Re: What would a pro buy - survey? (was: Lessons fro a pro)
Around here, there is no such thing as a generic pro photographer. Your subject determines the gear you need. You need to be more specific. One thing I would say is that you almost entirely left out lighting equipment. If you ever need any additiona; light at all you need at least two of those little shoe mount flashes, so you have a spare. Most editorial, corporate, location, wedding event, many sports, studio photographers have as much invested in lighting: lights/stands/light boxes/umbrellas/backdrops/grids/reflectors/meters as they do in camera gear. BR From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] I would probably be looking for: 2 digital bodies (3-14 MP0), including battery grips etc. Dedicated lenses: 2-3 zooms f2.8 throughout 3-5 primes f2.8 or better Tele converter, perhaps a macro converter Filters, like polarizer and misc. effects (Cokin) A dedicated flash GN 135 (45) 2-4 RAM cards Portable hard drive/card reader Tripod and monopod And probably some IS equipment or avialable light/evening shots
Re: OT:The PDML is Dying
You posted it on the Pentax Deranged Mailing List BR From: Anthony Farr [EMAIL PROTECTED] How on earth did my very mild observation about BR, and subsequent apology for a careless allusion, warp into another insultfest.
Re: OT:The PDML is Dying
I also know how to trim my responses. BR From: Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] at least Bruce has the ability to stay on topic. (Now that was an insult).
Re: A photographic weekend - ahhhhhhhh!
There are lots of wedding shooters who shoot all digital. It's a workflow efficiency issue that is developed with knowledge and experience. Many folks can go through 1000-1500 images and come up with a set of files for proofs in a couple of hours. The key is batch operations and not getting fancy on proofs. Save the custom tweaking for the pictures that go in the albums or enlargements. Since you're working with digital files there isn't any need to go driving off to a lab. Just up load images to places that print them out and then send them back to you. People weren't fast and efficient the first time they printed in a darkroom, digital is no different. BR From: Jim Apilado [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your wedding activities reminded me of some weddings I have done in the past. I did one wedding exclusively with digital. I decided I will not longer do a wedding with a digital slr, although I could take many more exposures than with film. My reasoning is that there is a lot of post-production labor involving digital that I never did with film. Exposure corrections, sharpening, maybe some gaussian blur effect. All takes time. When it comes to film, I may have some images printed to hot and I return to the lab for correction. I let them correct the error. Yes, it takes time as well to do this, but I enjoy being inside a camera store looking at all the toys.
Re: Do Smarter Cameras make Dumber Photogs?
Automation has nothing to do with light, form and composition, and everything to do with being a photographer. If anything, automation has permitted photographers to concentrate more on light, form and composition rather than technical minutiae. The strength of an image is what counts and the average viewer couldn't care less whether it was done with an 8x10 view camera or an auto everything PS. Photographers get paid to create images and not twirl dials. It's the wishful thinking of the masters of an arcane craft that the pcitures created by photographers who have started since the early 80's are inferior to older photographers. This is like saying that Shakespeare wrote as well as he did because he used a quill pen. BR From: Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] No... that wasn't what I was trying to say. My point was that I don't believe that (in general) photographers who learned their craft back in the days before automated cameras have lost their appreciation of light, form and composition, and that in my opinion a more interesting issue is what the effect of automation on new photographers is.
Re: OT: Bunch of OT stuff
There's a whole section devoted to the Fuji DSLRs here: http://www.robgalbraith.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php The camera seems to give great color, but a number of them have had problems and Fuji support doesn't get good reviews. Rumor has it that there's an S3 in the pipeline. BR Subject: OT: Bunch of OT stuff Does anyone have any experience with the Fuji S2? any comments for or against?
Re: OT: News about Nachtwey and Weisskopf
I just read a recent issue of Time, where they cover the incident. James had shrapnel wounds in a hand, abdomen and legs. He is home now. Accordingto the article, James took pictures of Weisskop receiving first aid from a medic at the time of the explosion, until he (James) passed out. BR
Re: Photography: Fun or Profit????
Most of my involvment in photography these days is for money; either shooting or assisting. Right now I like the challenge of having to get the shots, because someone is paying you to do so. It's very different than shooting for friends, family or even second shooter. The pressure is greater, but so is the gratification. Since I don't do it for my primary source of income, I'm less likely to get burnt out. I greatly admire the people whod can do this day in and day out, ans still keep it fresh. BR From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] I was wondering how many of you are into photography for fun or do you do it for profit?
Re: Re[2]: card storage in the field
Thank you for the compliment. I must tell you though that almost all of them were done while I was second shooter/assistant. There is no stress of having to get THE SHOTS, so you can cherry pick. I wouldn't worry about how many shots you are currently taking to cover a wedding. You need enough shots to make the client feel that you've covered it well, doesn't say, Oh, didn't you get a picture of. and does say, There's so many pictures here that I want in my album and I can't decide which to put in.. BTW, your stuff is quite good. Being a great technician doesn't make you a great photographer, but being able to work well with light modifiers/flash, around here, can double what you charge. Light is your friend. The more you can do with it, the more fiends you have. Horses: You needed more light coming in from the shadow side. On camera flash will put light where you do and do not need it. You needed either a reflector or off camera flash to fill those shadows. But before you start adding light, you need to know hopw much you need. To do that you need a good incident/flash meter. You want 1.5 - 2 stops difference between the bright side and shadow side. An assistant holding a large reflector would have fixed that shot. A flash on a light stand, off to the side, firing into the shadow side would also do it. A simple setup of a flash, on a stand, fired into an umbrella would do wonders for your posed candids. Look through the Guides section here: http://www.elinchrom.com/ To get your reception flash shots look better you can bounce it the way Tom does using fast film and low shutter speeds to record as much ambient light as you can, or buy some good looking light. I use a Quantum T2 flash mounted on a bracket. The flash has a very broad even pattern and mounted up on a bracket, so it is 10 - 12 above the lens, gives very nice light without glare and hot spots. There is a reason why Quantum, Lumidyne and the big Metz flashes are part of so many wedding rigs. (The down side is that they are expensive and are heavy to lug around all day). BR From: Tanya Mayer Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED] Those are cool shots, I'll bet that she'll love them! BUT, I think it was Bruce(?) who posted about the different markets etc? I went and looked at the whole album from that wedding, and your shots are sensational (i am totally humbled and feel that my work is positively amateur in comparison to yours and also Bruces wedding work...) BTW, whilst you are all looking at that gallery, if anyone has the time, could you please have a look at the shots of the couple with the horse - any idea why my flash didn't fill the shadows on their faces? I was really close, shot with a 28mm and 50mm lens. I'm thinking it is because the flash has exposed for the white of the dress? But truly, I have no idea... Those shots look like absolute crap, and that is what I mean about me having a LOT to learn... Not only are the shadows really bad, major hotspots all over, but they are very poorly composed too. NOT one of my finest photographic moments there... I almost threw those in the trash can before even showing them to the couple, who ironically love them. There truly is no accounting for taste sometimes. AND, does anyone have any sure fire tips for preventing shine on faces from flash and reduce contrast for reception pics? No matter what bounce options, softboxes etc I have tried on my flash gun, I have never been able to find what I feel is a satisfactory result...
