RE: Greetings from Winston-Salem
Well, yea. It wasn't my money paying for it, and I did turn down several of the hostess's blandishments and inducements of oriental luxury, all in the name of keeping myself moral. When I use my own money I check myself in as livestock, and travel in a wooden crate in the hold. -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 1st Class to LA huh? Why Bob, I'd always placed you nodding off on a crate in the back of a C130, Leicas nonchalantly slung around your neck, on your way to a third world photographic sojourn :-)
Re: FA28-105/3.2-4.5
Jon Paul Schelter (R* Toronto) wrote: Let me know how you like it if you buy one? I'm up to 4 lenses now, (FA35/2, A50/2, DA18-55, Tamron 70-300) I think I'll have to hold off for a while, I just bought myself a motorcycle.. but the 28-105 would make a nice everyday lens. You're right. It's a very good lens, which is surprising since its pretty inexpensive. $200? That's peanuts for a decent 28-105. I was skeptical when I first bought one. I fully expected to own it for a few weeks and then sell it off in favor of the power-zoom version. I was wrong. I sold the PZ version. The 28-105 f/3.2-4.5 is 1/2 stop faster, half the weight, and at least just as sharp, IMHO. And its such a useful focal length.
Re: *ist DL now on dpreview
David Oswald wrote: Christian wrote: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0506/05060104pentaxistdl.asp After reading the specs as listed on dpreview, I have to ask, how is Auto ISO different from the *ist-DS's automatic ISO selection setting? The spec list for the *ist-DL lists this as a new feature, but I thought the *ist-DS already has automatic senstivity selection available as an option in the custom menu. Not that I ever use it on the *ist-DS, but I am curious. Could it be that its now in the Fn menu under the other ISO settings, instead of being buried in the setup options? I think that would be worthwhile for me. I'm switching the sensitivity correction on and off all the time. D -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Jim Apilado wrote: I'm headed for Greece in a couple of weeks. If they use the Euro, I hope it comes down in value against the greenback. They do, and your lettuce-leaves are the ones in the down. But the place is not quite UK (don't bother looking for photo equipment anyway). Whereabouts are you going? Kostas (Greek :-)
Re: Predictable Pentax
On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Mishka wrote: i am curious: except for -- small 6MP sensor -- mediocre buffer -- lousy viewfinder -- crippled mount is there anything else that a pro or high end camera would need to change? Which camera are you referring to? The -D is not pro nor is it *that* high-end and the viewfinder is great. Same for -Ds, which certainly is not high-end and has a reasonable buffer. The -DL is the one with the (predicted) lousy VF. Kostas
Re: [Happy] My D has arrived :D (enablement)
Hi! I'm happy now :) -- Thibouille -- Z1,SuperA,KX,MX,P30t and KR-10x ... Congrats!!! As usual, I should ask you to show us some pics :). Boris
Re: multiple item enablement
On 2/6/05, Amita Guha, discombobulated, unleashed: Nate and I did a BH trip today. Under the rules of Mutually Assured Destruction (thanks, Cotty!) I picked up that Sigma 18-125mm. It is really small and light, and I wish I'd had it last week. Also, I'm flying tomorrow and I might have a chance to shoot some deer, so I got a small, packable Velbon tripod and a decent head to go on it. I topped that off with a battery grip for the D. This put me ahead of Nate in the M.A.D., so he got the Sigma lens as well. Ah, the joys of being married... Amita, send me an address off list and I'll get the case and box off to Nate. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Predictable Pentax
On 2/6/05, Mishka, discombobulated, unleashed: i am curious: except for -- small 6MP sensor -- mediocre buffer -- lousy viewfinder -- crippled mount is there anything else that a pro or high end camera would need to change? Interesting that you list the viewfinder as lousy. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?
On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Shel Belinkoff wrote: They also sponsor a number of PBS shows, such as nature, where the audience demographics are terrific. I think the key is placement: lube the news-channels to show reporters using Canons; partially fund movies to get the star or the guy behind the star to shoot Canon; that kind of thing. Kostas
Mike Johnston in a silly mood
Mike awards lenses for best bokeh. It's a free download, but I still had to register, nevertheless. I'm a bokeh lover (ahem), so it was interesting. Ah the good old 50mm/1.4 And I think it's silly giving Oscars for lenses, but the FA Ltds get a mention. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-june-05.shtml D -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc
Re: PESO -- Yet another dog portrait
Hi! All this talk about the M85 f2.0 and I decided to haul mine out and play with it a bit. I was messing around with it last night and got this. Just so no one will say you focused on his nose! I'll beat you to it. It was intentional, after all what is a dog if not it's nose. http://www.mindspring.com/~webster26/PESO_--_yadp.html The main question is what did he/she tell you after you took a shot. Somehow the dogs looks as if he/she is going to tell you something, and probably unpleasant too :-). Boris
Re: Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?
From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/06/03 Fri AM 03:28:14 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors? Shel wrote: Having used a couple of Canons I really don't see what all the fuss is about. For example, Image Stabilization may be nice, but I'd prefer smaller lenses and bodies that don't need as much stabilization, and lenses that offer the image qualities that I like over lenses that have a feature set that needs to be adjusted, even minimally. I like to think that I know how to use my gear well enough that there's no need to rely upon electric motors, gyroscopes, software, chips (and maybe even dip), and what have you, in order to get a good photo. But that's just me ... or is it? From what I've seen there are quite a few istD owners here who use their cameras pretty much like standard manual cameras most of the time, sometimes with a concession to auto focus, and rarely use many of the modes and features and options. Maybe the Pentax Way really is to simpler, smaller, lighter, more basic cameras that produce good photos. All good points Shel. For the most part I am satisfied with my *ist D. My *major* concern is the future of the brand and the wisdom of throwing more money at the Pentax line (especially when it comes to Pentax or 3rd party K-mount lenses). If Pentax were to go bellyup or were to get out of the DLSR business, I think support and repairs for their existing cameras would quickly disappear. I could end up with a non-functioning DLSR and a whole slew of lenses that will only work with pre-owned Pentax film cameras. Only if you are precious with it. The more you use it, the better will be the backup. To use an extreme example, you can buy a pretty much brand new Supermarine Spitfire these days. Only because there are enough people flying the unimportant (historically) ones to make it worthwhile for companies to support them. My thoughts are leaning to Canon because if I blow $1000 on a new lens, I feel confident that Canon will be around and new bodies will continue to be available (hopefully compatible with the lenses, of course). Why do you feel confident? Any company can go bust and it is arguable that the bigger as corporation gets, the more likely it is that it will fail catastrophically. Sure I see that Pentax *appears* to be trying to compete in the DLSR market. But I'm unconvinced that they are seriously competing. Based upon a limited marketing strategy, at least in the US, I don't see the future boding well. If they out advertised Nikon and Canon 5-to-1 they'd still have a difficult uphill battle to gain market share. Both Nikon and Canon appear to have deep enough wallets to quickly bring new products to market and absorb the quick depreciation inherent in the digital lifecycle. It's just a gut feeling and I have no proof to offer, other than that I have been a loyal Pentax owner for 15 years and now I'm starting to get paranoid. The fact that other long respected marques that didn't leapfrog to the front of the digital persuasion early, are biting the dust doesn't help much. I've thought about getting an *ist D for my wife. Everytime I do though, I think why not a 20D and one nice lens? Tom C. (wordy enough I'm sure). - Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
Digital MZ-5n
As another spin-off from the looong why choose *istDL thread, I thought I might mention that I completely agree with the whoever-it-was who said that what he'd really like to see, was something that might be described as a digital version of the MZ-5n (or ZX-5n.) Like that other person, I'm not sure it would make sense from a marketing viewpoint - although it would at least have some features that would clearly distinguish it from the competitors, which is often a Good Thing. Any other opinions? - Toralf
Re: Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?
fra: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 2/6/05, Alan Chan, discombobulated, unleashed: Are Pentax people blind? Only in one eye, apparently. Hey, if you're referring to me you got it wrong. Both eyes work perfectly, but not together. .-) DagT
Re: pentax 85mm soft
On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Boris Liberman wrote: Sure. Here come the links: http://webaperture.com/gallery/photos/50088 http://webaperture.com/gallery/photos/49655 http://webaperture.com/gallery/photos/47681 http://boris.isra-shop.com/soft-adventures.htm (some of the shots are made with another soft lens, but you can read it in the notes) Some very nice shots there Boris. Well done. Kostas
Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?
