Re: Any diff smc vs smc-m (aka k vs m)
I wrote: > Furthermore, there's no documented smc difference between K-series and > M-series. Pentax claimed that when turning from M-series to A-series, smc > was applied to all surfaces (including glass-to-glass ones), while K and M > only had smc on glass-to-air surfaces. I was wrong. The claim of applying SMC on all surfaces, including glass-to-glass, was made on occasion of launching the SMC Pentax lens line (as as opposed to SMC Takumars, which only had SMC on glass-to-air surfaces). Sorry for this mistake, and thanks to Andre for reminding me how things were going. > However, I doubt a standard smc can be of any help on glass-to-glass > surfaces, as multicoating is essential when refraction index changes a lot > (and must be accorded to that). A smc designed for glass-to-air will be of > little help (and possibly will be worse than nothing) if refraction indexes > of the two cemented glass elements are close each other (and I guess a glass > should be closer to another glass type than to air). And Pentax never > claimed smc variations for different needs (although it would not suprise me > to discover that they did that without claiming it). Above comments remain valid, and are more on topic of this K/M discussion. I have to add that during the years SMC was changed, as you can spot different color reflections on lenses (even on lenses of the same type, not only comparing different lenses). Asahi never documented such changes in coating quality, but they occurred. It is generally believed that A-series lenses usually feature improved contrast over their M-series counterparts. Dario Bonazza www.aohc.it
Re: FA 85mm 1.4 and *istD
Kevin, Another sample image here: http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p14e.htm (click on the portrait to get the original image file) Dario Bonazza - Original Message - From: "Kevin Waterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 5:16 AM Subject: FA 85mm 1.4 and *istD > Will this lens work with the istD? > > Kind regards > Kevin > > -- > __ > (_ \ > _) ) > | / / _ ) / _ | / ___) / _ ) > | | ( (/ / ( ( | |( (___ ( (/ / > |_| \) \_||_| \) \) > Kevin Waterson > Port Macquarie, Australia >
Re: FA 85mm 1.4 and *istD
Kevin, You'll find examples of the quality it can deliver with the *ist D here: http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p13e.htm Dario Bonazza - Original Message - From: "Kevin Waterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 5:16 AM Subject: FA 85mm 1.4 and *istD > Will this lens work with the istD? > > Kind regards > Kevin > > -- > __ > (_ \ > _) ) > | / / _ ) / _ | / ___) / _ ) > | | ( (/ / ( ( | |( (___ ( (/ / > |_| \) \_||_| \) \) > Kevin Waterson > Port Macquarie, Australia >
Re: Any diff smc vs smc-m (aka k vs m)
K-lenses were usually bigger and M-lenses were usually smaller (compared to the equivalent K-series lens). Some K-series are among the best built lenses ever, so if any manufacturing improvements happened, they were to the purpose of saving money. Furthermore, there's no documented smc difference between K-series and M-series. Pentax claimed that when turning from M-series to A-series, smc was applied to all surfaces (including glass-to-glass ones), while K and M only had smc on glass-to-air surfaces. However, I doubt a standard smc can be of any help on glass-to-glass surfaces, as multicoating is essential when refraction index changes a lot (and must be accorded to that). A smc designed for glass-to-air will be of little help (and possibly will be worse than nothing) if refraction indexes of the two cemented glass elements are close each other (and I guess a glass should be closer to another glass type than to air). And Pentax never claimed smc variations for different needs (although it would not suprise me to discover that they did that without claiming it). Bye, Dario Bonazza - Original Message - From: "jmb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 6:05 AM Subject: Re: Any diff smc vs smc-m (aka k vs m) > William, > > According to Peter Spiro web page I just read the difference is > due to superior coating (smc .ne. smc) and improved > manufacturing process. > > K lenses and M lenses function identically. > > > > William Robb > > > > John >
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Lasse wrote: > I noticed an unusually high number of Pentax 67 and 645 items for sale on a Swedish second hand online store yesterday. > > Is this a sign of the times? Yes, I believe so. > And in that case, what does the sign tell us? That if you are interested in that stuff, and wait a little more, you'll pay even less. Dario Bonazza
OT: worlds around
The way we call "our worlds" dates back to Columbus era (nothing to do with iron curtain or economy), so Sven is right and others are wrong. Dario Bonazza - Original Message - From: "keller.schaefer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 11:47 AM Subject: AW: The morality of taking a photograph > There is (and was) the 'Old World' Europe, including Russia (!) and the 'New > World' America to which so many people emigrated in the last three > centuries. To this nomenclature the term '3rd world' was added as we know it > now. 'Old/New world' is far older than the iron curtain... > > Sven
Subject must have some meaning...