Re: Pentax 28-105mm FA powerzoom
There is no problem, infact it is probably better, to have the the coverage of the flash broader than the FOV of the lens. I use a large flash that covers the field for a 28mm lens, and use it will all focal length lenses. The advantage to having wider coverage is that the light from the flash will be more even. Very often there is a hot spot in the center of the light pattern with shoe mount flashes. In doors you get the advantage of the light, on the edges, reflecting off the walls and ceilings, softening the light. BR From: Tanya Mayer Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED] Only problem is that being 135mm, I am unable to use any of my flash guns with it in TTL mode (they all only zoom to 105mm), and manual flash photography is just one of the areas I know absolutely, (well, virtually) nothing about.
Re: Nikon to stop selling film cameras in Japan...
The story on the Pop Photo site is that Pop Photo quoted a Japanese article stating that Nikon would develop a full frame sensor SLR. No one at Nikon ever told Keppler that Nikon would do it. This is really just another case of sloppy Pop Photo reporting. BR From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] Speaking of which, has anyone else been following the ongoing fiasco with Nikon's announcement that they are developing a full-frame DSLR...and subsequent denial of same? Last month's Popular Photography featured an interview with a Mr Komura of Nikon, who revealed (big surprise) that Nikon is developing a full-frame DSLR.
Re: pentax-discuss-d Digest V03 #1429
Did you give her Greywoofs e-mail address? Although she might be a little young for him. Maybe Pentax could feature her in their next DIY porno ad. BR From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] Same thing at weddings round here, though I did spot this last week: http://www.bigdayphoto.com/pentax.jpg Yes, it was her camera.
Re: pentax-discuss-d Digest V03 #1392
I'm using a Quantum T2 flash so the batteries are separate. The flash alone weighs around 30 oz. BR WR This is one of the reasons for my going with the Metz 60 series. Much of the WR flash weight is taken off the flash head and put onto the separate battery WR pack, which is carried on a shoulder strap. WR Still not light, but not as heavy. WR William Robb
Re: What is the high-end Pentax lens strategy????
To keep Canon and Nikon in business.
Re: Shooting baskteball game. Help needed.
From what I've read, for Pro games (which are played in much better lit arenas), still shooters set up multiple radio slaved flashes in the rafters/cat walks above the court. Now the pro players may be used to flash, and anyway, most wildlife and athletes don't seem to notice flashs. BR From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] I would not use flash ever in a sports tournament, ever. Even a friendly between amateurs, it's just bad form.
RE: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update
With my son's A70, saved as Fine (only does JPG - there is a Super Fine) with default settings (which add sharpening and a bit of saturation and contrast, I think). 5x7's, to a Epson 1200, look as good as a shot from a PS camera in terms of resolution/sharpness. A dump to PS and a print out with no adjustment yields better color than I see from just about any consumer film place. For normal people, those that don't view photographs with a microscope, the only difference between the G5 and 35mm is that the G5 will look better up to 8x10. BR From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ok, lets say someone comes in and dumps their G5 onto your hard drive. He shot large jpgs, lowest compression. Are his prints going to look much different than if he had shot 35mm?
Re: Photo plus show
The show was about the same size as last year. Another company MIA was Sigma. The Pentax booth was in a much more prominent location than last year. With the pro orientation of the show, the Pentax booth doesn't get a lot of attention. One of the reps was carrying on about how every lens, for every format, could be used on the camera, but didn't mention the metering issues. I did try the *D, and though it was very nicely done. The controls are useable and intelligible, with out the manual, for what every I tried to do with it. The AF is even finally competent. No, I'm not interested in buying one. BR From: Butch Black [EMAIL PROTECTED] I went to the Photo Plus show in NYC yesterday. The show seemed small to me, but it seems to be shrinking every year. A lot of digital, little cutting edge new. The Pentax booth was modest compared to N***N and C***n. I did get to play with the *ist-D. It feels nice, and solid. I photographer friend who was with me also commented on how nice it felt and how much better it felt to the Digital Rebel. Now the bad news. Pentax seems to be getting dissed (is *ist D pig latin for dissed?) by some of the accessory manufacturers. I went to capture 1 to ask if they were going to make their RAW converter for the ist D. The person I spoke to listed a half dozen other cameras that would get it first, and doubted that Pentax would have enough market share to make it worthwhile for them. I went to Adobe and asked if their RAW converter in the new Photoshop CS would handle Pentax's raw, nobody knew, though they were kind and polite about it, and told me I might find the answer on their site on-line. Even the Pentax rep sort of side stepped my comment of metering incompatibilities with the ist D and older lenses. Butch
Re: OT- Nikon announces new scanners
Anyone want a deal on a Canon FS4000? From: John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aha. 4000dpi, 14-bit scanning in the low-end model. Maybe it's time to replace the CoolScan III.