Are Pentax people blind? Only in one eye, apparently. Hey, if you're referring to me you got it wrong. Both eyes work perfectly, but not together. .-) I'm saying no more! :- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Digital MZ-5n
--- Toralf Lund [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As another spin-off from the looong why choose *istDL thread, I thought I might mention that I completely agree with the whoever-it-was who said that what he'd really like to see, was something that might be described as a digital version of the MZ-5n (or ZX-5n.) Like that other person, I'm not sure it would make sense from a marketing viewpoint - although it would at least have some features that would clearly distinguish it from the competitors, which is often a Good Thing. Any other opinions? How about use the traditional film back as LCD cover? You have to open the back to see the LCD hidden inside? Who need LCD protective plastic anyway? :-) Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan __ Discover Yahoo! Find restaurants, movies, travel and more fun for the weekend. Check it out! http://discover.yahoo.com/weekend.html
Re: Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/06/03 Fri AM 08:48:42 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors? On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Shel Belinkoff wrote: They also sponsor a number of PBS shows, such as nature, where the audience demographics are terrific. I think the key is placement: lube the news-channels to show reporters using Canons; partially fund movies to get the star or the guy behind the star to shoot Canon; that kind of thing. Kostas But Pentax users are unlikely to be targeted by this sort of thing. I'm not sure if it is just (just!) spam or an apptempt to insert a Trojan. (DON'T click the links!!) == Dear Customer, We would like to welcome our Canon Europe Web Self Service (CEWSS) customers to our new upgraded service called My Canon. We would like to inform you that, as from today, CEWSS has been fully integrated into the new My Canon service. What is My Canon? My Canon is an upgrade to your existing CEWSS service that will allow you to benefit at no additional cost from our European online community and is dedicated to your experience of the Canon Digital Imaging world. My Canon is a portal created for you to benefit from other online services, in addition to CEWSS, via one simple login. My Canon offers new, previously unavailable features and has already been launched in 16 European countries. Why Upgrade to My Canon? In order to continue accessing CEWSS, and also take advantage of the new My Canon services offered by Canon, you need to activate your account and become a member of the My Canon community: - Please follow this link: http://my.canon-europe.com/user/pwreminder.html , enter your email address and we will send you your own unique My Canon password - When you attempt to login to a My Canon service for the first time you may be asked to confirm or update your personal information - Once you have become a member of My Canon you will be able to experience CEWSS as you used to, and enjoy all the new services available to you. If you do not follow these instructions, you will no longer be able to access the CEWSS service and take advantage of the new services offered by My Canon. We hope you will enjoy the new My Canon world, where images do come to life. Your Canon Team x-gfi-me-from: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bcc: Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Jun 2005 09:49:41.0193 (UTC) FILETIME=02BDB90:01C56821] Date: 3 Jun 2005 10:49:41 +0100 = - Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
Re: Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/06/03 Fri AM 09:27:39 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors? fra: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 2/6/05, Alan Chan, discombobulated, unleashed: Are Pentax people blind? Only in one eye, apparently. Hey, if you're referring to me you got it wrong. Both eyes work perfectly, but not together. .-) DagT That explains a lot of your pictures. 8-) - Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
Re: Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?
On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, mike wilson wrote: But Pentax users are unlikely to be targeted by this sort of thing. I'm not sure if it is just (just!) spam or an apptempt to insert a Trojan. (DON'T click the links!!) x-gfi-me-from: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bcc: Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] How many Ns in Canon? Kostas
Re: OT, but maybe not
Thanks for the link. Are they from the last version of the camera? I ask because the samples on Leica's own site were nice but very old, and did show some heavy grid noise (though excellent sharpness). And as with Nikon's D2X, early sample shots were disappointing while the production samples were very good. Good light! fra
Re: Predictable Pentax
The Pentax digital mount is not crippled in any way. The viewfinder is quite possibly the best of any digital SLR. Paul On Jun 2, 2005, at 11:09 PM, Mishka wrote: i am curious: except for -- small 6MP sensor -- mediocre buffer -- lousy viewfinder -- crippled mount is there anything else that a pro or high end camera would need to change? i would imagine that the first two limitations shouldn't cost a fortune to fix. the finder and the mount might be trickier, but i doubt that's something that's waaay out of their reach. the higher pixel count competition (except for canon) is $5K D2X (APS) and $800K Oly Evolt (even smaller sensor, even smaller buffer, even less backward compatibility). it looks like at this point pentax is squarely in the middle of the pack and only canon is definitely far ahead. to me, it looks like concentration of efforts on 645D and the new lenses is the right thing to do at this time. not that i would mind having a pentax 16MP FF camera with 100% 1x finder for $1000 :) best, mishka On 6/2/05, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2 Jun 2005 at 14:00, Pål Jensen wrote: Certainly not. Making a high-emd body for Pentax makes no sense at present as virtually no one would buy one. Sure, they could make a body somewhat higher than the *istD but thats about it at present. The only high-end Pentax have any hope to be a player is in digital MF. Pentax didn't even see the need to have a high-end 35mm film body after 1980. A high-end DSLR cost several magnitudes more to develop than, say, an LX replacement with much smaller sales. Very few first time Pentax DSLR buyers would buy a high-end DSLR. Hence, they need to have a DSLR customer base installed before higher end model are being released. I don't know where you think all the high roller digital MF buyers are going to appear from? Personally I think that Pentax would now benefit by introducing a higher spec'd 35mm DSLR. The *ist D/Ds have introduced a lot of people to Pentax, my guess is that a goodly proportion of these buyers are well heeled geek types who would just love to be able to get their hands on a new pro/semi- pro spec'd body. Leave it too late and Pentax will miss the boat. Pity it's near impossible to find anything but a handful of lenses too. 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: Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?
fra: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] fra: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 2/6/05, Alan Chan, discombobulated, unleashed: Are Pentax people blind? Only in one eye, apparently. Hey, if you're referring to me you got it wrong. Both eyes work perfectly, but not together. .-) That explains a lot of your pictures. 8-) Yup, that's why they are two-dimensional .-) DagT
Re: Digital MZ-5n
As another spin-off from the looong why choose *istDL thread, I thought I might mention that I completely agree with the whoever-it- was who said that what he'd really like to see, was something that might be described as a digital version of the MZ-5n (or ZX-5n.) Like that other person, I'm not sure it would make sense from a marketing viewpoint - although it would at least have some features that would clearly distinguish it from the competitors, which is often a Good Thing. Bring it on, I'll have two please :) John
Re: Predictable Pentax
i looked through the finder. it sucks. i don't care that canon rebel has a worse one. the *istd finder still sucks. the mount is crippled. but i meant my email not as criticism of *istD*, quite on contrary. best, mishka On 6/3/05, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Pentax digital mount is not crippled in any way. The viewfinder is quite possibly the best of any digital SLR. Paul On Jun 2, 2005, at 11:09 PM, Mishka wrote:
Camera prices
$A957!! Bloody hell!! Is that with a lens? They are still selling for $1400 - 1500 at my local camera shops. I paid $A1200 for a DS a month ago (with Sigma zoom) and thought I was doing well. Dear Brian, No not with lens but real bargain price. Look at http://www.digitalcamerawarehouse.com.au/category147_1.htm Regards Charles Wilson Sydney Australia
Re: Predictable Pentax
I'd say the viewfinder is barely acceptable and it's a direct consequence of the APS size of the sensor. And I'm afraid we're not gonna get a better optical viewfinder in the future, and may even see the first electronic viewfinders showing up in entry level DSLR in a couple of years. Too bad, as optics is the last Pentax stronghold. Servus, Alin Mishka wrote: M i looked through the finder. it sucks. i don't care that canon M rebel has a worse one. the *istd finder still sucks.
