I've always used either a 40mm or 50mm. But then, this is not my field. If you want something a little long and modestly priced take a look at the M or A 100/2.8 offerings. The M is just a little over $100, and not too much more for the A100/2.8 Sincerely, Collin Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote on 01.06.05 13:19: I think that's what Henri (the OP) suggested. I think his surname is Finnish :-) http://www.mail-archive.com/pentax-discuss@pdml.net/msg253937.html I think Paul knows better as he comes from polypeptide.SE ;-) ?? Actually, I've lived all my life in Sweden. /Henri
Re: street shooting lens
On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Amita Guha wrote: I don't really feel like springing for the FA 85mm (and it's backordered anyway). Can anyone suggest an alternative lens or focal length or whatever? SMC Pentax-M 85/2. We are talking small and light here. On the zoom front, have you considered the cheapo Pentax 18-55? Kostas
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: Boris Liberman wrote on 01.06.05 14:12: Sylwek, I think the main issue here is like this. Imagine for a moment, just for sake of this discussion, that Pentax or Minolta are considering investing into development of FF DSLR, but still on the marketing level. Now they read the news. What would they say - these guys at Kodak are not stupid, and they've just cancelled the FF DSLR they had... Perhaps the technology is not still there, not from the cost effectiveness point of view. So they decide to not even think of pursuing a FF DSLR... Is it good? Is it bad? I've no clue. But I think it is a plausible scenario. That by the way would be my response to Kostas' question as well... Who knows, perhaps development of FF DSLR is *the* next breakthrough which now will be postponed, perhaps indefinitely... Or may be not... Who really knows? For now it seems unlikely that FF will ever be popular. Demand is low and thus production too hence price high... And it seems that pros prefere cameras as good photographics tools - that's why APS-C sensor based D2X is and was selling much better than FF Kodaks even though their price was very similar. Or maybe the Nikon would still have sold more than the Kodak even if they had swapped sensors? Differently put, don't you think the Nikon sold more than the Kodak just because the Nikon is a Nikon and the Kodak is, well, not a Nikon, or a Canon, or even a Pentax... - T
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams
Toralf Lund wrote on 01.06.05 14:33: Or maybe the Nikon would still have sold more than the Kodak even if they had swapped sensors? Differently put, don't you think the Nikon sold more than the Kodak just because the Nikon is a Nikon and the Kodak is, well, not a Nikon, or a Canon, or even a Pentax... Maybe you are right :-) But regarding brand popularity I gues Kodak is still more popular than Pentax - good source of this information is here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/stats.asp Pentax has never, ever received more cicks than Kodak :-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams
On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Toralf Lund wrote: Or maybe the Nikon would still have sold more than the Kodak even if they had swapped sensors? Differently put, don't you think the Nikon sold more than the Kodak just because the Nikon is a Nikon and the Kodak is, well, not a Nikon, or a Canon, or even a Pentax... Let's see if Nikon cares to buy the technology off Kodak; after all, the mount was OK for them. Kostas
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
Steve Jolly wrote: Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: I don't think the s had pentamirror, but I may be wrong. The DS has a pentaprism. However, according to the technical specs linked from that webpage*, so does the *istDL... S *assuming my attempts to interpret Swedish don't mislead me - I'm assuming prism implies a prism of some kind... Actually, no. Sökare: Prisma med pentaspeglar med Natural-Bright-Matte fokuseringsskiva. Translated, that means. Viewfinder: Prism with pentamirrors and natural-bright-matte focusing screen. So Pentamirrors it is, as I said. Why the product description on the front page says pentaprism I do not know. Probably marketing people that wrote that. /Henri
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
Eriksson Paulus wrote on 01.06.05 13:16: It means penta prism viewfinder. Thanks Paul!!! So aparrently this is not pentamirror as some suggested :-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek Excepet that in the 'Tekniska Specifikationer' it states: Prisma med pentaspeglar med Natural-Bright-Matte fokuseringsskiva. which I think means Prism with pentamirror with Natural-Bright-Matte focus-screen. That's where people are getting the idea that it has a pentamirror. -Michael __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