Re: Re[4]: Wireless flash and off camera clips, grips, pips, tips, salsa dips
There is just no good automagic way of doing multiple, off camera flashes. With studio flashes you: get a meter, use a digital camera (even a PS) to check a histogram (you can check this with a PS by uploading the file into PS), or shoot many, many rolls of film. If your shooting a subject, and want a 1:3 lighting ratio (1.5 stop difference) from one side to the other, TTL won't work. Your better off using both flashes in Auto mode, and set them to give different amounts of light. If I was shooting a person and given the choice between: two independently controlled lights (say into umbrellas), one light and fill card, one light and one light with on camera fill flash; the on camera light would be last and I wouldn't bother with it. You can do studio lighting on the cheap, but there are certain basic capabilities you need to get decent results. BR From: Dave Miers [EMAIL PROTECTED] Could you please explain this further. I had actually planned on the slave providing most of the light and the popup or hotshoe mounted flash providing the minority of the light. I'm afraid I'm still a bit lost here. I have the PZ-1p and PZ-1 cameras at this point and have no wireless to play with as yet in my Pentax equipment. I also have acquired a professional stand type modeling flash with 3 variing outputs from a local photographer that retired, only $40, and of course would like to implement it. Unfortunately I do not possess any metering equipment other then on camera metering. I have the AF360FGZ and a couple of other off brand flashes for pentax. one of which supports TTL and AF. I had planned to use a minisoftbox on my hotshoe on camera flash with the slaves.
Re: Why Adorama, BH are not shipping *ist D
www.uniquephoto.com BR From: Ramesh Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] When I order for something I wait anxiously. Delays like these could drive are frustrating May be BH and Adorama need some non-religious a competitors.
OT Re: New to the list
I already knew that. BR From: Bob Walkden [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] congratulations, you must be a different species to the rest of us.
Re: pentax-discuss-d Digest V03 #1237
An incident meter measures the amount of light directly striking the meter, so it won't help judge the tonality of subjects. It will develop an eye for the amount of light. An incident meter that can also measure flash will make multiple lighting setups practical to do, it's a pure science fair experiment without one. Digital meters are the way to go: they are very reliable, stay in calibration, readout in finer granularity (1/10 stop is typical and not overkill for slides), and they can do some very handy advanced things (like tell you the % of flash/ambient). Sekonic 318IIB. A Minolta IVF if you can find a new one at your price. BR From: Ramesh Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi, I need to improve my ability to judge the tonality. I mostly do landscape work I use spot meter more. I am planning to buy a Incident meter and practice metering things around me. This may improve my tonality judging skills and one day I may be able judge the tonality of distant objects. I know I need an Incident meter. I have few question. *) What are other usefull features available in Incident meter (like ambient meter, flash meter) *) Difference b/w anolog digital meters is only the needle? or are there any other differences? *) What I gain with Digital meter? Are they more accurate? I will be spending 200usd at most. Any brand suggestions are welcome. Thanks Ramesh
Re: NYC landscapes (was: feature for digital camera)
Oy! Looking for natural stuff in NYC is like going to the Grand Canyon to take pictures of kids playing stick ball in the gutter... Here goes: There's Cental Park in Manhattan and Prospect Park in Brooklyn, along with the Brooklyn and Bronx Botanic Gardens anda patch of grass in my back yard. The closest thing to a mountain in NYC is the garbage dump in the Great Kills section of Staten Island. All the bodies of water are either man made, or have funny stuff floating in them. I think that you really want to go to New Jersey. BR From: arnie [EMAIL PROTECTED] lanscapes, foliage, lakes, rivers - natural stuff
Re: correct exposure
Because weddings have so much energy the over expose everything by one stop? If the light meter says f11 shoot at f11. BR From: Feroze Kistan [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm currently doing a course in wedding photography. One of the things that came up and which I forgot to ask was: we were told that the studio lights had been set for f/11 and that we should set our cameras to f/8, why is this so?
Re: Has Pentax missed again?
It's the rumored, but not yet announced, D2X that I'm waiting for. BR From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Nikon D2H, which very few if any people actually have in their hands right now but is promised this month, is better than the equivalent Canon EOS-1D. Canon isn't sitting still, of course, so their next offering will be better than the D2H.
Re: Has Pentax missed again?
The D1 was based on the F100. It came out around a year before the D30. You're thinking of the Kodak/Nikon hybreds. BR From: Alan Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] I remember those days. Those big heavy ugly DSLRs which were not designed for the general public, but press photographers only. Even so, few were using them.
Re: Old lenses and *ist D
Quite a few Nikons, going back to the early 90's wouldn't meter with MF lenses. It's just that they were entry level bodies and nobody paid much attention to them. For the most part people who were buying these things were new buyers and didn't have any MF lenses. The N80/D100 have a much larger appeal and a lot of long time uses would have like to be able use their MF lenses. I'll bet that the main reason that these (Nikon/Pentax) cameras are designed to not to be able to meter at all with old lenses it to keep some newbie trying to use a MF lens and having things set so the exposure is thrown way off (like trying to shoot in P mode with the lens wide open). The support costs for having to fix perfectly good cameras and disappointed customers is the real reason. They don't want people to hurt themselves, and then blame the camera maker. BR From: Collin R Brendemuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] And I think the N65 also won't use them. It wouldn't be a surprise if the same users of old Nikon lenses are complaining in just the same manner as we're hearing right here.
Re: Printer Suggestions?
Take a look at the Olympus dyesub printers here:http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_pp_printers.asp From: Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm considering an additional printer to use mobile. Our son and his wife are members of a hot air balloon crew and I've come up with the idea of taking photos of/for paying passengers and having prints available for them at the end of their ride.
Re: I haven't got *Ist D
There's only a little over 200 people on the PDML. Within a few months it will easily be a double digit percentage with them. The folks on the PDML are not representative of typical Pentax users. BR From: Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Most likely something like 1% or less of the PDMLers have or are getting an ist-D.
Re: istD test needs doing.....
This was done years ago by people who take pictures, an not of eye charts, for a living. They now shoot with DSLRs and don't scan film. The vast majoriety of normal people don't examine photographs under microscopes. At normal viewing distances, for normal people, digital pictures cna be made to look better and sharper because of the lack of grain.. BR From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] What I would like to see is a (scanned) film vs. digital output of the *istD using a really good lens at a good fstop and really good film like tmax 100 or fuji provia 100f.
Re: Tripod use - hard lenses and soft films or the other way round
It is about capturing the visual experience/sensation so that someone else feels what you did. Photography can not be reality or literal, because, for among other things, you have transformed something from 3D space to a 2D plane. BR From: Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED] What you say may be true for some aspects of photography, but for an image recorder like me, I try to record exactly what I'm seeing and experiencing at the time, with the least amount of distortion of fact as possible. Making the photo a slice of reality as *I* saw it is easily 90% of the effort. Else, why take the shot? keith whaley
Re: *ist D delay
Then maybe the Pentax reps won't look like a collection of Maytag repair men. BR From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] What's new. Pentax USA has been saying that for months. I figure the delay will not go past October's end since that's the Javit's Show.
