Re: Photo from Italy
Exquisite! On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:31 PM, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: I've been back from Italy for over a week and haven't posted any photos. Until now. I'm keeping very busy with my Photoshop book but I had to make time for at least one image from Italy. This is in Milan. I forget what the magnificent building used to be used for but now it's a high end shopping area (the store in the center is Prada). When I entered the place I thought this is like being inside an HDR photo! So I thought WTF, let's do HDR. I deliberately *didn't* use the de-ghosting feature of Merge to HDR. http://www.robertstech.com/temp/7dd06620-23.jpg (Big image, in pixel dimensions and file size) -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range
I concur. Although when I first saw the lens in your hands, Jaume, I did not expect to own it some day. I should point that it is not that heavy given the speed and zoom range. It is rather well made although indeed eventually the zoom becomes creepy. It does have the zoom look that is handy for transportation, obviously. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, I also have the old Sigma 17-70 (actually I think that I have some responsibility in Boris owning one...) and I second Boris comments. The only complaint is that is is a bit heavy and the zoom eventually becomes loose. I have physically seen the latest version and I have to admit that it looks and feels extremely compact. However, my favorite compromise range / IQ would be the 18-135. Sigma has one but its reputation is worst than the 17-70s and the Pentax one seems a bit expensive. Regards, Jaume - Mensaje original - De: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net CC: Enviado: Martes 23 de julio de 2013 13:47 Asunto: Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range Dave, I've (the oldest version of) Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5. Such lenses can be had for order of USD 250-300. I cannot praise mine enough. It successfully replaced DA* 16-50/2.8. Later versions are 17-70/2.8-4.0 (notice faster long end of the zoom range) and further introduced HSM (Sigma's ultrasonic AF) and OS (Optical image Stabilization). I opted out of these as I wanted something as simple as possible so that it won't break down just because. Optically I've no complaints at all. It just what suits me best right now if and when I have to shoot with DSLR. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:40 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Hey all. This last week at the plow demo got me thinking again about my short zoom, the 16-45. Normally i take two cameras, the D2H with re 70-200 VR f2.8 and the D200 with the 18-70. I use the 18-70 for the closer shots when the teams come at me. This year i took the K-5 and used the 16-45. It performed fine, but at 45 at the long end just does not get what i want before i switch back to the longer zoom. So Im thinking something along the lines of the Pentax or Sigma 17-70 ish lenses, and i think i saw on Henrys site an 18-135??? I know these have come up before just looking for opinions. Also the 55-30 is still on my list, although the sales person at Henreys showed me the Sigma version, a bit cheaper and now i'm humming on that one. Comments about the short zooms or the Sigma 55-300 appreciated, Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Should I send my K-5 in for service?
John, can it be that any authorized camera service willing give your sensor a proper cleaning would do? It seems to me that an experienced camera technician (not necessarily exclusive to Pentax brand) could help you and obviously, to clean a sensor won't cost you an arm and a leg. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 6:59 PM, John Celio neo.venator.com+p...@gmail.com wrote: If you take a look at the four pictures in the following gallery, you will see two little blobs on the right side that become clearer as the aperture is stopped down: http://imgur.com/a/IG40x (to see an image at full resolution, hover your mouse over the image, click the gear icon that appears and select view full resolution.) The blob closer to the center is probably regular old dust that would go away with a puff from a blower ball. The other blob (the darker one closer to the right side), however, is a problem. It won't go away with air or Sensor Swabs. I even took a risk and tried a compressed air blast once. No dice. I'm worried it may be some sort of actual damage to the sensor, even though I can't really think of anything that could have caused that. My question is, which of the following would you do: A) Send it to Pentax/CRIS and see what they say. I'm worried this will be very expensive (as in, replace-the-sensor expensive), and I don't have the money to spend on repairs right now. B) Deal with it in Photoshop until a replacement for the K-5 comes out, and then start saving to get that. (I'm nearly finished paying off the last of my recession-incurred debts, so saving will be much easier starting this fall) Other ideas would be welcome, too. Thanks, John -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: July Extra PUG - Open Gallery - is UP
Thanks, Brian! On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Brian Walters apathy...@lyons-ryan.org wrote: G'day all A great gallery with plenty of variety. A few favourites: Bob's 'Looking for a mate' - just fantastic Aahz's 'Endicott Sunset' - stunning colour Gerrit's 'Done Fishing' - simple but effective composition Bruce's 'Test Shot' - wonderful smile Ann's 'Soho Shadows' - the title says it all Boris' 'Ceramic Potters' - really effective shallow depth of field As usual, you'll find the gallery here: http://pug.komkon.org/ (you may need to refresh your browser if you see the previous Gallery there) Note: The automated submission process usually works well but it's not infallible. So, if you made a submission and you don't see it in the gallery, let me know. + Coming up for August is 'Signs of the Times'; nominal closing date 31 July. There are already 3 submissions. Submit here: http://pug.komkon.org/submit/ Submission Guidelines here: http://pug.komkon.org/general/autosubmit.html The main requirements are: * Max. pixel dimensions: 800 x 800 pixels * Max file size: 300k * Third party equipment is acceptable provided either the camera body or lens used is Pentax. * If you embed a colour space in the image, it should be sRGB to ensure that the image is displayed correctly on line. -- Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ -- Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
PESOs: Micro PDLM meeting in Greenwich
Bob and I met up with Rick who's over on a fleeting visit. We had a pleasant couple of hours in Greenwich where my son Pete also joined us. Here's a snap of Rick when I found him by the Cutty Sark: http://www.zen50061.zen.co.uk/PDML/DSCF2569.jpg And here he is at the Old Brewery where we had supper: http://www.zen50061.zen.co.uk/PDML/DSCF2589.jpg Chris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Should I send my K-5 in for service?
CRIS won't perform ny repairs without your authorization. They're quite reasonable and willing to negotiate. Paul On Jul 24, 2013, at 2:23 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: John, can it be that any authorized camera service willing give your sensor a proper cleaning would do? It seems to me that an experienced camera technician (not necessarily exclusive to Pentax brand) could help you and obviously, to clean a sensor won't cost you an arm and a leg. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 6:59 PM, John Celio neo.venator.com+p...@gmail.com wrote: If you take a look at the four pictures in the following gallery, you will see two little blobs on the right side that become clearer as the aperture is stopped down: http://imgur.com/a/IG40x (to see an image at full resolution, hover your mouse over the image, click the gear icon that appears and select view full resolution.) The blob closer to the center is probably regular old dust that would go away with a puff from a blower ball. The other blob (the darker one closer to the right side), however, is a problem. It won't go away with air or Sensor Swabs. I even took a risk and tried a compressed air blast once. No dice. I'm worried it may be some sort of actual damage to the sensor, even though I can't really think of anything that could have caused that. My question is, which of the following would you do: A) Send it to Pentax/CRIS and see what they say. I'm worried this will be very expensive (as in, replace-the-sensor expensive), and I don't have the money to spend on repairs right now. B) Deal with it in Photoshop until a replacement for the K-5 comes out, and then start saving to get that. (I'm nearly finished paying off the last of my recession-incurred debts, so saving will be much easier starting this fall) Other ideas would be welcome, too. Thanks, John -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: KEH has an A* 135mm f1.8
On 23/07/2013 9:42 PM, Walt wrote: On 7/23/2013 6:27 PM, Larry Colen wrote: No Walt, I won't give you my 77ltd so that I have an excuse to by the 85/1.4. I'm glad you didn't have to see me flounce out of the room and slam the door just now. I didn't let having a 77 stop me from buying an A*85/1.4. And neither should you. bill -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range
Thanks for the comments so far. Given me some things to think about. I have a fader ND filter at 67mm dia, so the Pentax 17-70 would fit it, but leery of the SDM from what i have read previously. I don t need IS as its in the K-5 body so that would be a wasted Sigma feature. Decisions decisions. Dave On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:21 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: I concur. Although when I first saw the lens in your hands, Jaume, I did not expect to own it some day. I should point that it is not that heavy given the speed and zoom range. It is rather well made although indeed eventually the zoom becomes creepy. It does have the zoom look that is handy for transportation, obviously. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, I also have the old Sigma 17-70 (actually I think that I have some responsibility in Boris owning one...) and I second Boris comments. The only complaint is that is is a bit heavy and the zoom eventually becomes loose. I have physically seen the latest version and I have to admit that it looks and feels extremely compact. However, my favorite compromise range / IQ would be the 18-135. Sigma has one but its reputation is worst than the 17-70s and the Pentax one seems a bit expensive. Regards, Jaume - Mensaje original - De: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net CC: Enviado: Martes 23 de julio de 2013 13:47 Asunto: Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range Dave, I've (the oldest version of) Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5. Such lenses can be had for order of USD 250-300. I cannot praise mine enough. It successfully replaced DA* 16-50/2.8. Later versions are 17-70/2.8-4.0 (notice faster long end of the zoom range) and further introduced HSM (Sigma's ultrasonic AF) and OS (Optical image Stabilization). I opted out of these as I wanted something as simple as possible so that it won't break down just because. Optically I've no complaints at all. It just what suits me best right now if and when I have to shoot with DSLR. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:40 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Hey all. This last week at the plow demo got me thinking again about my short zoom, the 16-45. Normally i take two cameras, the D2H with re 70-200 VR f2.8 and the D200 with the 18-70. I use the 18-70 for the closer shots when the teams come at me. This year i took the K-5 and used the 16-45. It performed fine, but at 45 at the long end just does not get what i want before i switch back to the longer zoom. So Im thinking something along the lines of the Pentax or Sigma 17-70 ish lenses, and i think i saw on Henrys site an 18-135??? I know these have come up before just looking for opinions. Also the 55-30 is still on my list, although the sales person at Henreys showed me the Sigma version, a bit cheaper and now i'm humming on that one. Comments about the short zooms or the Sigma 55-300 appreciated, Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range
One of local Pentaxians had 17-70/4. The SDM failed on him and being a handy person he took it apart. I won't repeat what he told me so as not to insult anyone. It was a very strong arguments against the SDM lenses, at least the cheaper ones. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:27 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the comments so far. Given me some things to think about. I have a fader ND filter at 67mm dia, so the Pentax 17-70 would fit it, but leery of the SDM from what i have read previously. I don t need IS as its in the K-5 body so that would be a wasted Sigma feature. Decisions decisions. Dave On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:21 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: I concur. Although when I first saw the lens in your hands, Jaume, I did not expect to own it some day. I should point that it is not that heavy given the speed and zoom range. It is rather well made although indeed eventually the zoom becomes creepy. It does have the zoom look that is handy for transportation, obviously. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, I also have the old Sigma 17-70 (actually I think that I have some responsibility in Boris owning one...) and I second Boris comments. The only complaint is that is is a bit heavy and the zoom eventually becomes loose. I have physically seen the latest version and I have to admit that it looks and feels extremely compact. However, my favorite compromise range / IQ would be the 18-135. Sigma has one but its reputation is worst than the 17-70s and the Pentax one seems a bit expensive. Regards, Jaume - Mensaje original - De: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net CC: Enviado: Martes 23 de julio de 2013 13:47 Asunto: Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range Dave, I've (the oldest version of) Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5. Such lenses can be had for order of USD 250-300. I cannot praise mine enough. It successfully replaced DA* 16-50/2.8. Later versions are 17-70/2.8-4.0 (notice faster long end of the zoom range) and further introduced HSM (Sigma's ultrasonic AF) and OS (Optical image Stabilization). I opted out of these as I wanted something as simple as possible so that it won't break down just because. Optically I've no complaints at all. It just what suits me best right now if and when I have to shoot with DSLR. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:40 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Hey all. This last week at the plow demo got me thinking again about my short zoom, the 16-45. Normally i take two cameras, the D2H with re 70-200 VR f2.8 and the D200 with the 18-70. I use the 18-70 for the closer shots when the teams come at me. This year i took the K-5 and used the 16-45. It performed fine, but at 45 at the long end just does not get what i want before i switch back to the longer zoom. So Im thinking something along the lines of the Pentax or Sigma 17-70 ish lenses, and i think i saw on Henrys site an 18-135??? I know these have come up before just looking for opinions. Also the 55-30 is still on my list, although the sales person at Henreys showed me the Sigma version, a bit cheaper and now i'm humming on that one. Comments about the short zooms or the Sigma 55-300 appreciated, Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range