Please, when your (or somebody else's) comments are bringing discussion into a rather different topic, please change subject of your message, so that anybody can get an idea about which messages are likely to be of some interest to them, and follow them accordingly. Aren't you seeing how many different threads are spreading within that "morality" title? Can you truly follow mixed discussions this way? Thanks to everybody. Dario Bonazza (I already asked this in the past, and it's time for asking again)
Re: What I would buy today ...
I believe that below 3 MP, pixel count was the single most important factor when thinking of good blow ups. Today, when serious compact digicams are in the 4 MP area or more, pixel count is no longer the main factor to look at. A good 4MP is better than an average 5-6 MP, also when dealing with big enlargements. Dario Bonazza - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 10:30 PM Subject: Re: What I would buy today ... > Graywolf wrote: > >Mp's are not the only thing to look at, nor even the most important thing. > > Maybe, but when doing blow ups it becomes important. > > Marnie aka Doe >
Re: What I would buy today ...
Yes and no. If you have a very good picture like those allowed by the best digicams around (let's say 4 MP average), you can then easy interpolate it up to 8-10 MP and still get a nice pixel-free blow up. That's not theory, I saw many excellent examples of that. If you have a so-so 6 MP picture, you can hardly get a picture of the same quality of above mentioned, and also interpolation won't work so good. Ciao, Dario (so sorry) Bonazza - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 10:30 PM Subject: Re: What I would buy today ... > Graywolf wrote: > >Mp's are not the only thing to look at, nor even the most important thing. > > Maybe, but when doing blow ups it becomes important. > > Marnie aka Doe >
Re: way OT: CD/LP was A conversation with Noritsu.
JCO, so do you see we can agree? I'm fully with you on this topic. Dario (yawn) Bonazza - Original Message - From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 10:05 PM Subject: RE: way OT: CD/LP was A conversation with Noritsu. > Noisier I would assume. If they are going to increase > the number of pixels, they should increase the sensor > size along with it. Thats one of the reasons I lust > after a 10Mpixel full frame sensor but the cost is > out of reach by far at this point > > -- -- >J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com > -- -- > > -Original Message- > From: alex wetmore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 3:47 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: way OT: CD/LP was A conversation with Noritsu. > > > On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > > I just read somewhere that Sony ( or maybe it > > was minolta?) has a new digicam ( not slr) > > with 8Mpixel sensor! > > They do. All of the sample photographs released so far have been > pretty terrible though. They are producing an 8mp sensor that is the > same size as the old 5mp sensor and it shows in the quality of the > photographs. > > http://www.dpreview.com has lots of threads on this new camera if you > look in the Sony Forum. > > alex >
Re: way OT: CD/LP was A conversation with Noritsu.
The F717 doesn't impress me so much. Images are sharp (sharper than those taken by the *ist D, which is not so difficult), but noisy (=grainy) also at 100 ISO and too flat. Color balance is good, but the *ist D is better on this respect. I didn't buy the F717 and I won't buy the F828. Dario (very critical this late evening) Bonazza - Original Message - From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 10:05 PM Subject: Re: way OT: CD/LP was A conversation with Noritsu. > Yep ... the F828 ... should be v-e-r-r-r-y interesting to see how well it > works. Its predecessors, the F717, was very highly regarded. > > "J. C. O'Connell" wrote: > > > I just read somewhere that Sony ( or maybe it > > was minolta?) has a new digicam ( not slr) > > with 8Mpixel sensor! > > > > Looks like 6Mpixel is not the leveling off > > point in consumer models after all >
Re: way OT: CD/LP was A conversation with Noritsu.