Michael Bergstrom wrote: Eriksson Paulus wrote on 01.06.05 13:16: It means penta prism viewfinder. Thanks Paul!!! So aparrently this is not pentamirror as some suggested :-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek Excepet that in the 'Tekniska Specifikationer' it states: Prisma med pentaspeglar med Natural-Bright-Matte fokuseringsskiva. which I think means Prism with pentamirror with Natural-Bright-Matte focus-screen. That's where people are getting the idea that it has a pentamirror. -Michael Hehe, beat ya to it. ;-) Just wrote an explanation a couple of minutes ago. /Henri
Re: street shooting lens
Amita, I generally use my 35 mm and 50 mm lenses for such kind of shooting. Still, I may suggest Tamron 90/2.5 (the old one) that is both very nice and very small, compared say to Pentax FA 100/2.8. It is however a bit heavy, but still lighter than FA 100/2.8... -- Boris
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams
Hi! You assume that the news were unexpected or inexplicable to them; I am not sure about that. You see, these people are no little-Kostases[1] with all talk and no walk asking for a FF solution yesterday or else. They know how much what costs and how far they can go, and make their decisions accordingly. Oh of course. You're probably right... Sod the FF and bring back the bloody actuator! (said he, stirring the fight from a suitable distance :-) Kostas (the name picked randomly :-) ), I must tell you that the green button solution of *istD is perfectly acceptable to me. I really think that this actuator is not *that* necessary any more. -- Boris
FS: Pentax PZ-1p body, just serviced by Pentax
I ended up with two PZ-1p bodies, thinking a backup would be smart, but it reality the second one just won't get any use as I'm trying to balance increasing digital use with a well-populated stable of beautiful film bodies stretching back to the pre-Spotmatic era. This was a PZ-1p I picked up on eBay, in pretty nice shape with some signs of use, but I sent it to Pentax to replace the viewfinder optics and to tune up the entire camera, so it's fresh from a CLA, back to original specs and has Pentax's repair warranty. Includes all caps, a battery, Pentax strap and a body cap. $275 plus shipping. I can throw in the Pentax 28-105mm IF lens in all black (the Tamron rebadge), EX+ condition, with caps and tulip hood, for a total of $325. Joe -- Joe Wilensky Editor, Cornell Chronicle Cornell News Office 312 College Ave. Ithaca, NY 14850 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (607) 255-3630 phone/voice mail (607) 255-5373 fax http://www.news.cornell.edu/Chronicle/Chronicle.html
Re: More Pentax Sightings
I noticed a billboard just outside of Perth (Ontario) when I was driving by last weekend. Picture shows a hand picking up a DS, and some comments about reasons to buy Pentax. I think it was the same as in the full page add in this month's Photo Life. (I don't have it here at work, or I'd give more detail. dk On 5/31/05, wendy beard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's probably the same one I've seen round here. Sort of odd-looking 50s retro look. (That's how I see it anyway :-) ). A couple of times I've meant to stop and take a picture of it. There's a billboard on the road to the airport. Happened to be going there ths morning and noticed it. Meant to stop on my way back but forgot. Can't see it when you drive in the oposite direction. Wendy --- frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The word Pentax was sighted, anyway... I'm crossing the Don Valley Parkway, one of Toronto's busiest and most congested controlled access highways, and in a ~very~ prominent spot (atop the old Lever factory between Queen and Richmond, for any locals) there's a huge Pentax billboard ad. Every one of the tens or hundreds of thousands of commuters heading downtown to work each day can't miss it. It's simply a large white sign, with the Pentax logo in bold capital letters. Very simple, very classy, very effective, IMHO. No official camera of the internet or any crap like that. Just Pentax. I hope to get a pic of it before they take it down. Well done, Pentax Canada. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson Wendy Beard Ottawa, Canada
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
Michael Bergstrom wrote: Eriksson Paulus wrote on 01.06.05 13:16: It means penta prism viewfinder. Thanks Paul!!! So aparrently this is not pentamirror as some suggested :-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek Excepet that in the 'Tekniska Specifikationer' it states: Prisma med pentaspeglar med Natural-Bright-Matte fokuseringsskiva. which I think means Prism with pentamirror with Natural-Bright-Matte focus-screen. That's where people are getting the idea that it has a pentamirror. -Michael Hehe, beat ya to it. ;-) Just wrote an explanation a couple of minutes ago. /Henri Yeah, I noticed, but I don't speak swedish so it took me longer! :) __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR
On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Rob Studdert wrote: More FF market share for Canon and hopefully price drops along the way or Price drops in a monopoly? How and why? Kostas
RE: digital zoom?