RE: Buffer speed (Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?)
hell, I still use large formant and you only get one exposure ( well two if you count both sides of the film holder) per film! JCO -Original Message- From: Mishka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 11:16 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Buffer speed (Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?) and how did people managed that with 36 exposures per fim? mishka On 6/2/05, Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: the proper moment might be 10-20 times a minute for a few minutes
Re: Predictable Pentax
Paul Stenquist wrote on 03.06.05 12:43: The Pentax digital mount is not crippled in any way. The viewfinder is quite possibly the best of any digital SLR. Almost. Konica-Minolta Maxxum (Dynax) 7D has even slightly bigger and brighter finder than *istD (it is almost as big as the one in MZ-S) - I've compared all these directly. -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Digital MZ-5n
I'd get a DSLR with the 5N controls layout (or MX for that matter). Distinct buttons for the essential photographic functions, not buried in obscure LCD menus. Come to that I don't think I even need an LCD. And yes, it needs to be 8 MP or more and sport at least the lousy 5N viewfinder and glass eyepiece. I guess the better viewfinder demands a larger sensor, so I'm not holding my breath. Just wake me up if the miracle happens. Servus, Alin Toralf wrote: TL As another spin-off from the looong why choose *istDL thread, I TL thought I might mention that I completely agree with the whoever-it-was TL who said that what he'd really like to see, was something that might be TL described as a digital version of the MZ-5n (or ZX-5n.) Like that other TL person, I'm not sure it would make sense from a marketing viewpoint - TL although it would at least have some features that would clearly TL distinguish it from the competitors, which is often a Good Thing. TL Any other opinions? TL - Toralf
Re: Predictable Pentax
Strange indeed. I compared *istD and 7D at Photokina, and the 7D viewfinder was noticeably narrower. Even the Minolta guy admitted that without hesitation. Brighter? Yes, I think so. Yes, it was a prototype, but... Dario - Original Message - From: Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 1:47 PM Subject: Re: Predictable Pentax Paul Stenquist wrote on 03.06.05 12:43: The Pentax digital mount is not crippled in any way. The viewfinder is quite possibly the best of any digital SLR. Almost. Konica-Minolta Maxxum (Dynax) 7D has even slightly bigger and brighter finder than *istD (it is almost as big as the one in MZ-S) - I've compared all these directly. -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Predictable Pentax
Look through the viewfinder of any dslr. I haven't seen one that's better than the *istD. As for the mount, if you had ever used the camera, you would know that it works great with K and M lenses. It's not even an issue. You tap the green button to meter. Not a problem. Easier than metering with many Pentax film cameras. It's interesting that you're so adamant about this, but you haven't tried it yourself. Very strange. Paul On Jun 3, 2005, at 7:23 AM, Mishka wrote: i looked through the finder. it sucks. i don't care that canon rebel has a worse one. the *istd finder still sucks. the mount is crippled. but i meant my email not as criticism of *istD*, quite on contrary. best, mishka On 6/3/05, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Pentax digital mount is not crippled in any way. The viewfinder is quite possibly the best of any digital SLR. Paul On Jun 2, 2005, at 11:09 PM, Mishka wrote:
Re: Pentax *ist-DL
Ronald Arvidsson wrote: Hmm, I often present myself as Scandinavian abroad since many more people in certain parts would rather know that then one of the specific countries. I guess also the EU maps showing some countries and others not show the same ignorance of geography as Europeans ascribe to Americans. My observation is that people wherever they live tend to have their own special geocentric world. Ours is pentaxian land in cyberspace galaxy. Possibly. I've been thinking that the selfcenteredness (can you call it that???) is actually proportional to the size of the country, though. - Toralf
Since 85mm soft lenses were mentioned recently... And lens prices, too...
I expect to get one - the FA variant - in the post in a couple of days. Paid NOK 1000,- for it. That would be about 125 euros, I believe. Quite reasonable, don't you think? - Toralf
Re: Predictable Pentax
Dario Bonazza wrote on 03.06.05 14:07: Strange indeed. I compared *istD and 7D at Photokina, and the 7D viewfinder was noticeably narrower. Even the Minolta guy admitted that without hesitation. Brighter? Yes, I think so. Yes, it was a prototype, but... I had an opportunity to test production sample. As usually I used similar focal length, similar f-stop and looked through both finders simultaneously. D7D's one was undoubtely slightly bigger and brighter than the one in *istD, althought the difference wasn't as big as between *istD and for instance N D70. As a matter of fact I compared D7D's finder to MZ-S too and there was very slight difference (in favour of MZ-S of course) between these... Popular Photography has even measured magnification and coverage of both viewfinders: D7D: magnification 0.95X, coverage 95.2% *istD: magnification 0.94X, coverage 88% Both tests can be downloaded here: http://www.popphoto.com/assets/download/1142004172027.pdf http://www.popphoto.com/assets/download/PP0205_Minolta7DTest.pdf It seems that worse coverage makes *istD viewfinder smaller than the one in D7D. Minolta had undoubtly the best viewfinders among analogue AF cameras and as I can see they continue this tradition in DSLRs. -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Pentax FA 28-105
Just came across another FS zoom - a 28-105, this time. Not 100% sure which variant it is, but I think it's most likely to be this one: http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/zooms/short/FA28-105f4-5.6-ii.html As usual, I would like to ask for opinions on the performance, reasonable price level etc. Hmmm... Seems like I've been posting a lot to this list lately. Must be a slow week at work... - Toralf
Re: Since 85mm soft lenses were mentioned recently... And lens prices, too...
Hello Toralf, Friday, June 3, 2005, 3:31:54 PM, you wrote: TL I expect to get one - the FA variant - in the post in a couple of days. TL Paid NOK 1000,- for it. That would be about 125 euros, I believe. Quite TL reasonable, don't you think? TL - Toralf Thats good price IMHO. I do want to buy this lense, but I can not find it since long time. If it is not great secret, could You tell me where You bought it? Jurij -- Best regards, daomailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Since 85mm soft lenses were mentioned recently... And lens prices, too...
On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Toralf Lund wrote: I expect to get one - the FA variant - in the post in a couple of days. Paid NOK 1000,- for it. That would be about 125 euros, I believe. Quite reasonable, don't you think? Very. If you find another one, let me know :-) K
Re: PAW: Bus Trip
I love it the way it is, in color and a bit blurred. Excellent shot Albano --- frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wish it was bw, but I only had one body with me, and it was loaded with colour. I wish it was a bit sharper, but that's not such a big deal. I wish it wasn't tilted, but again, that doesn't bother me so much. Sometimes we don't get everything we wish for... vbg Still, I think I kind of like it, despite it's flaws. Let me know what you think. Taken from one bus to another: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3403901size=lg Thanks in advance. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson Albano Garcia Photography Graphic Design http://www.albanogarcia.com.ar http://www.flaneur.albanogarcia.com.ar __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Re: Since 85mm soft lenses were mentioned recently... And lens prices, too...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Toralf, Friday, June 3, 2005, 3:31:54 PM, you wrote: TL I expect to get one - the FA variant - in the post in a couple of days. TL Paid NOK 1000,- for it. That would be about 125 euros, I believe. Quite TL reasonable, don't you think? TL - Toralf Thats good price IMHO. I do want to buy this lense, but I can not find it since long time. If it is not great secret, could You tell me where You bought it? It just popped up at a Norwegian net auction site - http://www.qxl.no/. It seems to me that even thought this site is the most widely used of its kind here in Norway (actually, it may be the only one), its audience is too small to get high prices on something like Pentax photo equipment. (Although there will of course also not be that many competing auctions.) But don't you go telling any potential sellers that... - T
RE: Predictable Pentax
I don't see how you can say that the *istD stop down metering/NO AE on the fly with K/M lenses isnt crippled. Not only do you lose metering sensitivity compared to a a real PK mount at small fstops, AE *on the fly* is no longer possible. This is simply not as good as real PK mount and if it was then Pentax would have been doing it that way for last 30 years BUT THEY HAVENT because its NOT as good method of doing it as sensing the aperture setting ring method is, which the *istD doesn't do. Im not saying green button technique is useless, its just not on the fly AE which pentax has had for over 30 years beginning way back in the screwmount era with the ES/ESII. JCO -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 8:24 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Predictable Pentax Look through the viewfinder of any dslr. I haven't seen one that's better than the *istD. As for the mount, if you had ever used the camera, you would know that it works great with K and M lenses. It's not even an issue. You tap the green button to meter. Not a problem. Easier than metering with many Pentax film cameras. It's interesting that you're so adamant about this, but you haven't tried it yourself. Very strange. Paul On Jun 3, 2005, at 7:23 AM, Mishka wrote: i looked through the finder. it sucks. i don't care that canon rebel has a worse one. the *istd finder still sucks. the mount is crippled. but i meant my email not as criticism of *istD*, quite on contrary. best, mishka On 6/3/05, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Pentax digital mount is not crippled in any way. The viewfinder is quite possibly the best of any digital SLR. Paul On Jun 2, 2005, at 11:09 PM, Mishka wrote:
Re: Pentax FA 28-105
I picked this zoom up in the all-black version http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/zooms/short/FA28-105f4-5.6-ii_black.jpg (much nicer looking than the silver, I think) from KEH. As it has the reputation of being the worst of the three Pentax 28-105 variants (and a Tamron rebadged lens), I didn't know what to expect, but it performs quite well. I have had all three 28-105 types at one time and I still have this lens and the power zoom. This IF lens is sharp, contrasty, and significantly lighter and more compact than the powerzoom version, even though it takes 62mm filters. It comes with the bayonet hood and the barrel doesn't rotate when focusing, so polarizers are easier to use (although the hood doesn't have the little removable door at the bottom, like the new 28-105, which makes using a polarizer even easier). And though it shares the telescoping barrel design of the new 28-105, making it seem long and a bit delicate when zoomed out to 105mm, it feels a bit sturdier than the newest 28-105 version (though the powerzoom still feels the sturdiest of all three). It should sell, used, for about $125 USD in excellent-plus condition from a retailer, closer to $100 on eBay, perhaps. Joe Just came across another FS zoom - a 28-105, this time. Not 100% sure which variant it is, but I think it's most likely to be this one: http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/zooms/short/FA28-105f4-5.6-ii.html As usual, I would like to ask for opinions on the performance, reasonable price level etc. Hmmm... Seems like I've been posting a lot to this list lately. Must be a slow week at work... - Toralf -- 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: Buffer speed (Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?)
- Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 7:46 AM Subject: RE: Buffer speed (Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?) hell, I still use large formant and you only get one exposure ( well two if you count both sides of the film holder) per film! JCO and you are shooting birds and sports with this right? :-) Interesting story: There is a local guy who shoots car racing with a 4x5. I've seen him set up on the outside of turn 1 (a 90 degree right hander) and he seems to get some great shots. I guess he prefocuses at a spot on the track and trips the shutter when the cars are at this point. My concern is that being on the outside of the turn and concentrating on his framing, he is vulnerable for the common occurrence of a car going straight on. Christian
Re: Digital MZ-5n
- Original Message - From: Alin Flaider [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Toralf Lund pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 7:57 AM Subject: Re: Digital MZ-5n I'd get a DSLR with the 5N controls layout (or MX for that matter). Distinct buttons for the essential photographic functions, not buried in obscure LCD menus. Come to that I don't think I even need an LCD. Just out of curiosity, what essential photographic functions are buried in obscure LCD menus on the D or Ds? Here's what's essential to me: aperture control (back wheelie thing on ist D). Shutter speed control (front wheelie thing on *ist D). Focus ring (yep all lenses have one). Shutter button thingy (both D and Ds have one) ISO sensitivity (as easy to set on the D as it is on the LX or MX). And last on a digi-body, file type/quality setting (I shoot RAW 100% of the time and it's easy to set and not burried in a menu on the D; on the 20D it IS buried in the menu, but again it makes no difference to me because I set it once and never change it). nothing else needed to take a picture. Christian
PESO: Dynamic Range
Last Friday while shooting on the street at night, I grabbed a pic of the Birmingham theater marquis. Right off the bat I could see it was a problem. The billboard part of the marquis was extremely bright while the colored lights were quite dim. Of course the unlit parts of the building and marquis were in deep night shadow with only a touch of illumination from the street lights and marquis lights. Overall, it was at least ten stops variation. For capture I shot RAW overexposing the highlights by about a 1 1/2 stops. Normally, I bring the highlights within range, but I knew I'd lose a lot of shadow if I did that. The RAW converter can recover some highlight detail, so I was counting on that. When converting, I pulled the exposure back down about a stop and turned the brightness all the way up. I also decreased the shadow depth. I'm at work now, but I can get the exact numbers later if someone is interested. Finally, after conversion, I used the shadow/highlight tool to ligh! ten the shadows a bit more, tame the highlights and increase midrange contrast. I sharpened after conversion with USM. I'm quite pleased with the result. It's here: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3421449
Re: Predictable Pentax
know that it works great with K and M lenses. It's not even an issue. You tap the green button to meter. Not a problem. Easier than metering with many Pentax film cameras. It's interesting that you're so adamant about this, but you haven't tried it yourself. Very strange. Paul I don't know if the -DS I've got is much different than the -D, but I know a few things where the crippled mount falls flat. The biggest is flash... pretty much stuck with manual. The other ones are less important... matrix metering, etc. Oh, and of course the human fiddle factor of having to/forgetting to go to 'M' mode when swapping to a non-A lens. For the most part, however, it *is* a non-issue. How much more would it cost to add in the coupler? If it were $100 I'd probably pay that. If it were $250, I'd have to think about it. If it were $500, no way. -Cory * * Cory Papenfuss* * Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student * * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University * *
Re: Predictable Pentax
On 3/6/05, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed: Look through the viewfinder of any dslr. I haven't seen one that's better than the *istD. As for the mount, if you had ever used the camera, you would know that it works great with K and M lenses. It's not even an issue. You tap the green button to meter. Not a problem. Easier than metering with many Pentax film cameras. It's interesting that you're so adamant about this, but you haven't tried it yourself. Very strange. Agreed. I held the *ist Ds and the Canon 1Dm2 up vertically side by side and looked through with both eyes. To me, the finders on both were the same size and brightness, and the 1D is a 1.3 crop. The *ist D and Ds finders are way bigger than other offerings. Now if you're comparing to a film camera, say the LX, well, then I suppose you could say that a digi SLR Hoovers in that regard, but I personally think you have to compare apples with apples... Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Saw You yesterday -- and last Friday in Birmingham
Hi Amy, I saw you -- or at least your car -- at the intersection of Old Woodward and Oak yesterday. I hung out at the gallery last Friday to talk to customers. While there I spent some time out on the street shooting pics. Friday nights in Birmingham are great for that. Here's a few on my web page: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3421449 http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3410319 http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3408588 http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3403038 Hope things are great with you. Have a nice weekend. Paul
Re: Predictable Pentax
- Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 6:43 AM Subject: Re: Predictable Pentax The Pentax digital mount is not crippled in any way. The viewfinder is quite possibly the best of any digital SLR. Here I most definitely agree. The 20D's finder has slightly more of the tunnel feel to it, but the *ist D finder is great. The worst has to be the Oly E1 and E300. Yuck! Not only does it have a light-at-the-end-of-a-tunnel look but let's just say that the light must be a 40watt bulb about to expire. BTW, a co-worker has a 1DII. WOW! the finder on that is huge and bright. But the body size matches it; even I can admit that it's a big camera. Christian
Re: Digital MZ-5n
Toralf Lund wrote: As another spin-off from the looong why choose *istDL thread, I thought I might mention that I completely agree with the whoever-it-was who said that what he'd really like to see, was something that might be described as a digital version of the MZ-5n (or ZX-5n.) Like that other person, I'm not sure it would make sense from a marketing viewpoint - although it would at least have some features that would clearly distinguish it from the competitors, which is often a Good Thing. That would be a she -- namely, me. Thanks! It wouldn't be absolutely first; there being a Leicasonic model around with the traditional controls in the traditional places, but then again the Leica one is a non-interchangeable-lens, electronic viewfinder digicam with SLR sizing and pricing, so maybe ... ERNR
Re: Digital MZ-5n
Alin Flaider wrote: I'd get a DSLR with the 5N controls layout (or MX for that matter). Distinct buttons for the essential photographic functions, not buried in obscure LCD menus. Come to that I don't think I even need an LCD. And yes, it needs to be 8 MP or more and sport at least the lousy 5N viewfinder and glass eyepiece. I guess the better viewfinder demands a larger sensor, so I'm not holding my breath. Just wake me up if the miracle happens. Although, IMO, the *istD viewfinder is no worse than the ZX-5n finder; maybe even better. .-)
Re: Saw You yesterday -- and last Friday in Birmingham
Sent this to the list by mistake. Don't know how I accomplished that. Must have been a major brain malfunction. Disregard. Hi Amy, I saw you -- or at least your car -- at the intersection of Old Woodward and Oak yesterday. I hung out at the gallery last Friday to talk to customers. While there I spent some time out on the street shooting pics. Friday nights in Birmingham are great for that. Here's a few on my web page: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3421449 http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3410319 http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3408588 http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3403038 Hope things are great with you. Have a nice weekend. Paul
Re: Questions re Pentax made lens filters