Re: pentax-discuss-d Digest V03 #984
In this part of the world that is taking an order. A sale is a transaction that results in the exchange of good/services for something of value. BR From: Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] The *ist D was actually being sold on sept 1 - dealers were selling it, even if they could not supply it yet.
RE: *ist D delayed again
There were no *ist D's for sale Sept. 1, 2003. Whatever verbiage was exchanged was an attempt to define the concept of for sale. Pentax still hasen't moved it into the sales channel. It ain't soup yet and it didn't make the date. BR From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] No. I was planning to go through my sent mail to figure when things were said, but it's the busy time for me right now... tv
Re: OT Elements Q
PS supports 8 and 16 color depth. With 14 bit images, PS will pad it out to 16 bits. The color space I would try would be Kodak sRGB, since sRGB is pretty much standard for all but special, high end work and works well with just about all printing devices. BR --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My film scanner (Prime Film 1800 AFL) can scan in 8 bit or 14 bit color depth. I've been scanning in 8 bit mode because when I scan in 14 bit, I get a message that says something like the image is in an unsupported color mode and will be converted Does PS really not support higher than 8 bit color or is there a setting I need to change? Should I care about this? Also, my scanner driver lists a lot of output profiles (e.g. generic monitor, Kodak sRGB display, ProPhoto RGB, 8650 4 color photographic, light GCR 360 cmyk US negative proofing). I've been using the generic monitor profile (the default) because don't know what these are. Of course, the documentation is no help Cory --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.515 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 9/2/2003 __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Re: Viewfinder magnification 0.8x vs. 0.7x, why ?
You're looking for a single figue of merit to quantify ability to MF lense on a AF body, and magnification isn't it, because there isn't one. There were differences in the quality of viewfinders with MF cameras and there are with AF cameras. Like many other things, the best correlation between a number and the quality of the viewfinder is the cost of the camera. The highend AF cameras have much better viewfinders. BR Bruce, I am aware of the differences between eyepoint, magnification and coverage. I was specifically asking about modern AF camera that boasts magnification higher than 0.8. You see, what I, personally and humbly, want is an AF camera that allows for reasonable ability to do MF without having to rely on AF confimation light or sound. I think that it would be necessary to have at least 0.8 magnification for that. I think that 0.85 or even 0.9 would be ever better.
Re: OOOOOWWOOOO, the thick plottens,
I knew there was more to this: RE: dslr From: tom Subject: RE: dslr Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 06:47:10 -0700 Ok, we'll say shipped to a dealer somewhere by 9/1/03. What's in it for you? I don't have any old Nikon bodies lying around. tv
Re: *ist-D on Adorama Site
Not so fast there, Mr. Bigdayphoto. The camera has to be in stock and shipping by Labor Day. They're only taking orders now. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The bet. -- Thomas Van Veen Photography www.bigdayphoto.com 301-758-3085
Re: *ist-D on Adorama Site
2nd Prize is 2 PPs. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A program plus.
Re: *ist-D on Adorama Site
I thought it was understood that it was listed for sale, not for order. It's been for order in several places already. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't remember saying anything about dealer's shelves, the bet was: Ok, the bet is that Pentax will have a digital slr for sale by 9/1/03. For sale means it's listed on a major camera retailer's web site. tv -Original Message- From: frank theriault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2003 8:49 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: *ist-D on Adorama Site Hi, Bill, So, tvv gets a PP if the Starkist D is on the shelves within - let's see now, that would be - the next week! Good luck, tom! What do you win, Bill, if the camera ain't there (as I suspect it won't be)? cheers, frank William Robb wrote: --The bet was that it would be on the dealers shelves by Labour Day. Adorama sez they will ship when they get it from the manufacturer. Apparently, they don't have it on the shelves quite yet. William Robb -- Jazz is about capturing the moment -Herbie Hancock
Re: *ist-D on Adorama Site
Yes, a large cookie made to look like a Pentax lens cap. Any thing other than that is wishful thinking. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And, what was the bet about? Frank, how could you forget?? Wasn't there something also along the lines that Bruce was going to have to eat something, er unpalatable? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: *ist-D on Adorama Site
Win what? BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I win. tv -Original Message- From: Kathleen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2003 9:07 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: *ist-D on Adorama Site Just went into Adorama searching out digital cameras with 5+ megapixels, and up popped the *ist-D along with a number of other cameras. The price they have is $1699.95, and if you order it they will ship it as soon as they get it in from the manufacturer (at which time they will charge your credit card). I think this is going to be a great camera, and I wish I could get one. Just a FYI. Kathy L.
Re: AF points point?
Some of us know what we're trying to get before raising the camera to our eye. I know wher I want the subject and set the AF sensor first. I don't fiddle with the camera to figure out which AF point to use. Focus and recompose is better known as Missed Shot when it comes to moving subjects. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was wondering what the point of having selectable AF points might be. In my shooting (hack), I find that it's probably easier to focus and recompose than to compose and then fiddle with the camera to figure out which AF point to use. Perhaps it's a case of using a point or set of points most of the time and being able to select others when the situation arises?
Re: Card reader
Best Buy sells a PNY CF card reader that plugs into a USB port (extension cambe inclued for a rear USB port), for $15. With Win2K or XP you just plug in the reader, plug in a card and the card looks like an additional drive. Works well. BR
Re: salt spray on camera
If you don't see any white residue (salt) on any surfaces, and everything works right, then it's all OK. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, is my stuff safe from salt corrosion or is there something more I need to do?
Re: Selling my Pentax MX, ME and lenses ??
Step this way to the Canon and Nikon Counter, Sir. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have decided to sell my Pentax MX, ME super and lenses, 28mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.7, 75-150 f/4 zoom. Unless somebody can convince me it is a mistake. Why am I selling? Quite simply I want several things these cameras can't deliver. I want an automatic fill-flash system, some kind of vibration reduction so I can handhold shots when I travel and can't use a tripod. So give me your thoughts if you like.
Re: p-TTL: works with pre-flash only?