Fader filters don't work too well below 70mm, especially as you get to the higher levels of filtering. An X tends to appear in the image due to the design of the filter. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:27 AM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the comments so far. Given me some things to think about. I have a fader ND filter at 67mm dia, so the Pentax 17-70 would fit it, but leery of the SDM from what i have read previously. I don t need IS as its in the K-5 body so that would be a wasted Sigma feature. Decisions decisions. Dave On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:21 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: I concur. Although when I first saw the lens in your hands, Jaume, I did not expect to own it some day. I should point that it is not that heavy given the speed and zoom range. It is rather well made although indeed eventually the zoom becomes creepy. It does have the zoom look that is handy for transportation, obviously. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, I also have the old Sigma 17-70 (actually I think that I have some responsibility in Boris owning one...) and I second Boris comments. The only complaint is that is is a bit heavy and the zoom eventually becomes loose. I have physically seen the latest version and I have to admit that it looks and feels extremely compact. However, my favorite compromise range / IQ would be the 18-135. Sigma has one but its reputation is worst than the 17-70s and the Pentax one seems a bit expensive. Regards, Jaume - Mensaje original - De: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net CC: Enviado: Martes 23 de julio de 2013 13:47 Asunto: Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range Dave, I've (the oldest version of) Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5. Such lenses can be had for order of USD 250-300. I cannot praise mine enough. It successfully replaced DA* 16-50/2.8. Later versions are 17-70/2.8-4.0 (notice faster long end of the zoom range) and further introduced HSM (Sigma's ultrasonic AF) and OS (Optical image Stabilization). I opted out of these as I wanted something as simple as possible so that it won't break down just because. Optically I've no complaints at all. It just what suits me best right now if and when I have to shoot with DSLR. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:40 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Hey all. This last week at the plow demo got me thinking again about my short zoom, the 16-45. Normally i take two cameras, the D2H with re 70-200 VR f2.8 and the D200 with the 18-70. I use the 18-70 for the closer shots when the teams come at me. This year i took the K-5 and used the 16-45. It performed fine, but at 45 at the long end just does not get what i want before i switch back to the longer zoom. So Im thinking something along the lines of the Pentax or Sigma 17-70 ish lenses, and i think i saw on Henrys site an 18-135??? I know these have come up before just looking for opinions. Also the 55-30 is still on my list, although the sales person at Henreys showed me the Sigma version, a bit cheaper and now i'm humming on that one. Comments about the short zooms or the Sigma 55-300 appreciated, Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- David Parsons Photography http://www.davidparsonsphoto.com Aloha Photographer Photoblog http://alohaphotog.blogspot.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: July Extra PUG - Open Gallery - is UP
Thanks, Brian. Excellent stuff. There certainly are many talented photographers in the group. Bob's looking for a mate immediately caught my eye too. From the thumbnail I initially thought Gerrit's Done Fishing was a windsurfer. Alan C -Original Message- From: Brian Walters Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 9:59 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: July Extra PUG - Open Gallery - is UP G'day all A great gallery with plenty of variety. A few favourites: Bob's 'Looking for a mate' - just fantastic Aahz's 'Endicott Sunset' - stunning colour Gerrit's 'Done Fishing' - simple but effective composition Bruce's 'Test Shot' - wonderful smile Ann's 'Soho Shadows' - the title says it all Boris' 'Ceramic Potters' - really effective shallow depth of field As usual, you'll find the gallery here: http://pug.komkon.org/ (you may need to refresh your browser if you see the previous Gallery there) Note: The automated submission process usually works well but it's not infallible. So, if you made a submission and you don't see it in the gallery, let me know. + Coming up for August is 'Signs of the Times'; nominal closing date 31 July. There are already 3 submissions. Submit here: http://pug.komkon.org/submit/ Submission Guidelines here: http://pug.komkon.org/general/autosubmit.html The main requirements are: * Max. pixel dimensions: 800 x 800 pixels * Max file size: 300k * Third party equipment is acceptable provided either the camera body or lens used is Pentax. * If you embed a colour space in the image, it should be sRGB to ensure that the image is displayed correctly on line. -- Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ -- Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range
what did he say? why would we be insulted? if its poorly built, its poorly built. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: One of local Pentaxians had 17-70/4. The SDM failed on him and being a handy person he took it apart. I won't repeat what he told me so as not to insult anyone. It was a very strong arguments against the SDM lenses, at least the cheaper ones. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:27 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the comments so far. Given me some things to think about. I have a fader ND filter at 67mm dia, so the Pentax 17-70 would fit it, but leery of the SDM from what i have read previously. I don t need IS as its in the K-5 body so that would be a wasted Sigma feature. Decisions decisions. Dave On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:21 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: I concur. Although when I first saw the lens in your hands, Jaume, I did not expect to own it some day. I should point that it is not that heavy given the speed and zoom range. It is rather well made although indeed eventually the zoom becomes creepy. It does have the zoom look that is handy for transportation, obviously. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, I also have the old Sigma 17-70 (actually I think that I have some responsibility in Boris owning one...) and I second Boris comments. The only complaint is that is is a bit heavy and the zoom eventually becomes loose. I have physically seen the latest version and I have to admit that it looks and feels extremely compact. However, my favorite compromise range / IQ would be the 18-135. Sigma has one but its reputation is worst than the 17-70s and the Pentax one seems a bit expensive. Regards, Jaume - Mensaje original - De: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net CC: Enviado: Martes 23 de julio de 2013 13:47 Asunto: Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range Dave, I've (the oldest version of) Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5. Such lenses can be had for order of USD 250-300. I cannot praise mine enough. It successfully replaced DA* 16-50/2.8. Later versions are 17-70/2.8-4.0 (notice faster long end of the zoom range) and further introduced HSM (Sigma's ultrasonic AF) and OS (Optical image Stabilization). I opted out of these as I wanted something as simple as possible so that it won't break down just because. Optically I've no complaints at all. It just what suits me best right now if and when I have to shoot with DSLR. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:40 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Hey all. This last week at the plow demo got me thinking again about my short zoom, the 16-45. Normally i take two cameras, the D2H with re 70-200 VR f2.8 and the D200 with the 18-70. I use the 18-70 for the closer shots when the teams come at me. This year i took the K-5 and used the 16-45. It performed fine, but at 45 at the long end just does not get what i want before i switch back to the longer zoom. So Im thinking something along the lines of the Pentax or Sigma 17-70 ish lenses, and i think i saw on Henrys site an 18-135??? I know these have come up before just looking for opinions. Also the 55-30 is still on my list, although the sales person at Henreys showed me the Sigma version, a bit cheaper and now i'm humming on that one. Comments about the short zooms or the Sigma 55-300 appreciated, Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the
Just got an Amazon Deal alert!
I don't know what's more amazing, that they think that anyone would pay $600. for it or that they still have 5 brand new ones in stock. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0028N7442/ref=pe_62860_31277760_email_1p_3_lm -- There are two kinds of computer users those who've experienced a hard drive failure, and those that will. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESOs: Micro PDLM meeting in Greenwich
The makeover looks good. When I was there last, they were still busy. Alan C -Original Message- From: Chris Mitchell Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 9:14 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: PESOs: Micro PDLM meeting in Greenwich Bob and I met up with Rick who's over on a fleeting visit. We had a pleasant couple of hours in Greenwich where my son Pete also joined us. Here's a snap of Rick when I found him by the Cutty Sark: http://www.zen50061.zen.co.uk/PDML/DSCF2569.jpg And here he is at the Old Brewery where we had supper: http://www.zen50061.zen.co.uk/PDML/DSCF2589.jpg Chris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range
Boris said: ...indeed eventually the zoom becomes creepy Boris, I have found this to be a general phenomenon; as things age, they start to appear creepy to others. You'll find out soon enough! stan On Jul 24, 2013, at 2:21 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: I concur. Although when I first saw the lens in your hands, Jaume, I did not expect to own it some day. I should point that it is not that heavy given the speed and zoom range. It is rather well made although indeed eventually the zoom becomes creepy. It does have the zoom look that is handy for transportation, obviously. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, I also have the old Sigma 17-70 (actually I think that I have some responsibility in Boris owning one...) and I second Boris comments. The only complaint is that is is a bit heavy and the zoom eventually becomes loose. I have physically seen the latest version and I have to admit that it looks and feels extremely compact. However, my favorite compromise range / IQ would be the 18-135. Sigma has one but its reputation is worst than the 17-70s and the Pentax one seems a bit expensive. Regards, Jaume - Mensaje original - De: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net CC: Enviado: Martes 23 de julio de 2013 13:47 Asunto: Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range Dave, I've (the oldest version of) Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5. Such lenses can be had for order of USD 250-300. I cannot praise mine enough. It successfully replaced DA* 16-50/2.8. Later versions are 17-70/2.8-4.0 (notice faster long end of the zoom range) and further introduced HSM (Sigma's ultrasonic AF) and OS (Optical image Stabilization). I opted out of these as I wanted something as simple as possible so that it won't break down just because. Optically I've no complaints at all. It just what suits me best right now if and when I have to shoot with DSLR. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:40 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Hey all. This last week at the plow demo got me thinking again about my short zoom, the 16-45. Normally i take two cameras, the D2H with re 70-200 VR f2.8 and the D200 with the 18-70. I use the 18-70 for the closer shots when the teams come at me. This year i took the K-5 and used the 16-45. It performed fine, but at 45 at the long end just does not get what i want before i switch back to the longer zoom. So Im thinking something along the lines of the Pentax or Sigma 17-70 ish lenses, and i think i saw on Henrys site an 18-135??? I know these have come up before just looking for opinions. Also the 55-30 is still on my list, although the sales person at Henreys showed me the Sigma version, a bit cheaper and now i'm humming on that one. Comments about the short zooms or the Sigma 55-300 appreciated, Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range
LOL...so true. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Stan Halpin s...@stans-photography.info wrote: Boris said: ...indeed eventually the zoom becomes creepy Boris, I have found this to be a general phenomenon; as things age, they start to appear creepy to others. You'll find out soon enough! stan On Jul 24, 2013, at 2:21 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: I concur. Although when I first saw the lens in your hands, Jaume, I did not expect to own it some day. I should point that it is not that heavy given the speed and zoom range. It is rather well made although indeed eventually the zoom becomes creepy. It does have the zoom look that is handy for transportation, obviously. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, I also have the old Sigma 17-70 (actually I think that I have some responsibility in Boris owning one...) and I second Boris comments. The only complaint is that is is a bit heavy and the zoom eventually becomes loose. I have physically seen the latest version and I have to admit that it looks and feels extremely compact. However, my favorite compromise range / IQ would be the 18-135. Sigma has one but its reputation is worst than the 17-70s and the Pentax one seems a bit expensive. Regards, Jaume - Mensaje original - De: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net CC: Enviado: Martes 23 de julio de 2013 13:47 Asunto: Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range Dave, I've (the oldest version of) Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5. Such lenses can be had for order of USD 250-300. I cannot praise mine enough. It successfully replaced DA* 16-50/2.8. Later versions are 17-70/2.8-4.0 (notice faster long end of the zoom range) and further introduced HSM (Sigma's ultrasonic AF) and OS (Optical image Stabilization). I opted out of these as I wanted something as simple as possible so that it won't break down just because. Optically I've no complaints at all. It just what suits me best right now if and when I have to shoot with DSLR. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:40 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Hey all. This last week at the plow demo got me thinking again about my short zoom, the 16-45. Normally i take two cameras, the D2H with re 70-200 VR f2.8 and the D200 with the 18-70. I use the 18-70 for the closer shots when the teams come at me. This year i took the K-5 and used the 16-45. It performed fine, but at 45 at the long end just does not get what i want before i switch back to the longer zoom. So Im thinking something along the lines of the Pentax or Sigma 17-70 ish lenses, and i think i saw on Henrys site an 18-135??? I know these have come up before just looking for opinions. Also the 55-30 is still on my list, although the sales person at Henreys showed me the Sigma version, a bit cheaper and now i'm humming on that one. Comments about the short zooms or the Sigma 55-300 appreciated, Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
PESO: Return of the Drone