The big mistake some makers are doing now (especially Fujifilm and Sony) is increasing pixel count (even more than truly neded) without increasing sensor size accordingly. More pixel in the same size mean worse S/N (signal/noise) ratio, hence grainy images. In other words, they're getting rid of one of the main advantages of digital vs. film. Silly, very very silly. Dario Bonazza - Original Message - From: "alex wetmore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 9:46 PM Subject: RE: way OT: CD/LP was A conversation with Noritsu. > On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > > I just read somewhere that Sony ( or maybe it > > was minolta?) has a new digicam ( not slr) > > with 8Mpixel sensor! > > They do. All of the sample photographs released so far have been > pretty terrible though. They are producing an 8mp sensor that is the > same size as the old 5mp sensor and it shows in the quality of the > photographs. > > http://www.dpreview.com has lots of threads on this new camera if you > look in the Sony Forum. > > alex >
Re: Enablement needed
David, In spite of my strong belief that in general digital is going to surpass film quality, and, most of all, adding so many new advantages that film will decline very quickly, in this specific case my advice is not to switch from MZ-S to *ist D. The *ist D won't give you the same quality you can get with the MZ-S and those fine lenses you own. I tried all of them on the *ist D: at slow ISO settings they don't even approach the quality you can get from them on a good slide film. Things can be different at high ISO settings, where digital SLR sensors (*ist D included) are so much better than film. This advice is very specific considering MZ-S vs.*ist D (combining the so-so image quality of the *ist D and the so-so behaviour of those Pentax lenses on it). Sorry, I wish I could give you a different advice and I'm sure many folks won't agree with me, but I'm not going to switching from MZ-S to *ist D for that same reason. Also, my answer could be different when considering different makes. Dario Bonazza - Original Message - From: "David Madsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax Discuss List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 9:28 PM Subject: Enablement needed > I am feeling a bit week, but not quite broken. I am in lust with the *istD, > but do not have enough money. My question for the owners of this fine > camera is, should I sell my film equipment to purchase the D? I have an > MZ-S, FA 100mm f2.8 macro, FA* 85mm f1.4, and an FA 50mm f1.4. I also have > a Mamiya C330f with 80mm f2.8 lens. Should I sell this stuff to go digital? > I obviously like fast lenses. My primary subject is portrait/people > photography. I would appreciate any input all of you may have. > > David Madsen > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.davidmadsen.com >
OT - Re: Scratching LP's ( not so much, since discussion is getting back into Pentax and photography)
In those early days (pre-1980), many LP's were already scratched (and well undulated) when bought new. Do you remember? At that time LP's were not considered high-end stuff, most of them were manufactured like cheap consumer stuff and were sold in supermarkets and stores here and there, so it was not necessary to be drunk for getting that tick... tick... tick... tick... typical sound of the 70's I think :-) Furthermore, I was a schoolboy then, and it was usual to lend and borrow LP's. Some friends used to handle them like any equipment most boys use to handle (i.e. little care). So all of my LP's went more or less scratched very quick. Today's LP's are likely to be better built and cared, since they're targeted to connoisseurs. Then, current prices for analog music equipment are like those for full-frame digital SLR, while proces for good quality digital music equipment are like those for midrange film compacts. Not to speak of quality of turntables, heads, amplifiers and especially speakers i could use then. The best I could afford at that time was a Micro+Shure+Rotel+Altec hi-fi set you'll probably scorn today. Okay, it was big improvement over my Superscope campact cassette player, but pure litter for today's vinyl purists. However, they still work now, long after my first CD player (Technics, bought in 1982) left me five years ago after a lightning hit my home. Generally speaking, the LP makes no more sense at all to me. However, I'm happy after knowing that Thorens is still alive. Any loss is a loss for everybody, even those who immediately appreciated CD's and don't care so much about LP's (like me). So we can expect Leica will survive this dramatic change after all (to great surprise of pragmatic folks like me), but please don't expect Pentax will survive making film cameras. The only hope for them is getting stronger in the digital arena. So be happy with your LP's, buy expensive Leicas, and let other be happy with their CD's and Pentax digicams (as soon as they'll improve a bit further). Dario - Original Message - From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 10:07 PM Subject: RE: Scratching LP's (was: Digital/Film body pricing (was: A conversation with Noritsu.)) > theres only one problem with your decision, CDs > dont just sound as good. Hardly minor. Scratching > is rare if ever unless you handle them drunk... > > -- -- >J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com > -- -- > > -Original Message- > From: Dario Bonazza 2 