They probably just set the threshold for the slave high, so it wouldn't be sensitive enough to be tripped by the pre-fire flashes (they are low power flashes). BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I saw an advertisement for a flash that was primarily designed to augment the flash on a point and shoot and had a built in slave that was triggered by the camera's built in flash. The thing that grabbed my attention was that the add' suggested the flash was compatible with camera's using a pre-flash.
Re: semi OT : I got a CD burner but, but, but.... Help!
For a CD to be able to be read by any other CD player, the CD has to be made in disk at once (or what ever Nero calls it, you don't want packet writting mode). The basic concept for doing what you want to do is: create a data CD (should be a menu option) then you drag the files you want copied to the cd using some sort of GUI then you tell the program to start burning the CD After you do it once you'll go, This is easy! BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A friend installed it for me. It is there, I can read stuff from the D; drive that used to be my E: drive, I can read Cd's inserted in the new CD-ROM drive. But the software has me totally befuddled. Friend who installed the drive left town (literally) before we actually got to try ot burn something. I'm an old dos girl, I thought you could just sort of say copy blah blah .jpg e: (wrong) or at least save as from photo deluxe. OF course I want the burner to make CD's to send to people - as a way of displaying my photos. I also thought it would be nice to make screen saver slide shows to sell and/or give to friends. I'm a dunce on this stuff. I thought I could wing it. The software that came with the burner is called NERO (hehe) and AHEAD software. Acrobat is included, in case you don't have it, to read the manual. I got this from office max for virtually nothing -- $70 coming back to me in rebates. So any ideas? I felt a bit less like an idiot when another friend told me of two computer savvy folks of his acquaintance (actually his son and his brother) complained of being quite confused by the software. I don't want to burn music, I don't want to do a video, all I want is to get files on a disk to back up my hard drive, to show people images, etc. I had thought that a cd could be used just like a floppy but if there is software around that will make it behave like that I'd sure like to know. annsan the easily confused
Re: OT: anti-shake CCD from Minolta...
It is workable with digital, because the sensor can be mounted in a fashion that it can be moved a small amount in 2 axis to counter shake. It's much harder to move film the same way because it is part of a roll. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.dimage.minolta.com/a1/flash.html Would this be the future of Minolta or Pentax's solution to IS/VR? Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan _ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: The digital fad?
Around here, folks think of the following as fads: hulla-hoops, 8 track cassetes, dry plate photography and gravity. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: By this definition it is the enthusiasm that is short-lived, not the object that people enthuse over. Your dictionary's definition is consistent with this. Digital photography will probably have a long and distinguished career after it has gone through the initial burst of enthusiasm. In 1999/2000 the e-commerce was a fad. Now it is no longer a fad, but it has not gone away.
Re: Just printed the test pictures from the *ist D...
Don't think so. The original bet was contingent on the DSLR being in stock and avalible in BH by Labor Day. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bruce hits a new low. What was it that he was going to eat if Pentax ever released a digital SLR. Does anyone remember? Talk about having your head in the sand -- or in your ass. Open wide Brucey.
Re: Just printed the test pictures from the *ist D...
Why start off with an apology to the list, instead of doing this off line? You drooling, senile old jerk? BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey, brucey boy. F. U! My appoligies to the list, but this troll's personal attacks have finally gotten to me.
Re: Just printed the test pictures from the *ist D...
Staring, for hours at a time, at the inner tension and geometric precision of a resolution chart always makes me weak in the knees. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: there is know way of getting around the fact that large format is better than medium format in terms of image quality.
Re: *ist D Response from Pentax USA
Rechargeable NiMh AA's work well, and pretty inexpensive to replace when they wear out. You can also keep a set of lithium AA's in the bag for, just in case. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Takes four AA batteries or two CR-V3 lithium-ion batteries This will either quietly kill it off, or they will change it in Revision B and include proprietary rechargeable battery packs. You heard it here first.
Re: recent treasure found at Sal Army - 2 items on ebay 4 u??
http://www.cameraquest.com/nkmatftn.htm http://www.nikonlinks.com/ All you'll need to know. Welcome to the Dark Side. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Told a few of you about my treasure privately - but going public now with my dirty little secret..
Re: Need advice from the wedding photogs-- PLease!
35/2, 50/1.7 and 35-105 on the PZ1. If you can MF well the 35-105 would be most useful, otherwise stick to the AF primes. A zoom is most useful at the reception, but that is also where AF is most useful. Small groups the 50, big groups the 35. Portra UC is the film. Putting the flash on a bracket would help a lot with the shadows. Good luck. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Gang, I've once again unwisely volunteered to do the pictures at the wedding of a friend. He and she have both assured me the ceremony will be low key, etc., etc, but he's also just informed me that almost 40 relatives from her home country of Belize will be here on Saturday-- so I do feel somewhat pressured to make sure everything goes well. I also have just realized that I no longer have a 28-70 2.8 lens, having sold the one I had do to lack of use. Even though I have no other zoom in that range, I have several choices on how to proceed: The PZ 1, with the AF 500ftz so that I can have the best possible range of power and TTL Flash possibilities, and if I go that route, my choices of AF lenses would be: the 24/2 the 35/2, the 50/1.7. The other option I was thinking of was my super program, with the AF 280T, and in that case, I would have my SMC 35-105 zoom, and lots of manual focus primes. I'd still get TTL flash, but not quite as powerful as the 500 ftz. Of course, I could still use the 35-105 on the PZ 1. I guess all this rambling should be condensed to: should I use the zoom lens, or maybe I'd do fine with 3 or 4 primes that I could switch around... I'm thinking the necessity of having to use manual focus should not be a problem, since my subjects won't be moving too fast to not be able to get them focused... Just hoping not to screw this up... Oh, by the way, I'm thinking of using Portra 400 VC instead of NC. Any comments on film, too? Regards, Sid B
Re: Need advice from the wedding photogs-- PLease!
Variable aperture zooms - Robb said he didn't like them because the background exposure changes as you change focal length. True for aperture ring controlled lenses, but not body controlled ones. I set my 28-105/3.5-4.5 to f8, via the body control, and that's what it will always shoots at. BR
Re: Odd request
There are some folks here that I would love to run some medical experiments on with that lens. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You may remember that the SMC 50/1,4 Takumar is somewhat radioactive too.
Re: Pentax goes to war?