An addition to my on-going Long Lake 2013 gallery, this is a shot of one of Ann's favorite critters. Last featured performing hazardous duty as a escort to a loon, today we see the intrepid drone at rest on the dock . . . http://photos.stanhalpin.com/p769975649/h6f441a6f#h6f441a6f stan -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range
Pretty much he said that it was shameful engineering... On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Zos Xavius zosxav...@gmail.com wrote: what did he say? why would we be insulted? if its poorly built, its poorly built. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: One of local Pentaxians had 17-70/4. The SDM failed on him and being a handy person he took it apart. I won't repeat what he told me so as not to insult anyone. It was a very strong arguments against the SDM lenses, at least the cheaper ones. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:27 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the comments so far. Given me some things to think about. I have a fader ND filter at 67mm dia, so the Pentax 17-70 would fit it, but leery of the SDM from what i have read previously. I don t need IS as its in the K-5 body so that would be a wasted Sigma feature. Decisions decisions. Dave On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:21 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: I concur. Although when I first saw the lens in your hands, Jaume, I did not expect to own it some day. I should point that it is not that heavy given the speed and zoom range. It is rather well made although indeed eventually the zoom becomes creepy. It does have the zoom look that is handy for transportation, obviously. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, I also have the old Sigma 17-70 (actually I think that I have some responsibility in Boris owning one...) and I second Boris comments. The only complaint is that is is a bit heavy and the zoom eventually becomes loose. I have physically seen the latest version and I have to admit that it looks and feels extremely compact. However, my favorite compromise range / IQ would be the 18-135. Sigma has one but its reputation is worst than the 17-70s and the Pentax one seems a bit expensive. Regards, Jaume - Mensaje original - De: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net CC: Enviado: Martes 23 de julio de 2013 13:47 Asunto: Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range Dave, I've (the oldest version of) Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5. Such lenses can be had for order of USD 250-300. I cannot praise mine enough. It successfully replaced DA* 16-50/2.8. Later versions are 17-70/2.8-4.0 (notice faster long end of the zoom range) and further introduced HSM (Sigma's ultrasonic AF) and OS (Optical image Stabilization). I opted out of these as I wanted something as simple as possible so that it won't break down just because. Optically I've no complaints at all. It just what suits me best right now if and when I have to shoot with DSLR. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:40 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Hey all. This last week at the plow demo got me thinking again about my short zoom, the 16-45. Normally i take two cameras, the D2H with re 70-200 VR f2.8 and the D200 with the 18-70. I use the 18-70 for the closer shots when the teams come at me. This year i took the K-5 and used the 16-45. It performed fine, but at 45 at the long end just does not get what i want before i switch back to the longer zoom. So Im thinking something along the lines of the Pentax or Sigma 17-70 ish lenses, and i think i saw on Henrys site an 18-135??? I know these have come up before just looking for opinions. Also the 55-30 is still on my list, although the sales person at Henreys showed me the Sigma version, a bit cheaper and now i'm humming on that one. Comments about the short zooms or the Sigma 55-300 appreciated, Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net
Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range
Well, I was expecting that someone would notice my use of the word creepy... And so it came to be ;-). On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Zos Xavius zosxav...@gmail.com wrote: LOL...so true. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Stan Halpin s...@stans-photography.info wrote: Boris said: ...indeed eventually the zoom becomes creepy Boris, I have found this to be a general phenomenon; as things age, they start to appear creepy to others. You'll find out soon enough! stan On Jul 24, 2013, at 2:21 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: I concur. Although when I first saw the lens in your hands, Jaume, I did not expect to own it some day. I should point that it is not that heavy given the speed and zoom range. It is rather well made although indeed eventually the zoom becomes creepy. It does have the zoom look that is handy for transportation, obviously. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, I also have the old Sigma 17-70 (actually I think that I have some responsibility in Boris owning one...) and I second Boris comments. The only complaint is that is is a bit heavy and the zoom eventually becomes loose. I have physically seen the latest version and I have to admit that it looks and feels extremely compact. However, my favorite compromise range / IQ would be the 18-135. Sigma has one but its reputation is worst than the 17-70s and the Pentax one seems a bit expensive. Regards, Jaume - Mensaje original - De: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net CC: Enviado: Martes 23 de julio de 2013 13:47 Asunto: Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range Dave, I've (the oldest version of) Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5. Such lenses can be had for order of USD 250-300. I cannot praise mine enough. It successfully replaced DA* 16-50/2.8. Later versions are 17-70/2.8-4.0 (notice faster long end of the zoom range) and further introduced HSM (Sigma's ultrasonic AF) and OS (Optical image Stabilization). I opted out of these as I wanted something as simple as possible so that it won't break down just because. Optically I've no complaints at all. It just what suits me best right now if and when I have to shoot with DSLR. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:40 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Hey all. This last week at the plow demo got me thinking again about my short zoom, the 16-45. Normally i take two cameras, the D2H with re 70-200 VR f2.8 and the D200 with the 18-70. I use the 18-70 for the closer shots when the teams come at me. This year i took the K-5 and used the 16-45. It performed fine, but at 45 at the long end just does not get what i want before i switch back to the longer zoom. So Im thinking something along the lines of the Pentax or Sigma 17-70 ish lenses, and i think i saw on Henrys site an 18-135??? I know these have come up before just looking for opinions. Also the 55-30 is still on my list, although the sales person at Henreys showed me the Sigma version, a bit cheaper and now i'm humming on that one. Comments about the short zooms or the Sigma 55-300 appreciated, Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: 16-50/2.8 (was Re: saved someone from Nigerian Paypal scam?)
I have the 16-45, but the wobbly barrel is killing my corners randomly. In portrait the upper half tends to get soft. I have two copies of this lens. The one I'm using now is very good when it is sharp, but inconsistent. I would pay to have one of them tightened, but I'm afraid that it will just get loose again rather quickly. I think the build quality is simply awful. Great glass inside though unfortunately. I tend to use it stopped down to f9-f11, but at f7.1 and lower the corners get pretty sad looking, so only good for closeups or when DOF is in play. Its pushing me to bite the bullet and start saving for a 16-50, though I don't know if I will really get any better IQ from that at the 16mm mark to be honest. I really wish pentax had some better wide-normal zooms at a reasonable price. The 17-70 doesn't do it for me. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:13 PM, steve harley p...@paper-ape.com wrote: on 2013-07-23 13:44 Aahz Maruch wrote Steve, the other advantage of the 16-50, of course, is that you're not having to switch lenses. yes, for a couple of years a 16-45mm was my most-used lens -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range
i think the big problem is that the lubricant seizes on the sdm motors rendering them useless. my guess is that they've fixed SDM now that they finally admitted it was faulty. they should have offered to fix everyone's lenses. way to stand by your products pentax! fuji bit the bullet and replaced a bunch of sensors on their cameras. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: Pretty much he said that it was shameful engineering... On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Zos Xavius zosxav...@gmail.com wrote: what did he say? why would we be insulted? if its poorly built, its poorly built. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: One of local Pentaxians had 17-70/4. The SDM failed on him and being a handy person he took it apart. I won't repeat what he told me so as not to insult anyone. It was a very strong arguments against the SDM lenses, at least the cheaper ones. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:27 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the comments so far. Given me some things to think about. I have a fader ND filter at 67mm dia, so the Pentax 17-70 would fit it, but leery of the SDM from what i have read previously. I don t need IS as its in the K-5 body so that would be a wasted Sigma feature. Decisions decisions. Dave On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:21 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: I concur. Although when I first saw the lens in your hands, Jaume, I did not expect to own it some day. I should point that it is not that heavy given the speed and zoom range. It is rather well made although indeed eventually the zoom becomes creepy. It does have the zoom look that is handy for transportation, obviously. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, I also have the old Sigma 17-70 (actually I think that I have some responsibility in Boris owning one...) and I second Boris comments. The only complaint is that is is a bit heavy and the zoom eventually becomes loose. I have physically seen the latest version and I have to admit that it looks and feels extremely compact. However, my favorite compromise range / IQ would be the 18-135. Sigma has one but its reputation is worst than the 17-70s and the Pentax one seems a bit expensive. Regards, Jaume - Mensaje original - De: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net CC: Enviado: Martes 23 de julio de 2013 13:47 Asunto: Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range Dave, I've (the oldest version of) Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5. Such lenses can be had for order of USD 250-300. I cannot praise mine enough. It successfully replaced DA* 16-50/2.8. Later versions are 17-70/2.8-4.0 (notice faster long end of the zoom range) and further introduced HSM (Sigma's ultrasonic AF) and OS (Optical image Stabilization). I opted out of these as I wanted something as simple as possible so that it won't break down just because. Optically I've no complaints at all. It just what suits me best right now if and when I have to shoot with DSLR. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:40 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Hey all. This last week at the plow demo got me thinking again about my short zoom, the 16-45. Normally i take two cameras, the D2H with re 70-200 VR f2.8 and the D200 with the 18-70. I use the 18-70 for the closer shots when the teams come at me. This year i took the K-5 and used the 16-45. It performed fine, but at 45 at the long end just does not get what i want before i switch back to the longer zoom. So Im thinking something along the lines of the Pentax or Sigma 17-70 ish lenses, and i think i saw on Henrys site an 18-135??? I know these have come up before just looking for opinions. Also the 55-30 is still on my list, although the sales person at Henreys showed me the Sigma version, a bit cheaper and now i'm humming on that one. Comments about the short zooms or the Sigma 55-300 appreciated, Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the
Re: PESO: Echinacea
Ken, Bob and Bruce, thanks for looking and thanks for your comments. I liked the shape of the group in my original PESO, despite the OoF flowers at the top. I decided to take your advice, and cropped the image: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=17471959 I hope this is an improvement. Comments are invited. I had done a similar arrangement originally, but the flowers in that grouping were a little ragged. Thanks again. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:07 PM, Bruce Walker bruce.wal...@gmail.com wrote: Gorgeous colour; just the right amount of under exposure. But like Ken and Bob say collectively: crop-me. :-) On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 11:47 PM, Bob Sullivan rf.sulli...@gmail.com wrote: Like ken says, very nice but you don't need the top. Regards, Bob S. On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 10:18 PM, Kenneth Waller kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote: Very nice capture Dan but The top OOF portion is irrelevant IMO. A much stronger image without it. -Original Message- From: Daniel J. Matyola danmaty...@gmail.com Subject: PESO: Echinacea http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=17468791 Comments are invited. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESOs: Micro PDLM meeting in Greenwich
Very nice portrait of Rick. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 3:14 AM, Chris Mitchell chris.mitch...@which.net wrote: Bob and I met up with Rick who's over on a fleeting visit. We had a pleasant couple of hours in Greenwich where my son Pete also joined us. Here's a snap of Rick when I found him by the Cutty Sark: http://www.zen50061.zen.co.uk/PDML/DSCF2569.jpg And here he is at the Old Brewery where we had supper: http://www.zen50061.zen.co.uk/PDML/DSCF2589.jpg Chris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photo from Italy
WOW! That image is quite special. That is the way HDR should be used. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: I've been back from Italy for over a week and haven't posted any photos. Until now. I'm keeping very busy with my Photoshop book but I had to make time for at least one image from Italy. This is in Milan. I forget what the magnificent building used to be used for but now it's a high end shopping area (the store in the center is Prada). When I entered the place I thought this is like being inside an HDR photo! So I thought WTF, let's do HDR. I deliberately *didn't* use the de-ghosting feature of Merge to HDR. http://www.robertstech.com/temp/7dd06620-23.jpg (Big image, in pixel dimensions and file size) -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range