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 3:04 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Scratching LP's (was: Digital/Film body pricing (was: A > conversation with Noritsu.)) > > > I bought my last LP back in 1981 or 1982. Only CD's from then to date and I > won't regret that one moment. > That's because, despite maximum care, the first time you get the tiniest > scratch, the supposed HQ LP superiority is gone forever. Not to speak of the > boring brushing and the like. > > Just my opinion, of course. Anybody's free to play with LP's, carbon > brushes, antistatic gizmos, dust & scratches at their own leisure forever. I > won't join the LP brotherhood. > > Dario Bonazza > > > - Original Message - > From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 8:35 PM > Subject: RE: Digital/Film body pricing (was: A conversation with Noritsu.) > > > > WRONG about LPs. When using high quality LPs played back > > on a high end phono rig (several thousand dollars), LPS > > BLOW AWAY even the best CDs. That is why all the studios > > no longer record in 16 bit digital audio and SACD and DVD-A > > have been developed and released. There is CURRENTLY a > > major revival in LP reissues because they sound BETTER > > than CDs. > > > > -- > -- > >J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com > > -- > -- > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 9:35 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Digital/Film body pricing (was: A conversation with Noritsu.) > > > > > > On digital cameras > >
Re: Origin of K mount name
Paul Stenquist wrote: > I was a screwmount user when the K series camera was introduced. I > remember we refered to it as the K camera with a bayonet mount. It was > only later that I heard it described as the K mount. The mount was named > after the camera. Hi Paul, Did you work at AOC design dept. at that time? If so, OK, your info will solve the problem. If not, why your common way of speaking at that time should be the answer to the question? Asahi literature published in 1975 always speaks of K-series cameras and K-bayonet (just checked my literature collection). Ciao, Dario Bonazza
Re: Origin of K mount name
Names are necessary. Some names have a meaning, while others are just names (long after their original meaning is lost). Italian name Bruno means "dark haired", but my friend Bruno is blond haired. Bruno is an Italian name rather appealing to German people, most of which are blond haired. Mauro means "Moor", but my friend Mauro has white skin and red hair, looking like a Viking. After the original Asahi Pentax (aka AP), Asahi manufactured an improved version called the "S" (likely meaning Super), then the "K" went out (meaning it featured 1/1000 sec.). Then, new models were called respectively S2, S3, S1 (H2, H3, H1 in USA, after Heiland/Honeywell), being known as the S-series. Why S? Maybe because of their screw mount, maybe not. However, I find S-series to be a good designation for screw mount cameras. IMO, both the AP and the K are S-series cameras too. Then SV and S1a (H3v and H1a in USA) were S-series too. And then there was the Spotmatic and its many followers (SPII, SPIIa, SPF, SP500, SP1000, SL, ES, ESII). Were they more S-series or were they SP-series? That's pure matter of opinion. And then the K-revolution happened. Were the K-series named after the K-bayonet or the other way round? I believe we will never get a final answer to this question. Maybe K is related to some bayonet shape (although I can see very little if any K shape in that bayonet), or maybe K stands for King of bayonets. Who knows? So the K2 was named that way because it couldn't be just K, or maybe after the Hymalaian K2: a good name for a camera then at the top of the range (maybe the LX had to be called the Everest at the beginning :-) Do many of you know that the LX prototype was called the AP for some time? I have pictures of it. Fortunately, that name was replaced by LX prior to announcing it. Did you notice how often Pentax used the X too (KX, MX, LX, SFX, ZX-series)? Apparently the X is one of the best appreciated letters for industrial products. It could be because any unnamed new project can be designated Project X, then X becomes the true name of the project. Or it could be the X sounds well: mysterious and appealing. Or maybe both reasons combined. You can replace the * in the *ist and *ist D with an X and get an Xist (a camera which previously didn't exist :-) What's the meaning of all that mess I wrote above? You can just play with words at your leisure, get some meaning and leave some meaning aside. Official explanations can be found and spread after you find good (and sometimes awful) names for products. Ciao, Dario - Original Message - From: "Mark Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 2:08 PM Subject: Re: Origin of K mount name > Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Well, I long wondered why the K2 was so named until I learned of > >> the existence of the K. > > > >Well, Mark, I still don't follow your logic. Sure, there was a > >screwmount Pentax K, but so wasn't there also a Pentax S, too, etc. > >Why would Pentax have singled out the Pentax K (and not, say, the > >Pentax S) for the name for the K-mount and the first K bodies? > > Well, that *is* my point, actually. I'm wondering why they picked the > letter K rather than something else. > > -- > Mark Roberts > Photography and writing > www.robertstech.com >
Re: Nikon to stop selling film cameras in Japan...