That's interesting about the variants of UV filters. Do you carry a lot of UV filter variants with you? How do you decide when to use which one? I've used primarily Skylight's and have noted that the light transmission charts show that some skylights block UV radiation while others do not. In my own kit I went with 49, 58, and 77mm SMC Skylight filters, with step up rings to accommodate different size lenses. I did that mostly for the sake of consistency and because I trust the quality of Pentax filters, and it keeps the system simple. I've been interested in trying a 'minus blue' filter with BW film - haven't gotten around to getting one yet though. - MCC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo, MI www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 12:18 AM Subject: Re: Questions re Pentax made lens filters It should be noted that there are different strengths of UV (Sometimes called haze) filters, as there are skylight filters. Tiffen, just for an example, has several UV filters that they offer: UV Protector - Protects lens from dust, moisture, scratches, and breakage. Haze 1 - Reduces excessive blue haze caused by UV light by absorbing 71% of UV. Recommended for all-around UV control. Haze 2A - Absorbs all UV light; reduces haze; maintains color and image clarity. Best for high altitude and marine scenes. UV 17 - Created for the photographer who wants to absorb most but not all UV light. It absorbs slightly less UV light than the Haze 2A. Warm UV - combines the benefits of the UV 17 with the Tiffen 812 Color Warming Filter for added warmth. Other companies may have similar variations in their filter lineup. B+W has several variants of the UV or Haze filter. In some situations the minus blue filter may be a better choice for eliminating the blue found at high altitudes and in other environments, but not all companies make such a filter, which is a yellow filter that falls within a particular range. Not every yellow filter has the same characteristics. One B+W UV filter is the KR6, which is suited for daylight with a high percentage of blue (midday in the mountains during the summer), and which is recommended for color film.used in situations where an extreme blue tone is to be expected. Not only does it block ultraviolet light and reduce blue tones in the shade, but it also penetrates light fog. The bottom line is that it's easy to slap a UV filter on your lens and believe you're getting a certain result, such as the results provided by some of the above and similar filters. Unfortunately, many people believe a UV filter is a UV filter, or that all skylight filters are the same. Such is not the case, and the clever photographer chooses his or her filter with careful thought to the desired results. As for cleaning Multi-Coated filters, the two best cleaners that I;ve come across are the ones sold by The Filter Connection (I think it's their MC formula) and the cleaner sold by ClearSight. Both do a remarkable job with no streaking or leaving of residual haze or film, as another perennial favorite, ROR, cab do if not carefully applied. Shel [Original Message] From: Mark Cassino Hi Boris - I did a simple test with Hoya HMC filters vs Pentax SMC - I took them out into the sun and tried to see how much of a reflection I could bounce off the filter onto a dark wall. The SMC filter was noticeably better in this test. Does it mean anything? I don't know, but I use a filter on my A* 200 macro to protect the front element, and I figure it's penny wise but pound foolish to slap an inferior filter on an excellent lens. In regards to protective filters - I only use them when there are identified risks that could damage the lens. Like little children and food (it's nice to be able to just smile at a little tyke who just put his greasy finger on the _filter_ in front of your camera lens, as opposed to traumatizing him by snatching the camera away) For macros in the field I use a protect filter because it's easy to poke the front element of a lens when you are poking around in brush etc - and when you have the lens set to close focus, you don't always see potential hazards in the finder. Bus absent an identified risk, I don;t use a filter unless I need the filter effect. It's also important to take into consideration those situations where a UV filter or Skylight is truly valuable for it's optical effect. I think there's a tendency to view these filters as merely being protective, but they will actually improve sharpness, cut haze, and help color saturation when shooting outdoors, particularly if you are shooting distant subjects, in bright sun, in situations with high humpty, dust, or smog. I don't know why, but I've found cleaning multicoated filters (Pentax, Hoya,
Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, mike wilson wrote: But Pentax users are unlikely to be targeted by this sort of thing. I'm not sure if it is just (just!) spam or an apptempt to insert a Trojan. (DON'T click the links!!) x-gfi-me-from: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bcc: Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] How many Ns in Canon? Kostas Depends on what kind... -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: Predictable Pentax
Then you'll be disappointed with finders on all digitals, keep your MX. Mishka wrote: i looked through the finder. it sucks. i don't care that canon rebel has a worse one. the *istd finder still sucks. the mount is crippled. but i meant my email not as criticism of *istD*, quite on contrary. best, mishka On 6/3/05, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Pentax digital mount is not crippled in any way. The viewfinder is quite possibly the best of any digital SLR. Paul On Jun 2, 2005, at 11:09 PM, Mishka wrote: -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: Predictable Pentax
Sure it's bright, but try manually focusing with it. Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: Paul Stenquist wrote on 03.06.05 12:43: The Pentax digital mount is not crippled in any way. The viewfinder is quite possibly the best of any digital SLR. Almost. Konica-Minolta Maxxum (Dynax) 7D has even slightly bigger and brighter finder than *istD (it is almost as big as the one in MZ-S) - I've compared all these directly. -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: Buffer speed (Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?)
Thirty years ago I used to shoot drag racing with a Speed Graphic 4x5. Most of the time I would shoot off a tripod, swapping or flipping film holders between shots. I would reload crouching by the guardrail with my hands in a changing bag. I did some action shots as well. Several were published. Here's one that was never published. That's why I still have the tranny. (Mags were very bad about returning stuff in those days.) This one is on Ektachrome Tungsten. I think it was about a one second exposure at 5.6 or so with a 127mm Wollensak lens. http://www.portfolios.com/zoom.html?User_number=stenquistimagecount=14 - Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 7:46 AM Subject: RE: Buffer speed (Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?) hell, I still use large formant and you only get one exposure ( well two if you count both sides of the film holder) per film! JCO and you are shooting birds and sports with this right? :-) Interesting story: There is a local guy who shoots car racing with a 4x5. I've seen him set up on the outside of turn 1 (a 90 degree right hander) and he seems to get some great shots. I guess he prefocuses at a spot on the track and trips the shutter when the cars are at this point. My concern is that being on the outside of the turn and concentrating on his framing, he is vulnerable for the common occurrence of a car going straight on. Christian
Re: Re: Predictable Pentax
From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/06/03 Fri PM 02:08:30 GMT To: pentax list pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Predictable Pentax On 3/6/05, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed: Look through the viewfinder of any dslr. I haven't seen one that's better than the *istD. As for the mount, if you had ever used the camera, you would know that it works great with K and M lenses. It's not even an issue. You tap the green button to meter. Not a problem. Easier than metering with many Pentax film cameras. It's interesting that you're so adamant about this, but you haven't tried it yourself. Very strange. Agreed. I held the *ist Ds and the Canon 1Dm2 up vertically side by side and looked through with both eyes. To me, the finders on both were the same size and brightness, and the 1D is a 1.3 crop. The *ist D and Ds finders are way bigger than other offerings. Now if you're comparing to a film camera, say the LX, well, then I suppose you could say that a digi SLR Hoovers in that regard, but I personally think you have to compare apples with apples... It's more like the difference between Egremont Russets and Bramleys. One is small, perfectly formed and tasty, the other is big and leaves a bitter taste in the mouth unless you do quite a bit of processing. 8- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ - Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
Re: Predictable Pentax
P. J. Alling wrote on 03.06.05 16:26: Sure it's bright, but try manually focusing with it. I tried, it is pretty easy bacause it's finder is even slightly bigger than the one in *istD. If you were referring to matte granurality, then there's no problem - just change focusing screen to type M or ML with Super-Spherical Acute Matte and you will get superb visibility of out of focus areas... -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
FS: Pentax PZ-1p body, just serviced by Pentax
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 (the eyepiece was scratched, of course) 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
FS: Lovely Super Program, Motor Drive A, lens available
For sale: A lovely Super Program that has seen only light use throughout its life 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: Since 85mm soft lenses were mentioned recently... And lens prices, too...
Hi! I expect to get one - the FA variant - in the post in a couple of days. Paid NOK 1000,- for it. That would be about 125 euros, I believe. Quite reasonable, don't you think? Toralf, I've recently saw F variant being sold on eekBay for $300, so your should be a steal... Enjoy this very special lens! Boris
Re: Re: Predictable Pentax
On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, mike wilson wrote: From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/06/03 Fri PM 02:08:30 GMT To: pentax list pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Predictable Pentax Now if you're comparing to a film camera, say the LX, well, then I suppose you could say that a digi SLR Hoovers in that regard, but I personally think you have to compare apples with apples... It's more like the difference between Egremont Russets and Bramleys. One is small, perfectly formed and tasty Not familiar with the Egremont Russets variety. Is it also sticky on the inside and old enough for the stock to be weak and susceptible to disease? :-o Kostas
Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?