You don't really want to look inside any modern autofocus lens. Compared to even the cheapest old brass and glass manual focus lens they appear to be made of well the best was I can describe it is cheap roughly finished stampings. The Japanese especially have a knack of reducing the cost and making parts only as costly as they absolutely have to be. Let's take two similar lenses, which I've partially disassembled. a Vivitar 17-28mm rectilinear from the 1980's, and a Pentax FA 20-35mm rectilinear. The internal parts of the Vivitar were all metal, machined and cast very nicely finished, hand assembled and in operation the zoom and focus rings turned as smooth as silk. The Pentax, well except for a the gearing mostly plastic not rough finished but not the smoothest either, the gearing for the autofocus is aparently stainless steel and very nicely finished and pretty close fit, the rest fit together nicely but still a bit loose. The zoom and focus rings were nicely damped but the feel was plastic sliding on plastic, with the focus ring sometimes eliciting a slight whirring sound from the metal gearing. The difference, the Pentax focuses accurately at all focal lengths, the Vivitar not so much, those lovely finished cast and machined parts were made not of brass, but some kind of pot metal, that was too easily deformed, so a few moderate knocks and the focus while smooth made no apparent change in the viewfinder or on film, which was why I took it apart. The Pentax by the way got some fine grit in it's works, and I only took it apart enough to blow it out. Once reassembled it works well to this day. I've partially disassembled a number of autofocus lenses and really I don't want to know what's inside as long as they work. They remind me of computer programs under the covers. On 7/24/2013 8:35 AM, Zos Xavius wrote: what did he say? why would we be insulted? if its poorly built, its poorly built. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: One of local Pentaxians had 17-70/4. The SDM failed on him and being a handy person he took it apart. I won't repeat what he told me so as not to insult anyone. It was a very strong arguments against the SDM lenses, at least the cheaper ones. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:27 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the comments so far. Given me some things to think about. I have a fader ND filter at 67mm dia, so the Pentax 17-70 would fit it, but leery of the SDM from what i have read previously. I don t need IS as its in the K-5 body so that would be a wasted Sigma feature. Decisions decisions. Dave On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:21 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: I concur. Although when I first saw the lens in your hands, Jaume, I did not expect to own it some day. I should point that it is not that heavy given the speed and zoom range. It is rather well made although indeed eventually the zoom becomes creepy. It does have the zoom look that is handy for transportation, obviously. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, I also have the old Sigma 17-70 (actually I think that I have some responsibility in Boris owning one...) and I second Boris comments. The only complaint is that is is a bit heavy and the zoom eventually becomes loose. I have physically seen the latest version and I have to admit that it looks and feels extremely compact. However, my favorite compromise range / IQ would be the 18-135. Sigma has one but its reputation is worst than the 17-70s and the Pentax one seems a bit expensive. Regards, Jaume - Mensaje original - De: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net CC: Enviado: Martes 23 de julio de 2013 13:47 Asunto: Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range Dave, I've (the oldest version of) Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5. Such lenses can be had for order of USD 250-300. I cannot praise mine enough. It successfully replaced DA* 16-50/2.8. Later versions are 17-70/2.8-4.0 (notice faster long end of the zoom range) and further introduced HSM (Sigma's ultrasonic AF) and OS (Optical image Stabilization). I opted out of these as I wanted something as simple as possible so that it won't break down just because. Optically I've no complaints at all. It just what suits me best right now if and when I have to shoot with DSLR. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:40 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Hey all. This last week at the plow demo got me thinking again about my short zoom, the 16-45. Normally i take two cameras, the D2H with re 70-200 VR f2.8 and the D200 with the 18-70. I use the 18-70 for the closer shots when the teams come at me. This year i took the K-5 and used the 16-45. It performed fine, but at 45 at the long end just does not get what i want before i switch back to the longer zoom. So Im thinking something along the lines of the Pentax or Sigma 17-70 ish
PESO 2013 - Guggenheim - GDG
Back home from my NY trip. Travel home was difficult. However, New York was fun ... On Sunday, my brother and I had a moment to get down to the Guggenheim for the James Turrell exhibit. Marvelous ... catch it if you can. Some photos from the excursion.. http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdgphoto/9356262623/lightbox http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdgphoto/9359039256/lightbox http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdgphoto/9356263871/lightbox http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdgphoto/9356267301/lightbox Thanks for looking, Comments appreciated. Godfrey -- a neglected photo blog: http://godfreydigiorgi.wordpress.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range
Zos, he was referring to very low quality of plastics used in the moving parts of the mechanism and in general to very poor engineering quality of the whole mechanism. But again - we're playing a broken phone here. Suffices it to say, I opted not to buy DA 17-70 and ultimately decided to stay with good old screw-driven AF of my Sigma 17-70... On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Zos Xavius zosxav...@gmail.com wrote: i think the big problem is that the lubricant seizes on the sdm motors rendering them useless. my guess is that they've fixed SDM now that they finally admitted it was faulty. they should have offered to fix everyone's lenses. way to stand by your products pentax! fuji bit the bullet and replaced a bunch of sensors on their cameras. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: Pretty much he said that it was shameful engineering... On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Zos Xavius zosxav...@gmail.com wrote: what did he say? why would we be insulted? if its poorly built, its poorly built. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: One of local Pentaxians had 17-70/4. The SDM failed on him and being a handy person he took it apart. I won't repeat what he told me so as not to insult anyone. It was a very strong arguments against the SDM lenses, at least the cheaper ones. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:27 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the comments so far. Given me some things to think about. I have a fader ND filter at 67mm dia, so the Pentax 17-70 would fit it, but leery of the SDM from what i have read previously. I don t need IS as its in the K-5 body so that would be a wasted Sigma feature. Decisions decisions. Dave On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:21 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: I concur. Although when I first saw the lens in your hands, Jaume, I did not expect to own it some day. I should point that it is not that heavy given the speed and zoom range. It is rather well made although indeed eventually the zoom becomes creepy. It does have the zoom look that is handy for transportation, obviously. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, I also have the old Sigma 17-70 (actually I think that I have some responsibility in Boris owning one...) and I second Boris comments. The only complaint is that is is a bit heavy and the zoom eventually becomes loose. I have physically seen the latest version and I have to admit that it looks and feels extremely compact. However, my favorite compromise range / IQ would be the 18-135. Sigma has one but its reputation is worst than the 17-70s and the Pentax one seems a bit expensive. Regards, Jaume - Mensaje original - De: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net CC: Enviado: Martes 23 de julio de 2013 13:47 Asunto: Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range Dave, I've (the oldest version of) Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5. Such lenses can be had for order of USD 250-300. I cannot praise mine enough. It successfully replaced DA* 16-50/2.8. Later versions are 17-70/2.8-4.0 (notice faster long end of the zoom range) and further introduced HSM (Sigma's ultrasonic AF) and OS (Optical image Stabilization). I opted out of these as I wanted something as simple as possible so that it won't break down just because. Optically I've no complaints at all. It just what suits me best right now if and when I have to shoot with DSLR. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:40 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Hey all. This last week at the plow demo got me thinking again about my short zoom, the 16-45. Normally i take two cameras, the D2H with re 70-200 VR f2.8 and the D200 with the 18-70. I use the 18-70 for the closer shots when the teams come at me. This year i took the K-5 and used the 16-45. It performed fine, but at 45 at the long end just does not get what i want before i switch back to the longer zoom. So Im thinking something along the lines of the Pentax or Sigma 17-70 ish lenses, and i think i saw on Henrys site an 18-135??? I know these have come up before just looking for opinions. Also the 55-30 is still on my list, although the sales person at Henreys showed me the Sigma version, a bit cheaper and now i'm humming on that one. Comments about the short zooms or the Sigma 55-300 appreciated, Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
Re: PESOs: Micro PDLM meeting in Greenwich
I wouldn't know for sure, but I would guess it does show his best side. On 7/24/2013 9:30 AM, Daniel J. Matyola wrote: Very nice portrait of Rick. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 3:14 AM, Chris Mitchell chris.mitch...@which.net wrote: Bob and I met up with Rick who's over on a fleeting visit. We had a pleasant couple of hours in Greenwich where my son Pete also joined us. Here's a snap of Rick when I found him by the Cutty Sark: http://www.zen50061.zen.co.uk/PDML/DSCF2569.jpg And here he is at the Old Brewery where we had supper: http://www.zen50061.zen.co.uk/PDML/DSCF2589.jpg Chris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- There are two kinds of computer users those who've experienced a hard drive failure, and those that will. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO 2013 - Guggenheim - GDG
All good. Especially like the tones and clean lines in the first one, and the light and shadowed figures in #4. Very fine. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 9:36 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi godfreydigio...@me.com wrote: Back home from my NY trip. Travel home was difficult. However, New York was fun ... On Sunday, my brother and I had a moment to get down to the Guggenheim for the James Turrell exhibit. Marvelous ... catch it if you can. Some photos from the excursion.. http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdgphoto/9356262623/lightbox http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdgphoto/9359039256/lightbox http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdgphoto/9356263871/lightbox http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdgphoto/9356267301/lightbox Thanks for looking, Comments appreciated. Godfrey -- a neglected photo blog: http://godfreydigiorgi.wordpress.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range
screw drive for the win! :) On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: Zos, he was referring to very low quality of plastics used in the moving parts of the mechanism and in general to very poor engineering quality of the whole mechanism. But again - we're playing a broken phone here. Suffices it to say, I opted not to buy DA 17-70 and ultimately decided to stay with good old screw-driven AF of my Sigma 17-70... On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Zos Xavius zosxav...@gmail.com wrote: i think the big problem is that the lubricant seizes on the sdm motors rendering them useless. my guess is that they've fixed SDM now that they finally admitted it was faulty. they should have offered to fix everyone's lenses. way to stand by your products pentax! fuji bit the bullet and replaced a bunch of sensors on their cameras. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: Pretty much he said that it was shameful engineering... On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Zos Xavius zosxav...@gmail.com wrote: what did he say? why would we be insulted? if its poorly built, its poorly built. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: One of local Pentaxians had 17-70/4. The SDM failed on him and being a handy person he took it apart. I won't repeat what he told me so as not to insult anyone. It was a very strong arguments against the SDM lenses, at least the cheaper ones. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:27 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the comments so far. Given me some things to think about. I have a fader ND filter at 67mm dia, so the Pentax 17-70 would fit it, but leery of the SDM from what i have read previously. I don t need IS as its in the K-5 body so that would be a wasted Sigma feature. Decisions decisions. Dave On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:21 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: I concur. Although when I first saw the lens in your hands, Jaume, I did not expect to own it some day. I should point that it is not that heavy given the speed and zoom range. It is rather well made although indeed eventually the zoom becomes creepy. It does have the zoom look that is handy for transportation, obviously. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, I also have the old Sigma 17-70 (actually I think that I have some responsibility in Boris owning one...) and I second Boris comments. The only complaint is that is is a bit heavy and the zoom eventually becomes loose. I have physically seen the latest version and I have to admit that it looks and feels extremely compact. However, my favorite compromise range / IQ would be the 18-135. Sigma has one but its reputation is worst than the 17-70s and the Pentax one seems a bit expensive. Regards, Jaume - Mensaje original - De: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net CC: Enviado: Martes 23 de julio de 2013 13:47 Asunto: Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range Dave, I've (the oldest version of) Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5. Such lenses can be had for order of USD 250-300. I cannot praise mine enough. It successfully replaced DA* 16-50/2.8. Later versions are 17-70/2.8-4.0 (notice faster long end of the zoom range) and further introduced HSM (Sigma's ultrasonic AF) and OS (Optical image Stabilization). I opted out of these as I wanted something as simple as possible so that it won't break down just because. Optically I've no complaints at all. It just what suits me best right now if and when I have to shoot with DSLR. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:40 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Hey all. This last week at the plow demo got me thinking again about my short zoom, the 16-45. Normally i take two cameras, the D2H with re 70-200 VR f2.8 and the D200 with the 18-70. I use the 18-70 for the closer shots when the teams come at me. This year i took the K-5 and used the 16-45. It performed fine, but at 45 at the long end just does not get what i want before i switch back to the longer zoom. So Im thinking something along the lines of the Pentax or Sigma 17-70 ish lenses, and i think i saw on Henrys site an 18-135??? I know these have come up before just looking for opinions. Also the 55-30 is still on my list, although the sales person at Henreys showed me the Sigma version, a bit cheaper and now i'm humming on that one. Comments about the short zooms or the Sigma 55-300 appreciated, Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range