Note: 1 - The problem was propulsion; not navigation 2 - The referenced thread dates to 1998 3 - The second referenced thread is about something else entirely. Nothing that I've read here has any substantive facts about what happened or why. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There was extensive discussion on comp.risks. See some: http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/19.91.html#subj7 http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/19.86.html#subj1 T Rittenhouse wrote: Your post reminds me of that ship that went amuck when MS Windows crashed in the auto pilot computer. Why the Navy would use Windows in a crucial navigation system is beyond comprehension.
Re: Pentax goes to war
You need to find some folks from the Royal Navy. The show was about a UK sub. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mike wilson) wrote: I don't know the OM series well at all but I think all of the shutters are electromechanical. The OM-1 shutter is pure mechanical; the only electronics are the match-needle metering. Don't know about the OM-3; the OM-2 and OM-4 are electromechanical, and the OM-10 series are far too cheap and nasty for the taste of the USN. I could ask over on sci.military.naval if people really want to know what they use now; there are some recently ex-USN sub-drivers there. --- John Dallman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Nikon and Pentax AF systems; the plot thickens
I see UPS finally delivered your sense of humor. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, but putting a Pentax-logo strap on a Nikon D100 helps remove the sting of having to use a Nikon DSLR instead of a Pentax. It also seems to improve the whole system by a factor of 32. Believe me, I'm speaking from experience. Photo colors are richer, the lenses have less flare, and there is this... whatchamacallit... better feel to the whole kit. Chasseru D'Images calls it Pou poup or Gran Poo or something like that. Best thing is confusing the hell out of gear watchers who are wondering just what in the hell that guy is carrying - a Pentax branded, Nikon-logo DSLR with a giant silver Pentax FA* 600/4 mounted on it? You gotta be kidding.
Re: Zooms vs. primes: the final word and ultimate wisdom
I think that it is something like practicing scales on a musical instrument: it's an exercise to make you better, and not an end in itself. A photographer named David Hume Kennerly did something like this with a Mamiya 67 with a single wide angle lens (read about him and the book that was the result here: http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0211/dk_intro.html). BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bruce, would forcing a zoom owner to use a prime lens, say 50 mm, for say 2 months, say forcing them to shoot, say one film a week, would help zoom owner improve?
Re: On Manual and Auto Focus
There is one plane of focus. The farther you move from it the more out of focus things are. DOF is determined by what is the maximum amount of blur considered acceptable at the limits of the DOF. So yes, the sharpness is not uniform through the DOF. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Finally, I suppose I am right to assume that sharpness is not uniform across the DOF region.
Re: Manual focus and proud of it (was:Re: On Manual and Auto Focus)
Hold it right there, Bud, and step away from the focus ring! You do this (manual focus thing) for a living, day in day out. This is a highly developed skill that few people have. I think that this is a case where what works specifically for you, won't work the same way for most people. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have found that I now use manual focus 100% of the time on my DSLR, .In the tv industry, broadcast quality cameras with autofocus are unheard of. Manual every time. Even the aperture is left on manual. .02 British pence
Re: On Manual and Auto Focus
Go back and read Beating the 50 lines per mm Resolution Limit (http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/limits.html). In practice it is hard to get 50 lp/mm regardless of how the lens is focused. If you have to take pictures right NOW, you will get more in focus shots with AF then MF. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Once upon a time, I read somewhere on the net (probably the huge third party lenses site) that modern AF systems are optimized for 50 lp/mm. Hence, on that site they would conclude that if you have a fine lens, AF would take away most of its qualities by lousy focusing. I thought of it, and it seems total BS (BackSpace g) to me.
Re: High-end film bodies (WAS: Re: *ist D was not production type:-()
Very little. It's a Pentax list. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: After reading this list for a few years, I sometimes wonder what this list has to do with photography g.
Re: *ist D was not production type :-(
A LF camera isn't very GOOD for underwater photography, is it? I only said good and bad, you had to go into all sorts of hardware issues. You also left out the first part of what I said, which is introducing hardware obscures the main point that good photographers take better pictures than bad ones. I realize as a someone for who English isn't their native language, they may miss some things. Also, as an insecure, defensive Pentax user you have certain knee jerk reactions, but do make an attempt to read what you think you are responding to. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sure, but he would know that it´s difficult, e.g. to use an LF camera for underwater photography or an APS camera if he wanted large prints of landscapes :-)
Re: *ist D was not production type :-(
The last part makes no difference. All that counts is the image. Nobody knows, or cares how you got it. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi On the other hand... A good photographer is a person who gets good photographs - and without getting disliked by his victims.
Re: *ist D was not production type :-(
Don't worry Lon, if you are as old as Tom then you have the knowledge of the ages and can use any gear you desire. If you are younger, then you have to take a written test of Tom's (he doesn't care about a portfolio: only theory counts) to get permission to use auto capable cameras. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tom, I use this kind of logic to justify shooting nothing newer than a SuperProgram, but yesterday I fooled around with my wife's ZX-L and experienced a tad of envy. Some of the touches on the newer cameras, even one as basic as the -L, are really nice. I believe they can help capture the instinctive grab shots that tend to pass me by.
Re: *ist D was not production type :-(
I get Grandfathered into the Knowledge of the Ages, Old Crock Photographers Union in September when I turn 50. I don't need your test. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brucey thought he was kidding grin. 1. How big is an f-stop 2. How fast does your shutter open and close when set to 125. 3. What f-stop do you have to use to have everything from 8 feet to infinity sharp in your photography. 4. What f-stop do you need to get proper exposure with a #5 clear flash bulb at 7 feet. 5. How accurate is the Sunny-16 rule for exposure.
Re: Lens compatibility in perspective (WAS: Re: D-ist blurb in AmericanPhotomagazine)
An advanced Pentax user is Pål Jensen. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Could you please define what an advanced Pentax user is, and do you include yourself in that category ?
Re: Lens compatibility in perspective (WAS: Re: D-ist blurb in AmericanPhotomagazine)
An advanced Pentax user is someone who has their Pentax gear under glass as museum pieces, and takes pictures with some other brand of cameras. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Could you please define what an advanced Pentax user is, and do you include yourself in that category ?