I think you are right Shel. luben Shel Belinkoff wrote: This little dialogue brings up an interesting, to me, point. First, I would have no qualms about giving up features (like a built-in toaster oven and wide screen TV) that are found in many pro cameras for a simplified feature set and a smaller, lighter, easier-to-carry simpler to operate camera, whether film or digital. Of course, different people have different needs, but I cannot help but wonder how many here who are lamenting the lack of a high-end, pro camera would actually buy one, especially if the size were bloated like some Canon and Nikons, or are just complaining because they think Pentax should have a camera that meets the top end models of these brands in terms of features because it's good for Pentax's image. Having used a couple of Canons I really don't see what all the fuss is about. For example, Image Stabilization may be nice, but I'd prefer smaller lenses and bodies that don't need as much stabilization, and lenses that offer the image qualities that I like over lenses that have a feature set that needs to be adjusted, even minimally. I like to think that I know how to use my gear well enough that there's no need to rely upon electric motors, gyroscopes, software, chips (and maybe even dip), and what have you, in order to get a good photo. But that's just me ... or is it? From what I've seen there are quite a few istD owners here who use their cameras pretty much like standard manual cameras most of the time, sometimes with a concession to auto focus, and rarely use many of the modes and features and options. Maybe the Pentax Way really is to simpler, smaller, lighter, more basic cameras that produce good photos. Shel -- Computers are useless. They can only give answers. - Pablo Picasso
Re: Predictable Pentax
Sure it's bright, but try manually focusing with it. Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: Paul Stenquist wrote on 03.06.05 12:43: The Pentax digital mount is not crippled in any way. The viewfinder is quite possibly the best of any digital SLR. Almost. Konica-Minolta Maxxum (Dynax) 7D has even slightly bigger and brighter finder than *istD (it is almost as big as the one in MZ-S) - I've compared all these directly. -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Test
Just got a failure notice from the list -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: Predictable Pentax
Then you'll be disappointed with finders on all digitals, keep your MX. Mishka wrote: i looked through the finder. it sucks. i don't care that canon rebel has a worse one. the *istd finder still sucks. the mount is crippled. but i meant my email not as criticism of *istD*, quite on contrary. best, mishka On 6/3/05, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Pentax digital mount is not crippled in any way. The viewfinder is quite possibly the best of any digital SLR. Paul On Jun 2, 2005, at 11:09 PM, Mishka wrote: -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, mike wilson wrote: But Pentax users are unlikely to be targeted by this sort of thing. I'm not sure if it is just (just!) spam or an apptempt to insert a Trojan. (DON'T click the links!!) x-gfi-me-from: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bcc: Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] How many Ns in Canon? Kostas Depends on what kind... -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: Predictable Pentax
I only saw it with the stock screen, it seemed to be incredably hard to find focus. Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: P. J. Alling wrote on 03.06.05 16:26: Sure it's bright, but try manually focusing with it. I tried, it is pretty easy bacause it's finder is even slightly bigger than the one in *istD. If you were referring to matte granurality, then there's no problem - just change focusing screen to type M or ML with Super-Spherical Acute Matte and you will get superb visibility of out of focus areas... -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: Predictable Pentax
P. J. Alling wrote on 03.06.05 16:57: Then you'll be disappointed with finders on all digitals, keep your MX. I've got that terrible feeling of Deja Vú :-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Test
I just looked deeper it didn't come from the list since my original messages got through please ignore the duplicates. P. J. Alling wrote: Just got a failure notice from the list -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: Predictable Pentax
P. J. Alling wrote on 03.06.05 17:04: I only saw it with the stock screen, it seemed to be incredably hard to find focus. Maybe you tried focusing with 17-35 lens? If so, you are right, it is not so easy, but bear in mind that it is very wide angle lens, so focusing isn't easy no matter what matte is used. However you should try D7D with M or ML screens - both give very sharp focus and out-of-focus areas definition, probably even better than in *istD, but that's just my feeling as I didn't compare them directly and with similar lenses. -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Failure Notice anyone else gettig them?
Every message I send to the list is being returned to as a failure notice, someones mail box is filled and it seems the mail demon on their server has decided to use my return path not Pentax-discuss. Just curious. -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: Questions re Pentax made lens filters
Hi Mark ... No, I don't carry many, if any, filters with me. I use a minimal number of filters IAC, but, when shooting a specific situation and looking for a particular effect, then it's time to consider which, if any, filter variant may be used. If, for example, I was heading to the mountains, I may take a Haze 2A or equivalent, and/or a minus blue depending on film choice, etc., but around town I may not carry or use any filter at all. Shel [Original Message] From: Mark Cassino That's interesting about the variants of UV filters. Do you carry a lot of UV filter variants with you? How do you decide when to use which one? I've used primarily Skylight's and have noted that the light transmission charts show that some skylights block UV radiation while others do not. In my own kit I went with 49, 58, and 77mm SMC Skylight filters, with step up rings to accommodate different size lenses. I did that mostly for the sake of consistency and because I trust the quality of Pentax filters, and it keeps the system simple. I've been interested in trying a 'minus blue' filter with BW film - haven't gotten around to getting one yet though. - MCC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo, MI www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 12:18 AM Subject: Re: Questions re Pentax made lens filters It should be noted that there are different strengths of UV (Sometimes called haze) filters, as there are skylight filters. Tiffen, just for an example, has several UV filters that they offer: UV Protector - Protects lens from dust, moisture, scratches, and breakage. Haze 1 - Reduces excessive blue haze caused by UV light by absorbing 71% of UV. Recommended for all-around UV control. Haze 2A - Absorbs all UV light; reduces haze; maintains color and image clarity. Best for high altitude and marine scenes. UV 17 - Created for the photographer who wants to absorb most but not all UV light. It absorbs slightly less UV light than the Haze 2A. Warm UV - combines the benefits of the UV 17 with the Tiffen 812 Color Warming Filter for added warmth. Other companies may have similar variations in their filter lineup. B+W has several variants of the UV or Haze filter. In some situations the minus blue filter may be a better choice for eliminating the blue found at high altitudes and in other environments, but not all companies make such a filter, which is a yellow filter that falls within a particular range. Not every yellow filter has the same characteristics. One B+W UV filter is the KR6, which is suited for daylight with a high percentage of blue (midday in the mountains during the summer), and which is recommended for color film.used in situations where an extreme blue tone is to be expected. Not only does it block ultraviolet light and reduce blue tones in the shade, but it also penetrates light fog. The bottom line is that it's easy to slap a UV filter on your lens and believe you're getting a certain result, such as the results provided by some of the above and similar filters. Unfortunately, many people believe a UV filter is a UV filter, or that all skylight filters are the same. Such is not the case, and the clever photographer chooses his or her filter with careful thought to the desired results. As for cleaning Multi-Coated filters, the two best cleaners that I;ve come across are the ones sold by The Filter Connection (I think it's their MC formula) and the cleaner sold by ClearSight. Both do a remarkable job with no streaking or leaving of residual haze or film, as another perennial favorite, ROR, cab do if not carefully applied. Shel
Re: Failure Notice anyone else gettig them?
yep. got one this morning. - Original Message - From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 11:18 AM Subject: Failure Notice anyone else gettig them? Every message I send to the list is being returned to as a failure notice, someones mail box is filled and it seems the mail demon on their server has decided to use my return path not Pentax-discuss. Just curious. -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: Failure Notice anyone else gettig them?