Amita, will 24-90 do? I'm not sure it would be wide enough. I like to shoot architecture. And it would not have to be digital only lens... What about 24-135 offerings by Tamron et al? That would be great, but I need a wider angle of view. My Tam 28-75 was perfect in most situations, but I kept having to switch to my wider lens and it got tiresome after a while. Amita
OT: Lithium AA's if manual doesn't specify?
I've picked up a small digital point-and-shoot (not Pentax), and it takes AA batteries. The manual mentions using alkalines and recommends NiMH rechargeable AA batteries, but says not a word about using lithium AA batteries. This is a fairly current camera (2004, discontinued this year). Is there any reason I can't use lithium AA batteries in this camera? Joe -- Joe Wilensky Editor, Cornell Chronicle Cornell News Office 312 College Ave. Ithaca, NY 14850 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (607) 255-3630 phone/voice mail (607) 255-5373 fax http://www.news.cornell.edu/Chronicle/Chronicle.html
FS: Lovely Super Program, Motor Drive A, lens available
For sale: A lovely Super Program that has seen light use and is a joy to use. EX condition. Front finger grip, body cap, strap and original Pentax manual included. Also FS: an EX+ condition Motor Drive A. Remote cap is present, all is excellent and working fine. Original Pentax manual included. $150 plus shipping for the kit. A kit lens is available for a small additional fee -- the variable-aperture A 35-70 zoom (very small for a zoom, and it's a one-touch zoom, not two rings, EX+ condition). $175 for the kit with this zoom included. Joe -- Joe Wilensky Editor, Cornell Chronicle Cornell News Office 312 College Ave. Ithaca, NY 14850 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (607) 255-3630 phone/voice mail (607) 255-5373 fax http://www.news.cornell.edu/Chronicle/Chronicle.html
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR
Dag wrote: - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 11:07 AM Subject: Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR Why not try to be optimistic: They may have decided to drop the Nikon og Canon based full frame cameras in order to concentrate on the cooperation with Pentax for developing the 18MP 645D. I don't think Kodak see themselves as a slr manufacturer. They probably made them in order to sell sensors. Kodak may now have more formalized outlets for their sensors by proper camera manufacturers. Pål
Re: Rumors About Pentax's Future
William wrote: The Nikon rep estimated that something like 5% of F3 cameras were in the hands of pro photographers, the rest were owned by well heeled amateurs. I've heard the same number for the F5. However, the Pentax distributor here in Norway says that 50% of Pentax MF are sold to professionals which means that MF has a significantly larger pro percentage usage than 35mm. Pål
Re: Rumors About Pentax's Future
Paul wrote: There's a world of price differentiation between and F3 and the 645D. Yeah, hobbyists will use a 645 system that they purchased for a grand or so. But will they come up with close to 10K for a digital body? Some say it will be much more. I doubt it. If there's no pro market for a 645D, it will be dead on arrival. I believe that one can assume that MF users on average are more willing to spend money than the average 35mm user. MF is bought by true enthusiast to a larger extent than 35mm. Pål
Re: Full Frame - What's the problem?