OK: So they only deny they will stop selling film compact cameras in Japan. However, they're not denying a stop to the development of new film cameras. However, I supposed we were not discussing the precise nature of what make and kind of equipment is going to be discontinued and when. I suspect we were discussing the trend and how quick it is. Also, I don't suppose next week you won't be able to buy film. My opinion is that film range will be reduced and cost will raise more and more as its production runs will decrease (over the next years, not before this coming midnight). As long as film will be sold in substantial quantities worldwide, manufacturers will continue making it. That's the same with tripods, VHS tapes, jeans, apples and oranges. Dario - Original Message - From: "Jostein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 3:49 PM Subject: Re: Nikon to stop selling film cameras in Japan... > Hmmm... > The wording makes me think the word "compact" is very significant in their > statement. > > Jostein > - > Pictures at: http://oksne.net > ----- > - Original Message - > From: "Dario Bonazza 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 3:12 PM > Subject: Re: Nikon to stop selling film cameras in Japan... > > > > They write: > > > > "Our Japanese photo dealers will continue selling Nikon film compact > > cameras." > > > > So they only deny they will stop selling film equipment in Japan. However, > > they're not denying a stop to the development of new film cameras. > > > > Dario > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Mark Stringer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 3:01 PM > > Subject: RE: Nikon to stop selling film cameras in Japan... > > > > > > > http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/news/2003/1113_e_03.htm > > > > > > Nikon says it ain't so > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Sylwester Pietrzyk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 5:11 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Nikon to stop selling film cameras in Japan... > > > > > > > > > Well, it just happened: > > > > > > in german: > > > > > > http://www.finanztreff.de/ftreff/news.htm?id=21174221&&r=0&sektion=branchen&; > > > awert=&u=0&k=0 > > > > > > or translated: > > > > > > http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/urltrurl?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.finan > > > > > > ztreff.de%2Fftreff%2Fnews.htm%3Fid%3D21174221%26%26r%3D0%26sektion%3Dbranche > > > n%26awert%3D%26u%3D0%26k%3D0&lp=de_en&tt=url > > > > > > -- > > > Best Regards > > > Sylwek > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: ME-F vs ME Super
Some years ago I bought one secondhand for my wife, to replace her ME Super and adding the focus confirmation bonus (so much valued by her due to eyesight problems). It ended up with my wife asking me to get back her ME Super because she couldn't afford to change batteries almost each time she had to shoot, with the risk of not having them handy when necessary. At that time I suspected a faulty camera, but then I was reported the same problem by other ME-F owners. I don't have an answer for that, I can just see two possibilities: 1 - It's a common fault of the ME-F. Many ME-F can break that way, but probably not all of them. 2 - It's the ME-F way of being. In that case, maybe the AF circuitry is too much power consuming for the type of batteries employed, even just for focus confirmation, since AF power was supplied by dedicated in-lens batteries. We can make a poll here. Anybody has been using the ME-F for some time? How much a battery set usually lasted? Bye, Dario - Original Message - From: "Kostas Kavoussanakis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 2:32 PM Subject: Re: ME-F vs ME Super > On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Dario Bonazza 2 wrote: > > > The problem is that the ME-F eats batteries like peanuts. > > Even without using the AF? Any ideas why? > > Thanks, > > Kostas >
Re: ME-F vs ME Super
The problem is that the ME-F eats batteries like peanuts. Ciao, Dario - Original Message - From: "Kostas Kavoussanakis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 1:51 PM Subject: ME-F vs ME Super > > Simple question this time: is the ME-F an ME Super with add-ons? Do > the add-ons hinder when not using the dedicated AF lens, or can one > forget about them and just bear a bit more weight? > > Thanks, > Kostas >
Updated: *ist D vs. EOS 300D
More picture details here: http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p7e.htm I added crops from in-camera TIFF and RAW to TIFF files. Then I added crops from shadow areas in the big pictures at different ISO settings. Bye, Dario Bonazza
Re: And now: the *ist D vs. the EOS 300D!