Re: *ist D was not production type :-(
We don't use any Korea War era fighter planes in combat, and for good reasons: they can't do what modern fighters can, no matter whose flying it. (There is also no reason to think that pilots of yesteryear (and photographers too) were better than the current ones. ) Same thing with cameras. Many pictures of today, of similar subjects, look different than 50 year old ones, because of newer camera technology. The old, a great photographer with a box camera can take better pictures than a Bozo with an auto wunder, obscures the major point that good photographers take better pictures than bad ones. Good photographers with good equipment will take better pictures than good photographers with bad equipment. You like old stuff? Fine I do to, but I use the new stuff when I know I'll get better results with it. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In fact, cameras are in some ways more like airplanes than cars as there are still a lot of 20, 30, or 50 year old ones still in service.
Re: *ist D was not production type :-(
Production life doesn't equal owned/used life. You don't expect your car to stop working when the manufacturer changes models do you? BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The problem with plastic shells is that they tend to crack when aged. But then again, the 6 month cycle for digital cameras should not pose any problem.
Re: *ist D was not production type :-(
The Super A has a chrome plated plastic top cover. It is not a metal sheet over plastic. It still wears much better than the silver paint that the industry has gone to (cheaper to paint than plate) BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perhaps something like the Super A where the top cover is plastic with metal sheet on top?
Re: The Pentax Lens Look
The Nikkor is also supposed to have some vignetting issues wide open. There are reasons why I have the 180/2.8 (good wide open and much smaller and lighter). BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Also, that particular test shows that Nikkor was very soft at the long end wide open. On the otherhand, the sharpness of the Pentax did not improve much even when stopped down. Judging by that test alone, I was disappointed by the fact that the Nikkor did not blow away the old Pentax (I was hoping more).
Re: SV: specul- ist -ations
From people who have done scanning (very high quality ones) and now do direct digital capture, they say that a 18meg direct digital file is equal in quality to a 50 meg (8 bit) scan. Digital capture does not directly compare to scan resolutions. Film introduces all sorts of crap that imaging devices do not. After almost 4 years with a 2400 dpi film scanner and recently getting a 4000 dpi one I can understand this 18 = 50 comment. resolution isn't everything. You have to stop looking at numbers and start looking at pictures. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Today the scanners seem to be reaching a sound wall - of 5000 ppi. I have figured that 35mm analoge photography can reach what is equivalent to appr. 7500 ppi (100 lppm). When digital cameras reach - let's say 6000ppi and fps of 8 shots per second at a competing price level(!) - the 35mm photography film will die. At least for the pro-market.
Re: ouch
I hope you got through the wedding OK. With all the moving around and hauling gear I don't know how you could pull it off without a good assistant or two. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I severely sprained my ankle last night. The x-ray didn't show a break, but that doesn't help the fact that I can barely walk. Of course, I have a wedding today. Wish me, and especially #7, luck! BTW, the x-ray was a chemical process, she had to add some fixer while I was there. Like last time, I took a whiff of the film and this time I could tell it was a chemical process. tv
Re: Pro talk (was Re: Leica R9/R8 digital back.)
The biggest problem with electronics and cameras is moisture. At some point in the production live of the F3, Nikon went to conformal coating for the circuit boards. This seals the electronics better than sealing the body. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: don't know about f4, but f3 is not sealed, afaik.
Re: freedom-schmeedom
OK, this is it, the one time I'm going to agree with Frank. I have a son who is old enough to be in the military. The anguish that a parent goes through when a child is hurt is deeper than any other. Politics have nothing to do with the trauma to Bob and Aaron's personal world. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bob's son Aaron is lying in a hospital somewhere, wondering if he's going to lose a foot, and you guys get into this discussion. Shame on both of you! I'm not impressed. This really ain't the time... -frank
Re: Digital vs. film again (was Re: I Am Pissed!)
On the Nikon list it was an issue until people started using DSLRs in large numbers several years ago. There are too many working photographers on the list, who are not PJ's, using digital, for this to be an issue any more. Also, because there are so many more Nikon and Canon users than Pentax users, there are more specialized mailing lists. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oh, Yes! You are right - didn't think of that! I often wonder, BTW - if other mail list (Nikon, Contax etc.) are like that...
Re: lack of *ist-d reviews
Western marketing mindset it to get interest going with tidbit, product flashes. Perhaps the Eastern mindset is to not reveal anything until it is finished. Other Japanese companies are much more Western than Pentax. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just finished reading a review of Olympus' E-1 on The Imaging resource's web site. It was a barely working pre production model but the reviewer hoped to have a production model to test by August. Does anyone else find it strange that there have been no reviews of the *ist-D given that it is supposed to be on sale in less then 2 months from now. BUTCH Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself. Hermann Hess (Demian)
Re: Digital vs. film again (was Re: I Am Pissed!)
He knows everything. He read it in the spec sheet. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: Caveman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] There's a nice experiment you can do. Ask the lab guy to enlarge for you a 645 frame, with the enlarger lens *slightly out of focus*. It will produce similar results to digital - No, it won't. i.e. doesn't have the resolution, but no grain either. You really should limit your comments to something you know about. tv
Re: Digital vs. film again (was Re: I Am Pissed!)
But he's oh so cute and clever. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Personally, I find your attitude annoying, and your opinions ignorant.
Re: Digital vs. film again (was Re: I Am Pissed!)
It's in the spec sheet! I don't have to look at anything to know what you see! BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . In this case, it is the theory of image sampling and reconstruction.
Re: Brucey's theory on practice (Re: Digital vs. film again (wasRe: I Am Pissed!)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's the theory on the base of which digital cameras are designed. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Where did you read that ? I suggest you use a hardhat for the next round of jumpings.
Re: Leica R9/R8 digital back
There was Charlie Rose show (PBS) a few weeks ago with 4 or 5 photographers who were in Iraq. At one point the discussion got onto equipment and they all shot digital and multiple digital backups. At this point they are as familiar with the durability of the digital gear as they were with film gear, and wouldn't appear to think they need a film back up. I think that a high energy EMP bomb would have them concerned about thing other than cameras. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Although almost all the photos to come out of the war in Iraq were probably digital, I wonder how many photographers had (mechanical) film cameras in their bags as backups. There was a lot of talk about the possible use of high energy EMP bombs that would destroy sensitive electronic equipment. We know now (or at least we're pretty sure!) that these weren't used, but if they had been they would have fried journalist's electronic cameras (film and digital) as much as Iraqi computer systems. I'd bet a lot of photographer's had an FM2 or something just in case.