Cornelius wrote: ? Why is it seemingly so difficult to produce a camera with a full frame (35mm) sensor, if Pentax and many others have/will have MF digitals surely one of these sensors could be used, even if it has to be masked? Cost and problem with performance at the corners due to the angle the light fall at the sensors edges. Canon may have slight advantage here due to the larger diametre of the lens mount. Pentax have released full frame lenses (FA-D) to fix this potential problem. Pål
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR
Bruce wrote: Bill, that is shocking! I used to use 67II's and did NOT think they were light or small. At least it had a big negative. That Canon is one BIG camera for having a sensor of that size. Yes...and it makes the Pentax 645 system look small... Pål
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR - the end of FF dreams
Jostein wrote: I think you're right. Now that the MedF systems are entering the market with cameras more suited for work outside studios, chances are they will put the FF high-pixel cameras in a squeeze. Thats what I think too. If the price rumors are correct it will cost less than a full frame Canon, weight less as well and as I have pointed out many times before, the lenses need weight no more than Canon L- lenses as long we are within the normal focal lenght range. Pål
Re: Seen in this week's Amateur Photographer...
Jostein wrote: I think the most likely conspiracy theory is that Pentax Japan is holding their cards to tightly to their chest as usual. Pentax UK sounds like they don't know what's coming, so they choose to focus on the past. Pentax Japan is extremely inept at making use of buzz for creating interest about coming products. If the worlwide distributors were fed with little bits of information they were allowed to pass on to dealers and customers, the whole brand-name would suddenly be more active and viable. But this has changed the last year or so after the new boss was hired. Before, the Pentax engineers leaked, now the boss does. Eg. it is a couple of years ago they told us about an MF DSLR with sensor from Kodak. The baby *ist (DL) was also mentioned and according to the same sorce, a semi pro DSLR is forthcoming. Pål
Re: Rumors About Pentax's Future
Herb wrote: 66K DSLRs is 2/3 of what Kodak sold last year and Kodak is pulling the plug on their DSLRs. Kodak's DSLRs were a lot more expensive than any Pentax one and they still outsold Pentax. since the Pentax DSLRs are low end models, Pentax isn't making much money on them. Sure. The Pentax MD-S (shelved) costed $20 million to develop. Assuming this is a typical for a DSLR we can assume that only the best selling Nikon and Canon DSLR's makes any money for their makers. Pentax is caught in a hard place as their volume segment, the advanced zoom compact, are under intense competition and the fact that they virtually abandoned their old niche the slr. Pål
re: street shooting lens
Amita, My wife and I sometimes use the Pentax 1.7x AF converter with a 50mm 1.4 M lens. A little slow, but pretty small, relatively fast AF, and uses what we have without buying an 85mm. Steve street shooting lens Amita Guha Wed, 01 Jun 2005 05:25:41 -0700 While I was in London this past week, I tried to do some street portraits, but I wasn't very successful. I think part of the problem was that my zoom was too obvious when extended to 75mm. Also, 75mm didn't reach quite far enough. Nate got some good candids with his Canon 85mm prime. The barrel is pretty short, so it's nice and unobtrusive. I think I would like something comparable. I don't really feel like springing for the FA 85mm (and it's backordered anyway). Can anyone suggest an alternative lens or focal length or whatever? I'd love to hear what works for different people. Thanks, Amita
Re: OT: Kodak kills DSLR
On 1 Jun 2005 at 14:10, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Rob Studdert wrote: More FF market share for Canon and hopefully price drops along the way or Price drops in a monopoly? How and why? Just my intuition. 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: Full Frame - What's the problem?
I don't think the size of the lens mount matters at all, it's the size of the len's image circle that matters with regards to sensor size, not the diameter of the lens mount. jco -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 6:40 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Full Frame - What's the problem? The size of the lens mount factors into the equation. The large sensor works on the 645 because it has a large lens mount. Ditto the Canon. Paul On Jun 1, 2005, at 3:17 AM, Cornelius Nuzzlemuff III wrote: Why is it seemingly so difficult to produce a camera with a full frame (35mm) sensor, if Pentax and many others have/will have MF digitals surely one of these sensors could be used, even if it has to be masked? CN III -- Whatever you Wanadoo: http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/time/ This email has been checked for most known viruses - find out more at: http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/help/id/7098.htm
Re: Rumors About Pentax's Future
Ha, so you might think. Never underestimate the genus of cost cutting... Anthony Farr wrote: All 645 lenses are A series or higher. IOW there's no old lenses without electronic feedback that can be crippled. regards, Anthony Farr -Original Message- From: P. J. Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Then they better not cripple the mount... -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