William Robb wrote: > I'd like to add that now lens designers have another medium to keep in mind > when they design optics, that being the computer monitor. Of course, mostly because it's a powerful way of inspecting pictures. NOT because it can drive to grossly wrong information as recent discussion tries to suggest. Pictures looking perfect on screen can be so so when printed (the other way round is also true) for many different reasons I won't discuss here (mostly dealing with color balance, brigthness and contrast, due to unproper equipment setting). However, when comparing two similar pictures on a properly setup monitor+printer, the best one on screen is usually the best one on paper. > I suspect that lenses that do well there won't do so well on paper. Your suspect is legitimate, but I'm afraid it's pure speculation. Most important, it was not confirmed in practice. When comparing the *ist D to the S2 Pro, the best pictures as seen on screen were also the best when printed on A3+ paper, looking not only more detailed, but also more natural. Around A4, you'll still prefer the best pictures on screen, but also the worse among them could be acceptable. Below A4, you can hardly find any visible difference, because of the small format. Apart from good hopes and love for Pentax (which I also share with you), how can anybody think that a roughly pixelated curve can match better the analog look and look better on paper than a smooth one? That's complete nonsense to me. Dario Bonazza
Re: Oh, this is rich
So we now know where Sigma copied the lens code from. Dario - Original Message - From: "Christian Skofteland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 4:17 AM Subject: Re: Oh, this is rich > I originally commented that it identified my Sigma 300/4 as a FA* 300/4.5. > It least it was closer in that regard! > > Christian Skofteland > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > - Original Message - > From: "Joseph Tainter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "pdml" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 9:29 PM > Subject: Oh, this is rich > > > > Yesterday I tried my Tokina AT-X AF 400 f5.6 on the *ist D. Well, Pentax > > Photo Browser identifies the lens as "smc Pentax-F 35-70mmF3.5-4.5" and > > the focal length as 400 mm. Earth calling Pentax > > > > Joe > > >
Re: Oh, this is rich
So we now know where Tokina copied the lens code from. Dario - Original Message - From: "Joseph Tainter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "pdml" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 3:29 AM Subject: Oh, this is rich > Yesterday I tried my Tokina AT-X AF 400 f5.6 on the *ist D. Well, Pentax > Photo Browser identifies the lens as "smc Pentax-F 35-70mmF3.5-4.5" and > the focal length as 400 mm. Earth calling Pentax > > Joe >
Re: Digtial back for R Leicas
Sorry Steve, it's old news. It was announced late June. http://www.dpreview.com/news/0306/03062502leicadigitalr9.asp Dario (so much relaxed after testing the EOS 300D vs. the *ist D this morning) - Original Message - From: "Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 2:41 PM Subject: Digtial back for R Leicas > I read yesterday that Leica is coming out (at photokina, 2004) with a > digital back for the R8 and R9 SLRs. S'posed to be 10 MP. > > > Steven Desjardins > Department of Chemistry > Washington and Lee University > Lexington, VA 24450 > (540) 458-8873 > FAX: (540) 458-8878 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update
So you were on topic after all. Thanks. Dario - Original Message - From: "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 11:37 AM Subject: Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update > and NASA software is public domain. > > Herb > - Original Message - > From: "Dario Bonazza 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 4:26 AM > Subject: Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update > > > > Do all *ist D users have access to NASA labs? Great! Is it enough to jump > > there and show the *ist D to get free access everywhere? > > > > (I mean: please don't split hairs on any given word. Try to get the > meaning > > and possibly keep on topic a bit.) > >
Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: same pictures in same conditions
All pictures shown in my website were shot in *** jpeg, with the only exception of the bell tower among the last sample pictures (where RAW+conversion is stated). Ciao, Dario - Original Message - From: "Gianfranco Irlanda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 11:29 AM Subject: Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: same pictures in same conditions > Dario Bonazza 2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sorry, all *ist D pictures were taken with default settings > for sharpness, > > contrast and saturation, hence 0, 0, 0 (not +1, +1, +1 as > previously > > stated). > > Ciao Dario, > > Sorry if this has been asked before: did you use the in-camera > jpeg setting or RAW images converted in a second moment for the > comparison shots? It is not clear with all the pictures. > > Gianfranco > > = > "To read is to travel without all the hassles of luggage." > > ---Emilio Salgari (1863-1911) > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard > http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree >
Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: same pictures in same conditions
Rüdiger Neumann wrote: > It is not obvious on your home page, what camera gives the more natural > colors as the colors are very different, you should at that. The *ist D is better balanced. That's evident in studio shots, and less evident in outdoors, where the true colors were somewhere in between the two cameras. > It would be > also nice, if you can inform about the sharpness, contrast and color setings > on the *istD. default: +1 +1 +1 > If you look at the flowerpicture on the balcony, the S2 show sharpening > artefacts around the black metal, the *istD has less sharpening. Was the > sharpening of the *istD to +1 or was it zero? +1 > You complain at the results with the RAW files. At a german user forum > somebody has done a test with the Pentax Photo Lab and GENZO, a free RAW > format converter. > Here you can see the results in form ot two different pictures: > http://forum.digitalfotonetz.de/viewtopic.php?p=39108#39108 Thanks, Dario
Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update
After shooting a lot of pictures with short focal length lenses on the *ist D today, I partially changed my mind, so I can correct myself here below. DJE wrote: > > 15/3.5 A > > 20/4.5 SMC Takumar > > 20/2.8 Zeiss Jena Flektogon > > 24/2.8 A > > 24/2 FA* > > 18-35 FAJ > > 24-90 FA > > 28-70/4 FA > > Unfortunately most of the primes on this list are older optical designs, > primarily because pentax hasn't made a lot of new ultrawides I assume. > The 15/3.5 design apparently isn't great (nor is the equivalent Nikkor), The 15/3.5 is great for angle coverage (interesting perspective) and excellent distortion correction (better than its competitors). Sharpness it's not its strongest point, even on film. > the 20/4.5 is generally held to be not the best. See: http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p7e.htm > Kinda surprised that > the 24s don't perform better, but I've never tested a 24 (Pentax or Nikon) > that performs as well as longer lenses. Yes, they perform better then shorter ones. See: http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p8e.htm > Don't know anything about the > Flektogon, other than that I'd like to have one if I could find one. On film, I like the Flektogon very much. On the *ist D it shows some problems. However, I'm not sure focus was perfect. > The zooms don't surprise me as mediocre performers at wide angles, as > zooms are always compromises and making a good one is more expensive than > pentax normally markets. (This is not to say that Pentax zooms are bad, > just that they aren't as good as the $1750 zooms from C and N) All this makes sense. However, I'm surprised that Pentax glass should have so much problems on a DLSR, while most C/N lenses seem to comply rather good with their respective DLSR's (even mid-price zooms). > I'm curious what is WRONG with the images delivered by these lenses on the > *istD, especially compared to the images delivered by the same lenses on > film? Sharpness and contrast? Actual resolution and sharpness. > (The *istD is known to "undersharpen" its > images electronically, I don't think this can be enough for explaining the difference. Add any sharpening in Photoshop and you still don't get resolution you've lost. > and the sensor in it does appear to be less sharp > by nature than the Canon and possibly the Fuji sensors). At long last, you told that! This cannot be overcome by any postprocessing means. > Distortion? > It's a real pity that you can't mount the same lenses on some other > digital and compare results to know if all the wides are bad or the camera > is bad. I agree that a final word when comparing digital cameras could only be told by using the same lens. However, I couldn't do that at time of my comparison test, so I assumed that a good performer (but not the best around) like the Sigma 15-30mm used on the S2 won't be so much better than any comparable lens used on the *ist D. Is there any good reason for thinking that any Pentax lens used on a DSLR body, including primes in the same focal length range, should be worse than an average Sigma zoom lens? > I have not found ultra-wides to be great performers on film, in any brand > and at any price range, when compared to standard lenses. I'd actually > expect Pentax lenses to perform better on a digital camera than most > because Pentax seems to optimize for center sharpness at the cost of > corner sharpness and digital of course doesn't use the corners. > > How does the *istD perform with a lens of known outstanding quality? > If it is fine there then the problem is the lenses, although I think > you'll find that nobody's ultra-wide glass is great. See my pages: http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p7e.htm http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p8e.htm http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p9e.htm http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p10e.htm Is there any lens of outstanding quality among them? Can we assume that a lens of outstanding quality will be so on a digital camera? I've been told that the Nikkor 20mm is an excellent lens on film, and a mediocre lens on DLSR. I'm not sure if it's true, but could be. The problem is not just a bad lens on a digital camera, but a possible whole range of bad lenses on a (damn, partially!) compatible camera. Could this be the case with the *ist D? The Sigma 15-30 (or any other good performer on a competitor camera) will tell. Is there any owner of such a lens out there? Dario
Comparing lenses on *ist D
So I ended up trying several old and new lenses on the *ist D. A wide selection of results is visible here: http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p7e.htm http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p8e.htm http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p9e.htm http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p10e.htm I won't comment here, as any comment can be misunderstood, brought off topic and so on. Just see the pictures and then decide by yourself which lenses are good or bad, which are up to your expectations and if the *ist D is worth such lenses (or the other way round). It took me almost all the day to shoot, select and compare images, then crop details and put everything together for publishing. I do hope someone will appreciate that stuff. Thanks for your attention. Dario Bonazza
Re: Pentax Promo in Canada
Just an explanation, as I don't want to be misunderstood. My sentence below was mainly intended as a joke (as the smiley shows), since I'm convinced that Pentax Canada is one of the best Pentax subsidiaries, maybe the most active one. I wish all Pentax subsidiaries could be as committed as Pentax Canada is. Dario > To get rid of some MZ-S stuff :-)