Re: Leica R9/R8 digital back
The problem for photographers is that they are in a very competitive field. They are always afraid that the next shooter will be able to offer something that they can't. For news it timeliness and visual impact (color). It would be much easier to shoot color film and send it back to where ever the lab is, than to run a whole digital darkroom/transmission center. It's a lot more gear than was needed for developing BW in the hotel sink. The thing is, they know that that's what you have to do if that's what you want to do for a living. They aren't doing it because digital is cool. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: the guy in the Pop Photo article was much more worried about dust-related failures than anything. one of his three digital bodies died (cause not stated), and one of his solar chargers (from overheating). apparently, he took a stock Mac Powerbook too and not a ruggedized one.
Re: Leica R9/R8 digital back
Tempest approved computers weren't rugged in the sense of being able to be subjected to extremes of shock, vibration and temperature. They were designed for very low EMI radiation and used for working on classified material. They were very expensive and for classified computing it was cheaper, in the long run, to screened rooms to put regular PCs into. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Friday, June 27, 2003, at 06:34 PM, Peter Alling wrote: I've never seen a ruggedized Mac, http://online.sfsu.edu/~hl/c.Tempest.Mac.html http://www.wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,57961,00.html http://digitaltigers.com/flyingtiger.shtml http://www.wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,51670,00.html
Re: Leica R9/R8 digital back
This was true for the 10 year period of 1987 - 1997, but there's been almost no advance in the last 3 years. Maybe some catching up by Pentax, but Canon and Nikon haven't come out with anything better. RD $ is going into digital. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: the useful life of the body is about 3-5 years. that is how long it takes roughly for a superior AF and metering system to be available at the same or lower cost of the body you have now.
Re: SV: Prime portrait lenses - which one?
This is why the people skills of a photographer are very important for things like wedding photography. Every bride has a concept of what a bride should look like, but doesn't realize that the marketed bride image is that of professional models. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Non professional subjects tend to be intimidated by large equipment.
Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
The Leica says Leica on the front. The Leica uses Zeiss lenses. When you understand what these two things mean the comparison is over. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, we seem to be doing a lot of comparison with the MZS to Nikon or Canon. But take a look at the Leica R9.
Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
No, I know working photographers who just prefer a Leica rangefinder over anything else. There is also the issue of the look of Leitz lenses. Many people who have the money for a Leica have no need to brag about how much they have. I think it's really envy on the part of the have-nots. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a Leica is for bragging rights about how seriously i take my photography.
Re: Dumb Q - Pentax FA/F Lenses on *ist D?
All of photojournalism is not an exception. A tripod is just a tool, and should be used for appropriate conditions and subjects. It may be just the thing for what you shoot, but for me it's useless 99.9% of the time. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Give me a break Bruce there are always exceptions. A tripod is still the photographers best friend unless you like blurry pics..
Re: That AGFA competition
Only witless reparte is appropriate for this subject here. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Would someone send me the link or info? I've been barely able to even skim pdml for about a month .. sorry if you guys were expecting more witty reparte on language usuage! annsan
Re: MX Advance Lever Question
There is something wrong with the wind mechanism. That top disk is supposed to be tight. On my trash/mule MX I tightened it as much as I could with out snapping it off and it made no difference the the feel of the wind lever. (left hand thread for anyone else fooling with it) BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey everyone, Playing with an MX. I got into photography with a ZX-M so I am a bit spoiled by its automation so I have what is really a question about any mechanical camera. I was fiddling with the MX when the film advance lever lost its recoil and the film counter disk above the lever stuck and would jump erratically with movement of the lever. I realized that this occurred when I had hand tightened the rotating disk on top of the film advance lever. So, it was pretty obvious that this disk was overtightened and screwing up everything. I had to fashion a paper clip tool to loosen the disk and all was well. So, my question is how loose should the disk on top of the film advance lever be? I ask this because it seems to spin loose quite easily and I just spin it back with my finger. It's not a big deal but why did the engineers design something to be so finicky? Thanks for the mechanical and historical information.
Re: What were the 1st and 2nd tier bodies from K to start of autofocus?
The top K body was probably the K2DMD. The MX and ME are very different types of cameras, but similar in terms of material and quality. I think that they sold for around the same price, so I wouldn't rank one above the other. Although the SP wasn't the theoretical top of the line, it was probably the practical top of the line, because not many stores carried the LX. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm kind of confused about that. I know that the K-series was ranked K2 KX KM K1000. The M series was next, with MX leading the list. I assume ME-Super was second tier here, although both have advantages the other lacks. Was the LX introduced before or after the Program bodies? Was the Super Program, at one time, the high end Pentax body?
Re: Lens Mount Progress
You can't test one camera to determine the designed MTBF of the shutter. For a manufacturer, a shutter designed for 100,000 cycles means that very few would fail before 100,000 cycles. It would all depend on how similar one shutter would be in terms of manufacturing/process tolerance and what percentage of failures before 100,000 cycles was deemed acceptable. Figure that mode of the failure distribution curve was closer to 125,000 cycles. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How difficult would it be to test the mean time of a shutter, it either survives 100 000 cycles or it dosn't.
Re: Quote of the Day
Throat diameter is just one thing. What Canon did was to system engineer an entire SLR system from a fresh start. This means that folks sat down, figured out what they wanted the system to do and then figured out the best way to do it. They determined that electronic control of the lens was best for what they wanted. Once they knew the largest diameter they would probably ever need to optics, they included all the electrical contacts they might need. From this, they were able to figure out what the lens mount diameter had to be. (Standard system engineering practice.) Pentax didn't keep cobbling their mount, they changed from screw to K, with no backwards mechanical compatibility to use a K mount lens on a screw mount body. Pentax and Nikon have been enhancing the control/command, lens/body interface to add new functions. The problem is that they've have made a series of changes, sometimes taking different directions (Nikon AIS). They are classic evolved systems, rather than engineered ones. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What was it about the old Canon mount? Too narrow? Too far from (or too near to) the film plane? Have Nikon and Pentax been able to keep cobbling along because their mount dimensions were more generous? Somewhere this must have been written about, but I've never seen an article or discussion. -Lon
Re: Did you hear the one about Bob Shell?
Shell's wife had enough of the whole thing: http://www.roanoke.com/roatimes/news/story150953.html BR