Zos, you have to realize that availability of service, its quality and the fact that I normally don't have backup for everything (such as every lens, etc) are important factors here. If you have good service and have sufficiently many lenses, the SDM may not pose that much of an issue. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Zos Xavius zosxav...@gmail.com wrote: screw drive for the win! :) On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: Zos, he was referring to very low quality of plastics used in the moving parts of the mechanism and in general to very poor engineering quality of the whole mechanism. But again - we're playing a broken phone here. Suffices it to say, I opted not to buy DA 17-70 and ultimately decided to stay with good old screw-driven AF of my Sigma 17-70... On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Zos Xavius zosxav...@gmail.com wrote: i think the big problem is that the lubricant seizes on the sdm motors rendering them useless. my guess is that they've fixed SDM now that they finally admitted it was faulty. they should have offered to fix everyone's lenses. way to stand by your products pentax! fuji bit the bullet and replaced a bunch of sensors on their cameras. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: Pretty much he said that it was shameful engineering... On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Zos Xavius zosxav...@gmail.com wrote: what did he say? why would we be insulted? if its poorly built, its poorly built. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: One of local Pentaxians had 17-70/4. The SDM failed on him and being a handy person he took it apart. I won't repeat what he told me so as not to insult anyone. It was a very strong arguments against the SDM lenses, at least the cheaper ones. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:27 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the comments so far. Given me some things to think about. I have a fader ND filter at 67mm dia, so the Pentax 17-70 would fit it, but leery of the SDM from what i have read previously. I don t need IS as its in the K-5 body so that would be a wasted Sigma feature. Decisions decisions. Dave On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:21 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: I concur. Although when I first saw the lens in your hands, Jaume, I did not expect to own it some day. I should point that it is not that heavy given the speed and zoom range. It is rather well made although indeed eventually the zoom becomes creepy. It does have the zoom look that is handy for transportation, obviously. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, I also have the old Sigma 17-70 (actually I think that I have some responsibility in Boris owning one...) and I second Boris comments. The only complaint is that is is a bit heavy and the zoom eventually becomes loose. I have physically seen the latest version and I have to admit that it looks and feels extremely compact. However, my favorite compromise range / IQ would be the 18-135. Sigma has one but its reputation is worst than the 17-70s and the Pentax one seems a bit expensive. Regards, Jaume - Mensaje original - De: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net CC: Enviado: Martes 23 de julio de 2013 13:47 Asunto: Re: the 16-45 to 17-70 range Dave, I've (the oldest version of) Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5. Such lenses can be had for order of USD 250-300. I cannot praise mine enough. It successfully replaced DA* 16-50/2.8. Later versions are 17-70/2.8-4.0 (notice faster long end of the zoom range) and further introduced HSM (Sigma's ultrasonic AF) and OS (Optical image Stabilization). I opted out of these as I wanted something as simple as possible so that it won't break down just because. Optically I've no complaints at all. It just what suits me best right now if and when I have to shoot with DSLR. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:40 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Hey all. This last week at the plow demo got me thinking again about my short zoom, the 16-45. Normally i take two cameras, the D2H with re 70-200 VR f2.8 and the D200 with the 18-70. I use the 18-70 for the closer shots when the teams come at me. This year i took the K-5 and used the 16-45. It performed fine, but at 45 at the long end just does not get what i want before i switch back to the longer zoom. So Im thinking something along the lines of the Pentax or Sigma 17-70 ish lenses, and i think i saw on Henrys site an 18-135??? I know these have come up before just looking for opinions. Also the 55-30 is still on my list, although the sales person at Henreys showed me the Sigma version, a bit cheaper and now i'm humming on that one. Comments about the short zooms or the Sigma 55-300 appreciated, Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural
Re: PESO: Return of the Drone
Wow Stan, that's really close up! Were you using the 35mm Macro? Nice and crisp. Regards, Bob S. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Stan Halpin s...@stans-photography.info wrote: An addition to my on-going Long Lake 2013 gallery, this is a shot of one of Ann's favorite critters. Last featured performing hazardous duty as a escort to a loon, today we see the intrepid drone at rest on the dock . . . http://photos.stanhalpin.com/p769975649/h6f441a6f#h6f441a6f stan -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Return of the Drone
We'll worry if the loon goes missing now ann On 7/24/2013 09:15, Stan Halpin wrote: An addition to my on-going Long Lake 2013 gallery, this is a shot of one of Ann's favorite critters. Last featured performing hazardous duty as a escort to a loon, today we see the intrepid drone at rest on the dock . . . http://photos.stanhalpin.com/p769975649/h6f441a6f#h6f441a6f stan -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO 2013 - Guggenheim - GDG
Nice series... fun shot of the people lying on the floor photoing the lights - nice minamalist Guggenheim view. Sorry not to see you , as you know, but not sorry to have missed the light show and the crowds there. Godders is understating his travel difficulties - you see there was this little plane crash at the airport he was to leave from ... ann On 7/24/2013 09:36, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Back home from my NY trip. Travel home was difficult. However, New York was fun ... On Sunday, my brother and I had a moment to get down to the Guggenheim for the James Turrell exhibit. Marvelous ... catch it if you can. Some photos from the excursion.. http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdgphoto/9356262623/lightbox http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdgphoto/9359039256/lightbox http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdgphoto/9356263871/lightbox http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdgphoto/9356267301/lightbox Thanks for looking, Comments appreciated. Godfrey -- a neglected photo blog: http://godfreydigiorgi.wordpress.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Just got an Amazon Deal alert!
P.J., What a bargain! Directly from Amazon, it costs almost twice as much. Hurry up, just one left! http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002OHDBZS/?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER :-) (oops, that's a kit, but anyway...) Cheers, Igor Wed Jul 24 08:44:10 EDT 2013 P.J. Alling wrote: I don't know what's more amazing, that they think that anyone would pay $600. for it or that they still have 5 brand new ones in stock. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0028N7442/ref=pe_62860_31277760_email_1p_3_lm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Just got an Amazon Deal alert!
I have a minty K-7 I'll sell you for $500.. :P On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Igor Roshchin s...@komkon.org wrote: P.J., What a bargain! Directly from Amazon, it costs almost twice as much. Hurry up, just one left! http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002OHDBZS/?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER :-) (oops, that's a kit, but anyway...) Cheers, Igor Wed Jul 24 08:44:10 EDT 2013 P.J. Alling wrote: I don't know what's more amazing, that they think that anyone would pay $600. for it or that they still have 5 brand new ones in stock. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0028N7442/ref=pe_62860_31277760_email_1p_3_lm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Re: July Extra PUG - Open Gallery - is UP
Super excellent gallery. Kudos to every poster. The best caption goes to Alan Cole. Hippo Surfing . A title I shall never have an opportunity to use. pdml-requ...@pdml.net wrote: Message: 1 Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 07:33:47 -0400 From: David J Brookspentko...@gmail.com To: Pentax-Discuss Mail Listpdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: July Extra PUG - Open Gallery - is UP Message-ID: cak9cphjeajd_0hozc7rnsxfca6ra3e1bul+gjbzwtsbwmf1...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Super gallery Dave On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 3:59 AM, Brian Waltersapathy...@lyons-ryan.org wrote: G'day all A great gallery with plenty of variety. A few favourites: Bob's 'Looking for a mate' - just fantastic Aahz's 'Endicott Sunset' - stunning colour Gerrit's 'Done Fishing' - simple but effective composition Bruce's 'Test Shot' - wonderful smile Ann's 'Soho Shadows' - the title says it all Boris' 'Ceramic Potters' - really effective shallow depth of field As usual, you'll find the gallery here: http://pug.komkon.org/ (you may need to refresh your browser if you see the previous Gallery there) Note: The automated submission process usually works well but it's not infallible. So, if you made a submission and you don't see it in the gallery, let me know. + Coming up for August is 'Signs of the Times'; nominal closing date 31 July. There are already 3 submissions. Submit here: http://pug.komkon.org/submit/ Submission Guidelines here: http://pug.komkon.org/general/autosubmit.html The main requirements are: * Max. pixel dimensions: 800 x 800 pixels * Max file size: 300k * Third party equipment is acceptable provided either the camera body or lens used is Pentax. * If you embed a colour space in the image, it should be sRGB to ensure that the image is displayed correctly on line. -- Cheers -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
A bit closer to my first cyanotype
(This is not OT, since the original image was created with my Pentax K-5.) I mentioned in a previous thread, my interest in Alternative Processes. That interest was reawakened at our local Art in the Park a couple of Sunday's ago. There was a Nebraska practitioner of Alternative Processes there (that I had never heard of before) by the name of Jason Jilg. http://www.jasonjilg.com/home His work was quite lovely and he displayed cyanotypes, salt prints, bromide prints, and tin types. I got to visit with him briefly and gathered a few nuggets of information. He is soon moving to Wisconsin, but apparently he had offered classes through the Sheldon Art Gallery in Lincoln, NE (which I was also unaware of). Anyway, this reminded me that I had intended to purchase Jill Enfield's new title after it was published in June, so I did. I can highly recommend it and even wrote a review on Amazon for it. In addition, I checked another book that is considered a classic in that field entitled, Coming into Focus by John Barnier. This book is apparently used in many classes and so was in short supply when I last looked (and textbook expensive). However, this is a good time to purchase textbooks (before students begin purchasing them again for August classes) and I found a Very Good copy for less than $20 shipped. While I was at it, I purchased the chemistry for cyanotypes (Photographers' Formulary 07-0091 Liquid Cyanotype Printing Kit) and some hake brushes. I've created the inverted image files for a couple of different versions of my image God Rays that I hope will make a decent cyanotype. I have the transparency material (Inkpress Transparency Film, 8-1/2x11) and I plan on printing 7x10-1/2 on watercolor paper from the local Hobby Lobby. Once I have a few transparencies, I'd like to experiment with some of the other processes beginning with Van Dyke brown. If there is anyone on the list that has dabbled in Alternative Processes, I'd love to hear your experiences. -- Photography is a Bastard left by Science on the Doorstep of Art - Peter Galassi -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
For those too lazy to make their own, or don't have an Old Holga to salvage.
Only $24.00 http://www.freestylephoto.biz/313120-Holga-Lens-for-Pentax-DSLR-Cameras You to can have that unique image quality. -- There are two kinds of computer users those who've experienced a hard drive failure, and those that will. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Should I send my K-5 in for service?
I'm sure it would. The guy who comes to GFM is not exclusively Pentax. He's mostly CaNikon. I don't have any idea where I'd find a guy who only cleans Pentax sensors. On 7/24/2013 2:23 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: John, can it be that any authorized camera service willing give your sensor a proper cleaning would do? It seems to me that an experienced camera technician (not necessarily exclusive to Pentax brand) could help you and obviously, to clean a sensor won't cost you an arm and a leg. On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 6:59 PM, John Celio neo.venator.com+p...@gmail.com wrote: If you take a look at the four pictures in the following gallery, you will see two little blobs on the right side that become clearer as the aperture is stopped down: http://imgur.com/a/IG40x (to see an image at full resolution, hover your mouse over the image, click the gear icon that appears and select view full resolution.) The blob closer to the center is probably regular old dust that would go away with a puff from a blower ball. The other blob (the darker one closer to the right side), however, is a problem. It won't go away with air or Sensor Swabs. I even took a risk and tried a compressed air blast once. No dice. I'm worried it may be some sort of actual damage to the sensor, even though I can't really think of anything that could have caused that. My question is, which of the following would you do: A) Send it to Pentax/CRIS and see what they say. I'm worried this will be very expensive (as in, replace-the-sensor expensive), and I don't have the money to spend on repairs right now. B) Deal with it in Photoshop until a replacement for the K-5 comes out, and then start saving to get that. (I'm nearly finished paying off the last of my recession-incurred debts, so saving will be much easier starting this fall) Other ideas would be welcome, too. Thanks, John -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO 2013 - Guggenheim - GDG
9356262623 is the most excellent abstract. What are the people lying on the floor looking at? On 7/24/2013 9:36 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Back home from my NY trip. Travel home was difficult. However, New York was fun ... On Sunday, my brother and I had a moment to get down to the Guggenheim for the James Turrell exhibit. Marvelous ... catch it if you can. Some photos from the excursion.. http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdgphoto/9356262623/lightbox http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdgphoto/9359039256/lightbox http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdgphoto/9356263871/lightbox http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdgphoto/9356267301/lightbox Thanks for looking, Comments appreciated. Godfrey -- a neglected photo blog: http://godfreydigiorgi.wordpress.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Just got an Amazon Deal alert!