P. J. Alling wrote on 03.06.05 17:18: Every message I send to the list is being returned to as a failure notice, someones mail box is filled and it seems the mail demon on their server has decided to use my return path not Pentax-discuss. Just curious. Same here. User e-mail is: [EMAIL PROTECTED] so I guess it is someone from Italy. Perhaps he couldn't unsubsubscribe by sending numerous unsubscribe messages to the list and decided to use this e-mail adress no more ;-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
RE: pentax 85mm soft
Which raises a question. I also have the F version and I find it puzzling that it has the A contacts on the mount, even though it lacks the A position on the aperture ring. Does anybody know what function the contacts serve on this lens? regards, Anthony Farr -Original Message- From: Boris Liberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (snip) F variety has no A position, so *istD will work on P mode only between f/2.8 and f/5.6 inclusive. Then the exposure values do not change if you keep on clicking. You have to use the green button trick. Boris
Re: PESO: Dynamic Range
Paul, that is beautiful! Not just the marquee and the colored lights, but the sky and the architectural details of the building lit by the marquee as well. Very nice! Rick --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Last Friday while shooting on the street at night, I grabbed a pic of the Birmingham theater marquis. Right off the bat I could see it was a problem. The billboard part of the marquis was extremely bright while the colored lights were quite dim. Of course the unlit parts of the building and marquis were in deep night shadow with only a touch of illumination from the street lights and marquis lights. Overall, it was at least ten stops variation. For capture I shot RAW overexposing the highlights by about a 1 1/2 stops. Normally, I bring the highlights within range, but I knew I'd lose a lot of shadow if I did that. The RAW converter can recover some highlight detail, so I was counting on that. When converting, I pulled the exposure back down about a stop and turned the brightness all the way up. I also decreased the shadow depth. I'm at work now, but I can get the exact numbers later if someone is interested. Finally, after conversion, I used the shadow/highlight tool to ligh! ten the shadows a bit more, tame the highlights and increase midrange contrast. I sharpened after conversion with USM. I'm quite pleased with the result. It's here: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3421449 __ Yahoo! Mail Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour: http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html
Re: Digital MZ-5n
I use a lot the metering mode dial (multisegment, CW, spot) of my MZ-5n. There is one in the D, but you need to go through menus on the Ds (I asked this specifically to the list some time ago). --- Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Alin Flaider [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Toralf Lund pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 7:57 AM Subject: Re: Digital MZ-5n I'd get a DSLR with the 5N controls layout (or MX for that matter). Distinct buttons for the essential photographic functions, not buried in obscure LCD menus. Come to that I don't think I even need an LCD. Just out of curiosity, what essential photographic functions are buried in obscure LCD menus on the D or Ds? Here's what's essential to me: aperture control (back wheelie thing on ist D). Shutter speed control (front wheelie thing on *ist D). Focus ring (yep all lenses have one). Shutter button thingy (both D and Ds have one) ISO sensitivity (as easy to set on the D as it is on the LX or MX). And last on a digi-body, file type/quality setting (I shoot RAW 100% of the time and it's easy to set and not burried in a menu on the D; on the 20D it IS buried in the menu, but again it makes no difference to me because I set it once and never change it). nothing else needed to take a picture. Christian __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: PESO: Dynamic Range
Thanks Rick. Paul, that is beautiful! Not just the marquee and the colored lights, but the sky and the architectural details of the building lit by the marquee as well. Very nice! Rick --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Last Friday while shooting on the street at night, I grabbed a pic of the Birmingham theater marquis. Right off the bat I could see it was a problem. The billboard part of the marquis was extremely bright while the colored lights were quite dim. Of course the unlit parts of the building and marquis were in deep night shadow with only a touch of illumination from the street lights and marquis lights. Overall, it was at least ten stops variation. For capture I shot RAW overexposing the highlights by about a 1 1/2 stops. Normally, I bring the highlights within range, but I knew I'd lose a lot of shadow if I did that. The RAW converter can recover some highlight detail, so I was counting on that. When converting, I pulled the exposure back down about a stop and turned the brightness all the way up. I also decreased the shadow depth. I'm at work now, but I can get the exact numbers later if someone is interested. Finally, after conversion, I used the shadow/highlight tool to ligh! ten the shadows a bit more, tame the highlights and increase midrange contrast. I sharpened after conversion with USM. I'm quite pleased with the result. It's here: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3421449 __ Yahoo! Mail Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour: http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html
Re: Why choose *ist DL over Nikon or Canon competitors?
Alan wrote: I shoot and test my FA43 many times and came to the same conclusion. At least I know Rob has the same opinion on FA43. We both, of course, bought the lemons. :-) Obviously. The lens was tested by Amateur Photographer magazine and promptly became their reference lens outperforming the Carl Zeiss 50/1.4. The latter probably another Lemon lens whose reputation is based on myth only. Mike Johnston wrote an essay where the Pentax Limteds were touted as the best AF lenses money could buy. Maybe he too is easily fooled in spite of having tried almost everything out there? It may be that for some the best there is isn't good enough but for the rest of us the best there is, is the stuff that creates cults. Pål
Re: Rumors About Pentax's Future
Herb wrote: Pentax's official revenue forecasts show that it will make money over the next three years, but the imaging products division will lose about the same amount of money in the next three years as they lost this year. sounds like a winning strategy to me. then you have the financial analysts who don't believe Pentax and think they won't even make those targets because it's playing at the wrong end of the profit margin curve. Are there any companies that actually make money on digital cameras? According to Olympus they don't exist... Pål
Re: Digital MZ-5n
Toral Lund: As another spin-off from the looong why choose *istDL thread, I thought I might mention that I completely agree with the whoever-it-was who said that what he'd really like to see, was something that might be described as a digital version of the MZ-5n (or ZX-5n.) Like that other person, I'm not sure it would make sense from a marketing viewpoint - although it would at least have some features that would clearly distinguish it from the competitors, which is often a Good Thing. If they put it one one of those funky steel bodies used for more upmarket PS's I think it could have been quite succesful. However, it seems like Pentax wants to standardize interfaces and build more or less the same camera from the same building blocks. Even the forthcoming 645D seem to be an *istD in placed in a 645 chassis. Pål
Re: pentax 85mm soft
Thank you Boris, that answers my questions. I want one. rg Boris Liberman wrote: Hi! Boris has my old one. I sold it to him back when I was shooting medium format. I can say that I have not been able to fully duplicate the effect it has with filters or post processing. It would be on my list to buy again, except for the focal length on the *istD is a bit long. Yeppers, that'd be one of my most effective enablements on the list. In fact, I cannot thank you enough Bruce. This lens is a gem, though a very special one... Hopefully Boris will speak up and show some samples for you. Sure. Here come the links: http://webaperture.com/gallery/photos/50088 http://webaperture.com/gallery/photos/49655 http://webaperture.com/gallery/photos/47681 http://boris.isra-shop.com/soft-adventures.htm (some of the shots are made with another soft lens, but you can read it in the notes) On the less photographic side - this lens is very well built. On *istD you have to use Manual mode with the Green button as it has no A position. I've been told that FA 85/2.8 soft does have A position though. However, due to lack of A position, first few apertures f/2.8 through f/5.6 are manual. These are the soft apertures, so you get to see more or less how it will look on the photograph. I highly recommend this lens if you think you will like soft focus photography... Boris
Re: Since 85mm soft lenses were mentioned recently... And lens prices, too...
Sign me up too! rg Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Toralf Lund wrote: I expect to get one - the FA variant - in the post in a couple of days. Paid NOK 1000,- for it. That would be about 125 euros, I believe. Quite reasonable, don't you think? Very. If you find another one, let me know :-) K
Re: PESO: Dynamic Range
I note that you did not invite comments and if I'm violating an rule of etiquette, please forgive me. You manipulated this image with the a skill and aptitude that I will never posses. I'm envious!. If I may say so, the image lacks the natural glow I would expect of such a scene. It has, for me, a rather drab subdued feel. I suspect, however, this was more a technical rather than esthetic challenge. Jack --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Last Friday while shooting on the street at night, I grabbed a pic of the Birmingham theater marquis. Right off the bat I could see it was a problem. The billboard part of the marquis was extremely bright while the colored lights were quite dim. Of course the unlit parts of the building and marquis were in deep night shadow with only a touch of illumination from the street lights and marquis lights. Overall, it was at least ten stops variation. For capture I shot RAW overexposing the highlights by about a 1 1/2 stops. Normally, I bring the highlights within range, but I knew I'd lose a lot of shadow if I did that. The RAW converter can recover some highlight detail, so I was counting on that. When converting, I pulled the exposure back down about a stop and turned the brightness all the way up. I also decreased the shadow depth. I'm at work now, but I can get the exact numbers later if someone is interested. Finally, after conversion, I used the shadow/highlight tool to ligh! ten the shadows a bit more, tame the highlights and increase midrange contrast. I sharpened after conversion with USM. I'm quite pleased with the result. It's here: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3421449 __ Discover Yahoo! Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM and more. Check it out! http://discover.yahoo.com/online.html
Re: pentax 85mm soft
Anthony Farr wrote on 03.06.05 17:34: Which raises a question. I also have the F version and I find it puzzling that it has the A contacts on the mount, even though it lacks the A position on the aperture ring. Does anybody know what function the contacts serve on this lens? Aperture range and digital data as it is AF lens. more is here: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/technology/K-mount/Ka.html http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/technology/K-mount/Kaf.html -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Digital MZ-5n
- Original Message - From: Jaume Lahuerta [EMAIL PROTECTED] I use a lot the metering mode dial (multisegment, CW, spot) of my MZ-5n. There is one in the D, but you need to go through menus on the Ds (I asked this specifically to the list some time ago). gotcha. I had a D and the metering mode was set with a simple 3-way switch on the left side. Christian
Re: PESO: Dynamic Range
Hi Jack, With PESO or PAW postings, it goes without saying that comments are most welcome. While my description of the conversion process may sound complicated, it's really quite simple and doesn't require a lot of skill. I'm sure you can do it. In regard to aesthetic goals vs. a technical exercise, I would say that I rarely ignore one in favor of the other. I have kept this somewhat subdued in terms of overall brightness and saturation. I didn't want it to be night turned into day, and I didn't want to misrepresent the actual scene. But other interpretations are possible and may be more appealing to some viewers. Thanks for commenting. Paul I note that you did not invite comments and if I'm violating an rule of etiquette, please forgive me. You manipulated this image with the a skill and aptitude that I will never posses. I'm envious!. If I may say so, the image lacks the natural glow I would expect of such a scene. It has, for me, a rather drab subdued feel. I suspect, however, this was more a technical rather than esthetic challenge. Jack --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Last Friday while shooting on the street at night, I grabbed a pic of the Birmingham theater marquis. Right off the bat I could see it was a problem. The billboard part of the marquis was extremely bright while the colored lights were quite dim. Of course the unlit parts of the building and marquis were in deep night shadow with only a touch of illumination from the street lights and marquis lights. Overall, it was at least ten stops variation. For capture I shot RAW overexposing the highlights by about a 1 1/2 stops. Normally, I bring the highlights within range, but I knew I'd lose a lot of shadow if I did that. The RAW converter can recover some highlight detail, so I was counting on that. When converting, I pulled the exposure back down about a stop and turned the brightness all the way up. I also decreased the shadow depth. I'm at work now, but I can get the exact numbers later if someone is interested. Finally, after conversion, I used the shadow/highlight tool to ligh! ten the shadows a bit more, tame the highlights and increase midrange contrast. I sharpened after conversion with USM. I'm quite pleased with the result. It's here: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3421449 __ Discover Yahoo! Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM and more. Check it out! http://discover.yahoo.com/online.html
Re: Failure Notice anyone else gettig them?
On 3/6/05, P. J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed: Every message I send to the list is being returned to as a failure notice, someones mail box is filled and it seems the mail demon on their server has decided to use my return path not Pentax-discuss. Can't be Marnie, she's unsubbed. Allegedly. Could be a GFM-goer. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Digital MZ-5n
On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Jaume Lahuerta wrote: I use a lot the metering mode dial (multisegment, CW, spot) of my MZ-5n. Same here. A *lot*. Kostas
Re: PESO: Dynamic Range
Hi Paul ... I suppose it's as much a matter of preference as anything else, but I have to agree with Jack that the photo is rather flat and the lights on the marquee seem far less brilliant and glowing than I'd imagine them to be. The other aspects of the photo appear in nice balance - the lights just don't seem right or appropriate to the scene. Shel [Original Message] With PESO or PAW postings, it goes without saying that comments are most welcome. While my description of the conversion process may sound complicated, it's really quite simple and doesn't require a lot of skill. I'm sure you can do it. In regard to aesthetic goals vs. a technical exercise, I would say that I rarely ignore one in favor of the other. I have kept this somewhat subdued in terms of overall brightness and saturation. I didn't want it to be night turned into day, and I didn't want to misrepresent the actual scene. But other interpretations are possible and may be more appealing to some viewers. Thanks for commenting. I note that you did not invite comments and if I'm violating an rule of etiquette, please forgive me. You manipulated this image with the a skill and aptitude that I will never posses. I'm envious!. If I may say so, the image lacks the natural glow I would expect of such a scene. It has, for me, a rather drab subdued feel. I suspect, however, this was more a technical rather than esthetic challenge. Jack http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3421449
Re: Since 85mm soft lenses were mentioned recently... And lens prices, too...
Gonz wrote: Sign me up too! rg Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Toralf Lund wrote: I expect to get one - the FA variant - in the post in a couple of days. Paid NOK 1000,- for it. That would be about 125 euros, I believe. Quite reasonable, don't you think? Very. If you find another one, let me know :-) He, he... Like I said to someone else, it seems to me that it's easier to find bargains on auction sites with relatively few users, than it is e.g. on eBay. Yes, it takes longer between each time something I want to buy comes along, but when it does, chances are I'll be the only bidder. - Toralf
Re: Rumors About Pentax's Future
According to a June 1 dateline in the BJP, Olympus has recorded its first-ever consolidated loss and in the same week, slashed its imaging sector's worldwide workforce by 4000 staff. Gee, I feel like Herb Chong LOL Shel [Original Message] From: Pål Jensen Are there any companies that actually make money on digital cameras? According to Olympus they don't exist...
Re: Predictable Pentax
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, mike wilson wrote: From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/06/03 Fri PM 02:08:30 GMT To: pentax list pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Predictable Pentax Now if you're comparing to a film camera, say the LX, well, then I suppose you could say that a digi SLR Hoovers in that regard, but I personally think you have to compare apples with apples... It's more like the difference between Egremont Russets and Bramleys. One is small, perfectly formed and tasty Not familiar with the Egremont Russets variety. Is it also sticky on the inside and old enough for the stock to be weak and susceptible to disease? no. Probably the best eating apple in the world. Only available for a short time around early October. Distinguished by its non-shiny, russet (golden brown) skin. m
Re: Digital MZ-5n
The *ist-D and *ist-Ds are similar in size and shape but I don't think that they've come close to a standardized interface if you compare the two. They are frustratingly different, yet just enough alike to be annoying. Pål Jensen wrote: Toral Lund: As another spin-off from the looong why choose *istDL thread, I thought I might mention that I completely agree with the whoever-it-was who said that what he'd really like to see, was something that might be described as a digital version of the MZ-5n (or ZX-5n.) Like that other person, I'm not sure it would make sense from a marketing viewpoint - although it would at least have some features that would clearly distinguish it from the competitors, which is often a Good Thing. If they put it one one of those funky steel bodies used for more upmarket PS's I think it could have been quite succesful. However, it seems like Pentax wants to standardize interfaces and build more or less the same camera from the same building blocks. Even the forthcoming 645D seem to be an *istD in placed in a 645 chassis. Pål -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: Rumors About Pentax's Future
I think Pentax plans to be making DSLRs after the shakeout. They're certainly taking an aggressive stance using the same formula we saw with the MZ/ZX series cameras. It must have worked before. I hope they make a few technical improvements along the way... Shel Belinkoff wrote: According to a June 1 dateline in the BJP, Olympus has recorded its first-ever consolidated loss and in the same week, slashed its imaging sector's worldwide workforce by 4000 staff. Gee, I feel like Herb Chong LOL Shel [Original Message] From: Pål Jensen Are there any companies that actually make money on digital cameras? According to Olympus they don't exist... -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
RE: pentax 85mm soft
Thanks, Sylwek. I was forgetting that it was an AF lens. I suppose also that the contacts allow matrix metering which is unusual for a lens without an A position regards, Anthony Farr -Original Message- From: Sylwester Pietrzyk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, 4 June 2005 1:54 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: pentax 85mm soft Anthony Farr wrote on 03.06.05 17:34: Which raises a question. I also have the F version and I find it puzzling that it has the A contacts on the mount, even though it lacks the A position on the aperture ring. Does anybody know what function the contacts serve on this lens? Aperture range and digital data as it is AF lens. more is here: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/technology/K-mount/Ka.html http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/technology/K-mount/Kaf.html -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Predictable Pentax
Cory Papenfuss wrote: know that it works great with K and M lenses. It's not even an issue. You tap the green button to meter. Not a problem. Easier than metering with many Pentax film cameras. It's interesting that you're so adamant about this, but you haven't tried it yourself. Very strange. Paul I don't know if the -DS I've got is much different than the -D, but I know a few things where the crippled mount falls flat. The biggest is flash... pretty much stuck with manual. The other ones are less important... matrix metering, etc. The *ist-D does TTL flash very nicely, either with the built in flash or an AF200T or AF280T. Well as long as you make sure to set the sensitivity to ISO 400. I've noticed a lot more variation at other ISOs Oh, and of course the human fiddle factor of having to/forgetting to go to 'M' mode when swapping to a non-A lens. For the most part, however, it *is* a non-issue. How much more would it cost to add in the coupler? If it were $100 I'd probably pay that. If it were $250, I'd have to think about it. If it were $500, no way. -Cory * * Cory Papenfuss* * Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student * * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University * * -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: Failure Notice anyone else gettig them?
Hmm. So if I will be plagued with the same, I should get a similar notice for this mail? Jostein the curious - Original Message - From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 5:18 PM Subject: Failure Notice anyone else gettig them? Every message I send to the list is being returned to as a failure notice, someones mail box is filled and it seems the mail demon on their server has decided to use my return path not Pentax-discuss. Just curious. -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