You didn't even mention the Pentax K110D 6.1MP Digital SLR kit for $829.99 or the Pentax K100D 6.1MP Digital SLR Camera for $829.99 On 7/24/2013 8:44 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: I don't know what's more amazing, that they think that anyone would pay $600. for it or that they still have 5 brand new ones in stock. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0028N7442/ref=pe_62860_31277760_email_1p_3_lm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Another shot from Italy. Mountains this time
Out of the city and into the mountains. No tricky HDR or stitched pano stuff this time. Just a simple snapshot. http://www.robertstech.com/temp/dolomite1.jpg K-5 and DA*16-50/2.8 -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Another shot from Italy. Mountains this time
The fates of the god's were with you. Clouds, hills, a bit of snow, rocks, grassy slopes, a winding road some hikers. It's got it all. What an amazing scene. Alan C -Original Message- From: Mark Roberts Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 8:54 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Another shot from Italy. Mountains this time Out of the city and into the mountains. No tricky HDR or stitched pano stuff this time. Just a simple snapshot. http://www.robertstech.com/temp/dolomite1.jpg K-5 and DA*16-50/2.8 -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Another shot from Italy. Mountains this time
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 02:54:48PM -0400, Mark Roberts wrote: Out of the city and into the mountains. No tricky HDR or stitched pano stuff this time. Just a simple snapshot. Simple snapshot my ass. As I said elsewhere it's an effervescent mug of does not suck. http://www.robertstech.com/temp/dolomite1.jpg K-5 and DA*16-50/2.8 -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Another shot from Italy. Mountains this time
This Italy you speak of appears as if it might be a photogenic travel destination. Also: Your camera takes good pictures. :) :) :) Wonderful stuff! On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 02:54:48PM -0400, Mark Roberts wrote: Out of the city and into the mountains. No tricky HDR or stitched pano stuff this time. Just a simple snapshot. Simple snapshot my ass. As I said elsewhere it's an effervescent mug of does not suck. http://www.robertstech.com/temp/dolomite1.jpg K-5 and DA*16-50/2.8 -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Photography is a Bastard left by Science on the Doorstep of Art - Peter Galassi -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Another shot from Italy. Mountains this time
WOW Mark, the hits keep coming ! Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com Subject: Another shot from Italy. Mountains this time Out of the city and into the mountains. No tricky HDR or stitched pano stuff this time. Just a simple snapshot. http://www.robertstech.com/temp/dolomite1.jpg K-5 and DA*16-50/2.8 -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Another shot from Italy. Mountains this time
kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote: From: Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com Out of the city and into the mountains. No tricky HDR or stitched pano stuff this time. Just a simple snapshot. http://www.robertstech.com/temp/dolomite1.jpg K-5 and DA*16-50/2.8 WOW Mark, the hits keep coming ! I shot over 1500 photos there. I'm only gonna show ya the good ones ;-) -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Another shot from Italy. Mountains this time
That is a very fine image! Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: Out of the city and into the mountains. No tricky HDR or stitched pano stuff this time. Just a simple snapshot. http://www.robertstech.com/temp/dolomite1.jpg K-5 and DA*16-50/2.8 -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: A bit closer to my first cyanotype
Will be interested to see where you go using some of the old processes. Some nice stuff on his web site. Did he say what his Wisconsin destination was going to be? -p On 7/24/2013 11:31 AM, Darren Addy wrote: (This is not OT, since the original image was created with my Pentax K-5.) I mentioned in a previous thread, my interest in Alternative Processes. That interest was reawakened at our local Art in the Park a couple of Sunday's ago. There was a Nebraska practitioner of Alternative Processes there (that I had never heard of before) by the name of Jason Jilg. http://www.jasonjilg.com/home His work was quite lovely and he displayed cyanotypes, salt prints, bromide prints, and tin types. I got to visit with him briefly and gathered a few nuggets of information. He is soon moving to Wisconsin, but apparently he had offered classes through the Sheldon Art Gallery in Lincoln, NE (which I was also unaware of). Anyway, this reminded me that I had intended to purchase Jill Enfield's new title after it was published in June, so I did. I can highly recommend it and even wrote a review on Amazon for it. In addition, I checked another book that is considered a classic in that field entitled, Coming into Focus by John Barnier. This book is apparently used in many classes and so was in short supply when I last looked (and textbook expensive). However, this is a good time to purchase textbooks (before students begin purchasing them again for August classes) and I found a Very Good copy for less than $20 shipped. While I was at it, I purchased the chemistry for cyanotypes (Photographers' Formulary 07-0091 Liquid Cyanotype Printing Kit) and some hake brushes. I've created the inverted image files for a couple of different versions of my image God Rays that I hope will make a decent cyanotype. I have the transparency material (Inkpress Transparency Film, 8-1/2x11) and I plan on printing 7x10-1/2 on watercolor paper from the local Hobby Lobby. Once I have a few transparencies, I'd like to experiment with some of the other processes beginning with Van Dyke brown. If there is anyone on the list that has dabbled in Alternative Processes, I'd love to hear your experiences. -- Being old doesn't seem so old now that I'm old. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
PESO -- The Team.
I took part in a charity event, recently, the specific details of which I wish to forget. Since I was taking part and not rececording it for posterity, or posterior, (the latter seems somehow more appropriate), I only took along my old trusty *ist-Ds and the M40mm f2.8. It was a team even with free t-shirts. Which as you can gather was worth every penny I paid for mine. Well this was half of my team. Just a grab shot, but I haven't posted anything in a few days so enjoy, or not... https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1604247/PESO/PESO%20--%20%20theteam.html Equipment: as stated above. As usual comments are welcome but may be totally ignored. -- There are two kinds of computer users those who've experienced a hard drive failure, and those that will. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Another shot from Italy. Mountains this time
You oversmarted your website. I get: http://www.robertstech.com/errordocs/hotlink.jpe Hotlinking to files at robertstech is not permitted. (accesesed in FF under Win7 from http://pdml.net/pipermail/pdml_pdml.net/2013-July/352650.html ) http://www.robertstech.com/temp/dolomite1.jpg -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Another shot from Italy. Mountains this time
Wonderful. Superb composition and rendering. Paul On Jul 24, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: Out of the city and into the mountains. No tricky HDR or stitched pano stuff this time. Just a simple snapshot. http://www.robertstech.com/temp/dolomite1.jpg K-5 and DA*16-50/2.8 -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
reviews on the wirecutter.com
A friend just pointed me to http://thewirecutter.com It seems that they do far more in depth reviews than other places, and cite other reviews in their reviews. Their mid-level DSLR review is on the D7100, http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/the-best-mid-range-dslr-is-the-nikon-d7100/ And, they are thorough enough to compare it with the K-5II Surprisingly, the biggest and most serious competition to the Nikon D7100 right now comes from Pentax, who is often forgotten in these debates. The Pentax K-5 IIs is almost blow-for-blow on par with the D7100, and in most respects is its equal. The choice between the two has been a frequent topic of internet discussion. The image quality is on par, it’s more weather sealed, and Pentax packs image stabilization into the body rather than the lenses, meaning it works no matter what glass you attach to the front. However, the Nikon has more focusing points, is higher resolution, can hold two SD cards at once, the lenses are generally cheaper, and right now as a company, Nikon is holding its own far better. Eventually, the best way to decide between the two if you’re torn is to have a look at the lens selection, and see which fits your shooting style better (if you’re super outdoorsy, the Pentax weather sealing might appeal to you), and try and get both in hand to shoot with for a while. Comfort in hand can be a very important deciding factor. But the Nikon is simply the best APS-C camera on the market right now, thanks to its excellent under-the-hood guts, software, and overall image quality. Without some sort of compelling reason to go in the other direction, I’d say the Nikon still is the top choice. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: PESO -- The Team.
They look ready for an eating contest or beer drinking :-) Gerrit -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P.J. Alling Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 4:35 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: PESO -- The Team. I took part in a charity event, recently, the specific details of which I wish to forget. Since I was taking part and not rececording it for posterity, or posterior, (the latter seems somehow more appropriate), I only took along my old trusty *ist-Ds and the M40mm f2.8. It was a team even with free t-shirts. Which as you can gather was worth every penny I paid for mine. Well this was half of my team. Just a grab shot, but I haven't posted anything in a few days so enjoy, or not... https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1604247/PESO/PESO%20--%20%20theteam.html Equipment: as stated above. As usual comments are welcome but may be totally ignored. -- There are two kinds of computer users those who've experienced a hard drive failure, and those that will. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESOs: Micro PDLM meeting in Greenwich
Of course, I meant PDML. Must have been a semi-concious slip as we were telling Rick about the last London PDML gathering with Godfrey where there was no Pentax kit at all and thought that the group might need a new name... On 24 July 2013 08:14, Chris Mitchell chris.mitch...@which.net wrote: Bob and I met up with Rick who's over on a fleeting visit. We had a pleasant couple of hours in Greenwich where my son Pete also joined us. Here's a snap of Rick when I found him by the Cutty Sark: http://www.zen50061.zen.co.uk/PDML/DSCF2569.jpg And here he is at the Old Brewery where we had supper: http://www.zen50061.zen.co.uk/PDML/DSCF2589.jpg Chris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
The inability to use m42 lenses (without an adapter that contains an optical element for infinity focusing) is the main reason I would not have a Nikon. Love to experiment with those legacy lenses. And in-body image stabilization is a biggie feature, for me. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote: A friend just pointed me to http://thewirecutter.com It seems that they do far more in depth reviews than other places, and cite other reviews in their reviews. Their mid-level DSLR review is on the D7100, http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/the-best-mid-range-dslr-is-the-nikon-d7100/ And, they are thorough enough to compare it with the K-5II Surprisingly, the biggest and most serious competition to the Nikon D7100 right now comes from Pentax, who is often forgotten in these debates. The Pentax K-5 IIs is almost blow-for-blow on par with the D7100, and in most respects is its equal. The choice between the two has been a frequent topic of internet discussion. The image quality is on par, it’s more weather sealed, and Pentax packs image stabilization into the body rather than the lenses, meaning it works no matter what glass you attach to the front. However, the Nikon has more focusing points, is higher resolution, can hold two SD cards at once, the lenses are generally cheaper, and right now as a company, Nikon is holding its own far better. Eventually, the best way to decide between the two if you’re torn is to have a look at the lens selection, and see which fits your shooting style better (if you’re super outdoorsy, the Pentax weather sealing might appeal to you), and try and get both in hand to shoot with for a while. Comfort in hand can be a very important deciding factor. But the Nikon is simply the best APS-C camera on the market right now, thanks to its excellent under-the-hood guts, software, and overall image quality. Without some sort of compelling reason to go in the other direction, I’d say the Nikon still is the top choice. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Photography is a Bastard left by Science on the Doorstep of Art - Peter Galassi -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 04:42:44PM -0500, Darren Addy wrote: The inability to use m42 lenses (without an adapter that contains an optical element for infinity focusing) is the main reason I would not have a Nikon. Love to experiment with those legacy lenses. And in-body image stabilization is a biggie feature, for me. If I were buying my first DSLR today, I'd likely get the D7100, if only because I have a whole drawerful of Nikon glass. A friend has an old D200 that she never uses, and I'm very tempted to offer her a couple hundred dollars for it, just so that I have something digital to use my old Nikon glass on. It would, however, be very tough to give up my in-body image stabilization. On the other hand, those 39 autofocus points seem very attractive. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013, Larry Colen wrote: It would, however, be very tough to give up my in-body image stabilization. On the other hand, those 39 autofocus points seem very attractive. Does anyone actually use those multiple autofocus points for live handheld shooting? -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ * * * Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
I use all of the limited number of AF points that Pentax provides. Eg: the two upper corners of the 9-square land nicely on eyes in portraits. The outliers are good for faces in full-body shots. Etc. 39 would be both good and bad. With the Pentax cluster, it takes only a moment to steer over to another point when switching poses or orientation. With 39? I dunno, could be tedious. OTOH, getting the framing you want rather than what's forced on you would be nice. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013, Larry Colen wrote: It would, however, be very tough to give up my in-body image stabilization. On the other hand, those 39 autofocus points seem very attractive. Does anyone actually use those multiple autofocus points for live handheld shooting? -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ * * * Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
Larry Colen wrote: A friend just pointed me to http://thewirecutter.com It seems that they do far more in depth reviews than other places, and cite other reviews in their reviews. Their mid-level DSLR review is on the D7100, http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/the-best-mid-range-dslr-is-the-nikon-d7100/ Interesting review. What's intriguing to me is that one of my biggest disincentives for getting a Nikon D-7100 would be the 24-megapixel files. I've seen enough (and these reviewers seem to agree) samples to be convinced that going over 16 megapixels in APS-C, with or without anti-aliasing filter, buys you no more real resolution. I'd be interested in trying out the Nikon AF, though. The K-5 had problems dealing with atmospheric haze in the alps a couple of weeks ago. Perhaps the Nikon would have fared no better under these admittedly difficult conditions nut it would have been nice to find out. Then again, I was *really* grateful for the K-5's weather sealing many times during the trip (and made people with other cameras quite envious, I might add!) -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com wrote: Does anyone actually use those multiple autofocus points for live handheld shooting? I think it would be a big help for birds in flight. On Pentax bodies, it's easy for the bird to slip in between the sites, or outside the area they cover. Then the lens starts hunting, and you're toast. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
Apparently Nikon is playing with a 75 mp camera ouch DAVE On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: Larry Colen wrote: A friend just pointed me to http://thewirecutter.com It seems that they do far more in depth reviews than other places, and cite other reviews in their reviews. Their mid-level DSLR review is on the D7100, http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/the-best-mid-range-dslr-is-the-nikon-d7100/ Interesting review. What's intriguing to me is that one of my biggest disincentives for getting a Nikon D-7100 would be the 24-megapixel files. I've seen enough (and these reviewers seem to agree) samples to be convinced that going over 16 megapixels in APS-C, with or without anti-aliasing filter, buys you no more real resolution. I'd be interested in trying out the Nikon AF, though. The K-5 had problems dealing with atmospheric haze in the alps a couple of weeks ago. Perhaps the Nikon would have fared no better under these admittedly difficult conditions nut it would have been nice to find out. Then again, I was *really* grateful for the K-5's weather sealing many times during the trip (and made people with other cameras quite envious, I might add!) -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013, Larry Colen wrote: It would, however, be very tough to give up my in-body image stabilization. On the other hand, those 39 autofocus points seem very attractive. Does anyone actually use those multiple autofocus points for live handheld shooting? I don't Dave -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ * * * Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
Once you're into that sort of farting around with af points you are essentially focusing manually. B On 24 Jul 2013, at 23:55, Bruce Walker bruce.wal...@gmail.com wrote: I use all of the limited number of AF points that Pentax provides. Eg: the two upper corners of the 9-square land nicely on eyes in portraits. The outliers are good for faces in full-body shots. Etc. 39 would be both good and bad. With the Pentax cluster, it takes only a moment to steer over to another point when switching poses or orientation. With 39? I dunno, could be tedious. OTOH, getting the framing you want rather than what's forced on you would be nice. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013, Larry Colen wrote: It would, however, be very tough to give up my in-body image stabilization. On the other hand, those 39 autofocus points seem very attractive. Does anyone actually use those multiple autofocus points for live handheld shooting? -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ * * * Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
Aahz Maruch wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013, Larry Colen wrote: It would, however, be very tough to give up my in-body image stabilization. On the other hand, those 39 autofocus points seem very attractive. Does anyone actually use those multiple autofocus points for live handheld shooting? Perhaps I would only use a dozen of them. But they could well be different from the dozen that you prefer. -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
on 2013-07-24 17:04 Bob W wrote Once you're into that sort of farting around with af points you are essentially focusing manually. yeah, better would be focus peaking overlaid in the optical finder; especially if you could hit a button to lock focus on the object where it has peaked, so the AF could then follow that object as it moved around the frame; of course presently focus peaking is only for mirrorless … i think there is interesting stuff to come -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: 16-50/2.8 (was Re: saved someone from Nigerian Paypal scam?)
on 2013-07-24 7:19 Zos Xavius wrote I have the 16-45, but the wobbly barrel is killing my corners randomly. yeah it's an interesting compromise of a lens; i thought all the corners were soft but my point was that i had carried a zoom for a long time before almost completely switching to small primes for that range, so i have wieghed the benefits of not having to change lenses; if i kept the 16-50 it would probably be the WR that convinces me I really wish pentax had some better wide-normal zooms at a reasonable price. yeah and make it lighter than the combined weight of my three primes too! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013, Matthew Hunt wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com wrote: Does anyone actually use those multiple autofocus points for live handheld shooting? I think it would be a big help for birds in flight. On Pentax bodies, it's easy for the bird to slip in between the sites, or outside the area they cover. Then the lens starts hunting, and you're toast. Let me rephrase: does anyone actually use manually-selected AF points for handheld shooting? (I did use the camera-selected AF points some during our Alaska cruise and got limited benefit from that; can't imagine getting any benefit from trying to select AF points while the bird is moving.) -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ * * * Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
On 7/24/2013 6:15 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013, Matthew Hunt wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com wrote: Does anyone actually use those multiple autofocus points for live handheld shooting? I think it would be a big help for birds in flight. On Pentax bodies, it's easy for the bird to slip in between the sites, or outside the area they cover. Then the lens starts hunting, and you're toast. Let me rephrase: does anyone actually use manually-selected AF points for handheld shooting? (I did use the camera-selected AF points some during our Alaska cruise and got limited benefit from that; can't imagine getting any benefit from trying to select AF points while the bird is moving.) I always do. In fact, I've used manually selected focus points almost exclusively since I got my K20D, as I feel it saves me some cropping and helps my composition. The ability to quickly change the focus point was one of the reasons I preferred using the K20D over my K-x in spite of the difference in low light performance. I've also used it on a few bird shots, albeit with limited success. Still, I think it has made a difference for the better in my photos. Of course, we all have our own ways of shooting, so it's obviously not for everybody. But I really do enjoy using that feature in the K20D and K-5. -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
on 2013-07-24 17:15 Aahz Maruch wrote Let me rephrase: does anyone actually use manually-selected AF points for handheld shooting? yes, i have done it some, particularly with DA 15mm and FA 28mm lenses; it is a bit awkward, and i usually don't even use autofocus, but when i tried it out it felt like i could train myself to switch points quickly -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Another shot from Italy. Mountains this time
Am running internet explorer and I'm getting: Hotlinking to files at robertstech.com is not permitted. Never before seen. ?? Jack - Original Message - From: Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Cc: Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 11:54 AM Subject: Another shot from Italy. Mountains this time Out of the city and into the mountains. No tricky HDR or stitched pano stuff this time. Just a simple snapshot. http://www.robertstech.com/temp/dolomite1.jpg K-5 and DA*16-50/2.8 -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia http://www.robertstech.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
I do, at least in a limited way, Mostly I use the four corners or the center focus point. On the other hand I have a split image rangefinder screen in my K20D so I focus and recompose on with manual lenses anyway. On 7/24/2013 6:47 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013, Larry Colen wrote: It would, however, be very tough to give up my in-body image stabilization. On the other hand, those 39 autofocus points seem very attractive. Does anyone actually use those multiple autofocus points for live handheld shooting? -- There are two kinds of computer users those who've experienced a hard drive failure, and those that will. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:15 PM, Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com wrote: Let me rephrase: does anyone actually use manually-selected AF points for handheld shooting? I use the single centre and recompose Dave (I did use the camera-selected AF points some during our Alaska cruise and got limited benefit from that; can't imagine getting any benefit from trying to select AF points while the bird is moving.) -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ * * * Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 03:47:17PM -0700, Aahz Maruch wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013, Larry Colen wrote: It would, however, be very tough to give up my in-body image stabilization. On the other hand, those 39 autofocus points seem very attractive. Does anyone actually use those multiple autofocus points for live handheld shooting? The problem that I have is that the area of each autofocus point is so large that I'll think that I've got it set to autofocus on the musician, and it autofocuses on the microphone, or something else in the same region, but which has a much sharper boundary, that is easier to autofocus on. My experience is that generally autofocus is not only faster, but more accurate than manual focus. Unfortunately it tends to perfectly focus on the wrong thing. -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ * * * Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
On Jul 24, 2013, at 7:15 PM, Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com wrote: Let me rephrase: does anyone actually use manually-selected AF points for handheld shooting? Yes, frequently. It was once explained to me - and this might be of interest to bird-shooters out there - that setting the camera to continuous AF and dynamic focus area (or whatever its called that allows the camera to choose among focus points), and shooting in burst mode... Would allow you to shoot/keep in focus a moving subject as it travels through the frame... But the person who told me this shoots Canon, so... Never tried it, myself... anyone care to comment on that claim? It's the AF that tempts me most when my eyes wander to Nikon But, I wouldn't switch for a crop sensor camera... :) -c -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013, Larry Colen wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 03:47:17PM -0700, Aahz Maruch wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013, Larry Colen wrote: It would, however, be very tough to give up my in-body image stabilization. On the other hand, those 39 autofocus points seem very attractive. Does anyone actually use those multiple autofocus points for live handheld shooting? The problem that I have is that the area of each autofocus point is so large that I'll think that I've got it set to autofocus on the musician, and it autofocuses on the microphone, or something else in the same region, but which has a much sharper boundary, that is easier to autofocus on. My experience is that generally autofocus is not only faster, but more accurate than manual focus. Unfortunately it tends to perfectly focus on the wrong thing. That's why I do what David does: center point AF, shutter half-press, recompose. I only ever had problems with that on your K-x. ;-) Similarly, letting the camera pick the AF points makes some sense for bird shots and the like. I just can't even visualize the mechanics of manually selecting AF point for handheld shooting, so I figured I'd ask whether anyone does. -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ * * * Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
Generally, for hand held shooting of static or slowly moving subjects I'll use the center point and recompose. When the camera is on a tripod, especially if I'm shooting in the portrait orientation I'll select an individual focus point that's in the right spot. When I'm shooting sports or other fast moving subjects I'll use all of the focus points in one of the dynamic modes. The Nikon focus system tracks a moving subject very well in this mode. I turned off the shutter button focus quite a while ago and only use the back button. All of those modes are there for different reasons and styles of shooting. It takes a while to learn any particular brand and model's focusing system works mechanically and works for your style. In Nikon's case the description in the owner's manual isn't really very good. I was much more successful after reading Thom Hogans guides. He dissects the various modes in a way that made sense to me. gs George Sinos www.GeorgesPhotos.net www.GeorgeSinos.com On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Christine Nielsen ch...@inielsen.net wrote: On Jul 24, 2013, at 7:15 PM, Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com wrote: Let me rephrase: does anyone actually use manually-selected AF points for handheld shooting? Yes, frequently. It was once explained to me - and this might be of interest to bird-shooters out there - that setting the camera to continuous AF and dynamic focus area (or whatever its called that allows the camera to choose among focus points), and shooting in burst mode... Would allow you to shoot/keep in focus a moving subject as it travels through the frame... But the person who told me this shoots Canon, so... Never tried it, myself... anyone care to comment on that claim? It's the AF that tempts me most when my eyes wander to Nikon But, I wouldn't switch for a crop sensor camera... :) -c -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 05:25:40PM -0700, Aahz Maruch wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013, Larry Colen wrote: That's why I do what David does: center point AF, shutter half-press, recompose. I only ever had problems with that on your K-x. ;-) Similarly, letting the camera pick the AF points makes some sense for bird shots and the like. I just can't even visualize the mechanics of manually selecting AF point for handheld shooting, so I figured I'd ask whether anyone does. If I have my camera set up on a tripod, with a carefully selected composition, and I want more accurate focusing than I trust my aged eyes for, then it is very handy. particularly if I can't use something like a split prism, because it isn't in the center. Also, if I am photographing a musician, say a sax player, who is moving around, in low light, focus and recompose, or manual focus isn't going to work, then I set my focus point, and let autofocus do its magic. There is no single technique, for focus, exposure or anything else, that I always use. I do my best be proficient at many of them, and to understand when which one is appropriate, or optimal. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013, Larry Colen wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 05:25:40PM -0700, Aahz Maruch wrote: I just can't even visualize the mechanics of manually selecting AF point for handheld shooting, so I figured I'd ask whether anyone does. If I have my camera set up on a tripod, with a carefully selected composition, and I want more accurate focusing than I trust my aged eyes for, then it is very handy. particularly if I can't use something like a split prism, because it isn't in the center. Ayup, I haven't done that much (because I don't use a tripod ;-), but I can easily imagine it. Also, if I am photographing a musician, say a sax player, who is moving around, in low light, focus and recompose, or manual focus isn't going to work, then I set my focus point, and let autofocus do its magic. Are you setting shoot on focus or what? If the sax player is moving around, how do you set the focus point? Are you using tracking focus? -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ * * * Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
How so? I'm telling the AF what to focus on then letting it do what it does better than me. If you let AF focus on what it wants to you might as well hand the camera to someone else and let them shoot what they want to as well. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:04 PM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: Once you're into that sort of farting around with af points you are essentially focusing manually. B On 24 Jul 2013, at 23:55, Bruce Walker bruce.wal...@gmail.com wrote: I use all of the limited number of AF points that Pentax provides. Eg: the two upper corners of the 9-square land nicely on eyes in portraits. The outliers are good for faces in full-body shots. Etc. 39 would be both good and bad. With the Pentax cluster, it takes only a moment to steer over to another point when switching poses or orientation. With 39? I dunno, could be tedious. OTOH, getting the framing you want rather than what's forced on you would be nice. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013, Larry Colen wrote: It would, however, be very tough to give up my in-body image stabilization. On the other hand, those 39 autofocus points seem very attractive. Does anyone actually use those multiple autofocus points for live handheld shooting? -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 http://rule6.info/ * * * Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
I also use the Live View in some situations. All of the shots from the church that I have posted over the last few months were focused through the LCD and live view. The focusing point can be moved anywhere in the frame. The camera was on a tripod. Even though focusing is slower in live mode, the advantage of placing the focusing point exactly where it is wanted was appreciated. gs George Sinos www.GeorgesPhotos.net www.GeorgeSinos.com On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 05:25:40PM -0700, Aahz Maruch wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013, Larry Colen wrote: That's why I do what David does: center point AF, shutter half-press, recompose. I only ever had problems with that on your K-x. ;-) Similarly, letting the camera pick the AF points makes some sense for bird shots and the like. I just can't even visualize the mechanics of manually selecting AF point for handheld shooting, so I figured I'd ask whether anyone does. If I have my camera set up on a tripod, with a carefully selected composition, and I want more accurate focusing than I trust my aged eyes for, then it is very handy. particularly if I can't use something like a split prism, because it isn't in the center. Also, if I am photographing a musician, say a sax player, who is moving around, in low light, focus and recompose, or manual focus isn't going to work, then I set my focus point, and let autofocus do its magic. There is no single technique, for focus, exposure or anything else, that I always use. I do my best be proficient at many of them, and to understand when which one is appropriate, or optimal. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 8:05 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:15 PM, Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com wrote: Let me rephrase: does anyone actually use manually-selected AF points for handheld shooting? I use the single centre and recompose That doesn't work with large apertures and short teles or longer. It becomes auto-defocus then. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Another shot from Italy. Mountains this time
gee too bad you didn't go anywhere beautiful ;-) simple is good ann On 7/24/2013 14:54, Mark Roberts wrote: Out of the city and into the mountains. No tricky HDR or stitched pano stuff this time. Just a simple snapshot. http://www.robertstech.com/temp/dolomite1.jpg K-5 and DA*16-50/2.8 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Another shot from Italy. Mountains this time
Wonderfully dramatic shot, Mark! Love it! Ideal rendering. Jack - Original Message - From: Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Cc: Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 1:15 PM Subject: Re: Another shot from Italy. Mountains this time kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote: From: Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com Out of the city and into the mountains. No tricky HDR or stitched pano stuff this time. Just a simple snapshot. http://www.robertstech.com/temp/dolomite1.jpg K-5 and DA*16-50/2.8 WOW Mark, the hits keep coming ! I shot over 1500 photos there. I'm only gonna show ya the good ones ;-) -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia http://www.robertstech.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Return of the Drone
Thanks Bob. 300mm actually. If I had had the 35mm on the camera I would have gone lower and gotten more of its face, but the minimum focusing distance on the 300mm would have forced me into the water to get that perspective and I didn't want to get wet right then. Yeah, I know, a truly dedicated photographer wouldn't worry about such minor obstacles . . . On Jul 24, 2013, at 10:12 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: Wow Stan, that's really close up! Were you using the 35mm Macro? Nice and crisp. Regards, Bob S. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Stan Halpin s...@stans-photography.info wrote: An addition to my on-going Long Lake 2013 gallery, this is a shot of one of Ann's favorite critters. Last featured performing hazardous duty as a escort to a loon, today we see the intrepid drone at rest on the dock . . . http://photos.stanhalpin.com/p769975649/h6f441a6f#h6f441a6f stan -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Return of the Drone
No worries Ann. The loon was hanging around for 30-45 minutes late this afternoon, just off the end of the neighbor's dock. I am about to look through the 250-300 shots I took . . . On Jul 24, 2013, at 10:17 AM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: We'll worry if the loon goes missing now ann On 7/24/2013 09:15, Stan Halpin wrote: An addition to my on-going Long Lake 2013 gallery, this is a shot of one of Ann's favorite critters. Last featured performing hazardous duty as a escort to a loon, today we see the intrepid drone at rest on the dock . . . http://photos.stanhalpin.com/p769975649/h6f441a6f#h6f441a6f stan -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
PESO -- But seriously...
Warning serious dog expression. I haven't got a lot of recent stuff, been another photographic dry spell. So I went back and looked at some of the stuff I shot with the *ist-D. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1604247/PESO/PESO%20--%20butseriously.html Equipment: *ist-D w/smc Pentax FA 20-35mm f4.0 As usual comments are welcome but may be totally ignored. -- There are two kinds of computer users those who've experienced a hard drive failure, and those that will. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: PESO -- But seriously...
Lovely expression. A good subject for Bruce's eyelash test. gerrit -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P.J. Alling Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 9:48 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: PESO -- But seriously... Warning serious dog expression. I haven't got a lot of recent stuff, been another photographic dry spell. So I went back and looked at some of the stuff I shot with the *ist-D. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1604247/PESO/PESO%20--%20butseriously.ht ml Equipment: *ist-D w/smc Pentax FA 20-35mm f4.0 As usual comments are welcome but may be totally ignored. -- There are two kinds of computer users those who've experienced a hard drive failure, and those that will. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Did I get spamcopped
I just got a undelivered message that my upstream mail host has been blacklisted. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Did I get spamcopped
You are coming through to this list. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:03 PM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote: I just got a undelivered message that my upstream mail host has been blacklisted. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO -- But seriously...
or.I'm beggin' you, please stop this thing and let me out. Like the pleading fear in the eyes. Jack - Original Message - From: P.J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Cc: Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 6:48 PM Subject: PESO -- But seriously... Warning serious dog expression. I haven't got a lot of recent stuff, been another photographic dry spell. So I went back and looked at some of the stuff I shot with the *ist-D. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1604247/PESO/PESO%20--%20butseriously.html Equipment: *ist-D w/smc Pentax FA 20-35mm f4.0 As usual comments are welcome but may be totally ignored. -- There are two kinds of computer users those who've experienced a hard drive failure, and those that will. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Modern Tin Types
A soldier in Afghanistan has been experimenting with making tin type prints of his colleagues: http://twentytwowords.com/2013/07/24/soldier-in-afghanistan-photographs-comrades-using-civil-war-era-technique-14-pics/ -- Doug Lefty Franklin NutDriver Racing http://NutDriver.org Facebook NutDriver Racing Sponsored by Murphy -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
PESO: Corn Flower
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=17468739size=lg Comments invited. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO: Corn Flower
cute - you got the latin name down when you showed the other photo - Echinacea it is, but it is cone flower not corn flower (the things you learn having done stock nature photography) YOu have a lot of lovely floral close-ups, Dan, - for this isn't one of them I think for it to work the foreground ahas to be really sharp - I like the concept of three colors, though. ann On 7/24/2013 23:57, Daniel J. Matyola wrote: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=17468739size=lg Comments invited. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: 16-50/2.8 (was Re: saved someone from Nigerian Paypal scam?)
The original FA 28-105 f4-5.6 (the power zoom one for the PZ-1) is a bit heavy, but an unknown sleeper - fine quality lens. But you'd still need a 15mm prime. Regards, Bob S. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:13 PM, steve harley p...@paper-ape.com wrote: on 2013-07-24 7:19 Zos Xavius wrote I have the 16-45, but the wobbly barrel is killing my corners randomly. yeah it's an interesting compromise of a lens; i thought all the corners were soft but my point was that i had carried a zoom for a long time before almost completely switching to small primes for that range, so i have wieghed the benefits of not having to change lenses; if i kept the 16-50 it would probably be the WR that convinces me I really wish pentax had some better wide-normal zooms at a reasonable price. yeah and make it lighter than the combined weight of my three primes too! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: reviews on the wirecutter.com
Amen to that! I find it difficult to use the multiple autofocus points in any handheld shooting. Pentax doesn't focus fast enough to select th 26th point vs the 27th. When I try letting the camera pick the AF point, it goes all over the scene. And not necessarily where I want. Regards, Bob S. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013, Matthew Hunt wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com wrote: Does anyone actually use those multiple autofocus points for live handheld shooting? I think it would be a big help for birds in flight. On Pentax bodies, it's easy for the bird to slip in between the sites, or outside the area they cover. Then the lens starts hunting, and you're toast. Let me rephrase: does anyone actually use manually-selected AF points for handheld shooting? (I did use the camera-selected AF points some during our Alaska cruise and got limited benefit from that; can't imagine getting any benefit from trying to select AF points while the bird is moving.) -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ * * * Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Did I get spamcopped
Possible, but the unlikelyhood is certainly positive... Sent with AquaMail for Android http://www.aqua-mail.com On July 25, 2013 5:03:26 AM Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote: I just got a undelivered message that my upstream mail host has been blacklisted. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Did I get spamcopped
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 08:20:46AM +0300, Boris Liberman wrote: Possible, but the unlikelyhood is certainly positive... That reply has reach a unique level of definitiveness. This was from the header of one of my bounces: The mx1.mx3.got.net program pdml@pdml.net: host pdml.net[216.107.146.145] said: 550-JunkMail rejected - mx1.mx3.got.net (mx.got.net) [207.111.237.40]:42937 is 550 in an RBL, see Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?207.111.237.40; (in reply to RCPT TO command) [-- Attachment #2: Delivery report --] [-- Type: message/delivery-status, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 0.5K --] Reporting-MTA: dns; mx.got.net X-mx1-mx3-got-net-Queue-ID: 1C3B214166 X-mx1-mx3-got-net-Sender: rfc822; l...@platypus.gruk.net Arrival-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 18:59:28 -0700 (PDT) Final-Recipient: rfc822; pdml@pdml.net Action: failed Status: 5.0.0 Diagnostic-Code: X-mx1-mx3-got-net; host pdml.net[216.107.146.145] said: 550-JunkMail rejected - mx1.mx3.got.net (mx.got.net) [207.111.237.40]:42937 is 550 in an RBL, see Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?207.111.237.40; (in reply to RCPT TO command) [-- Attachment #3: Undelivered Message --] [-- Type: message/rfc822, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 1.9K --] -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