Re: Pentax Promo in Canada
Frank Theriault wrote: > Curiosity piqued, I read on, and it seems that they're giving away an MZ S > and an FA 24-80 zoom, along with bags, tripod, strap, that sort of stuff. > They tout it as Pentax' "pro level 35mm SLR". > > So, kudos to the promo department of Pentax Canada. At least they're > trying... To get rid of some MZ-S stuff :-) Dario Bonazza
Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: final update
Hi all, I believe I've finished adding more and more pictures to my *ist D test, including some (I believe) interesting comparison among lenses. Those shots partially contradict some of my previous thoughts, where I was rather convinced that you could find little difference among different lenses and the bottleneck of image quality is the camera. Trying more and more lenses, I could find some performing much better than other ones. It is also interesting to notice that among the best ones, you can find som old glories (both screw mount and M-series), thus strengthening further my idea that the crippled mount of the *ist D is a goof. Here are the links to the updated pages: http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p1e.htm http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p2e.htm http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p7e.htm Cheers, Dario Bonazza
Re: Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: same pictures in same conditions
Hello Rüdiger, You wrote: > Have you also compared the AF of the MZ-S with the *istD. About fast-moving subjects, maybe the MZ-S can get one extra shot during the same time (say 6 frames while the *ist D takes 5). > Somebody on a > German userforum reported, that the low light abillity is better on the > MZ-S. Yes, I also confirm that. On a given subject, the MZ-S still works about one EV lower than the *ist D. > How is the AF-speed of the S2. Have you also done such a car-test. No. I only tried the same car with the same driver, same speed, etc. with the MZ-S, and I got one extra shot. > Looking on the test results on pdreview, it is obvious, that the S2pro is > better than the 10D, D100 or SD9. > Do you know, how the *istD compares to the 10D and D100? No. Dario
Pentax *ist D vs. Fujifilm S2 Pro: more pictures
More sample pictures here: http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p7e.htm Dario Bonazza
Re: File size and capacity ?
Each. Dario - Original Message - From: "Keith Whaley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 5:19 PM Subject: Re: File size and capacity ? > > > Bill Owens wrote: > > > > > The Computer shows the files to vary in size by as much as one MB from > > > about 1.9 - 3.02. > > > > > > C onfused ry > > > > And when these same files are opened in Photoshop, they show 17.3 MB. > > EACH? > > > Bill > > keith whaley >
Re: File size and capacity ?
No, he told the camera 'supposed' to have capacity for storing 57 shots, then it actually stored 101 pix. It happened to me too, with different cards, different figures and more or less same 1:2 ratio between calculated pictures and true capacity. Dario Bonazza Keith Whaley wrote: > But, that doesn't address his question, which asks why the total number > of shots that showed up in his folder exceeds the number he said he put > in there.. > He took 57 shots, up- or downloaded them to his computer and now his > folder contains 101 images. > Where did the extra images come from? > > keith whaley > > graywolf wrote: > > > > Welcome to the world of jpeg. Compression varies depending upon the picture. > > Large monotone areas compress more than areas with a lot of small detail. If you > > compare the photos to their compressed sizes you will see what I mean. > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > Ok here are the facts: > > > * Camera - *ist D > > > * CF card - Lexar 256 MB 12X > > > * Camera shows 57 available shots when card is empty and the camera is in > > > best (***) JPEG mode. > > > * I filled up the card until it the camera showed 0 available shots. > > > * I downloaded the shots into a folder on my computer. > > > * I was shooting in best JPEG > > > * The Pentax photo browser confirms the shots were taken in Best JPEG mode, > > > they are all 3008 x 2008 pixels. > > > * There is ZERO chance I put any other shots in this folder. > > > > > > Now the problem. I have 101 shots in this folder. How did that happen? > > > > > > The Computer shows the files to vary in size by as much as one MB from about > > > 1.9 - 3.02. > > > > > > C onfused ry > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > > Version: 6.0.528 / Virus Database: 324 - Release Date: 10/16/2003 > > > > > > > > > > -- > > graywolf > > http://graywolfphoto.com > > > > "You might as well accept people as they are, > > you are not going to be able to change them anyway." >
Re: *IstD price in Italy
Italian import taxes are as follows (regardless new or used items): 20% VAT 4% customs duties a few euros for extra costs I don't know remember. So the due total is around 25% of item+shipping (yes, those taxes are calculated on shipping costs too). And don't forget the shipping cost itself, to be added to the item price. Dario - Original Message - From: "Gianfranco Irlanda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 8:22 PM Subject: Re: *IstD price in Italy > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > How much duty is charged on cameras imported to Italy? You > can buy the *istD > > here in Vancovuer for CDN$2199 (about USD$1640) without even > bargaining very > > hard. You could have it shipped with insurance; unless duty > is exceedingly > > high, you'd save a bundle. > > > > I will put you in touch with the dealer from whom I'm buying > mine if you wish. > > > > Hi Mike, > > Thanks for the offer. I guess I'll do something of that kinb as > soon as I'm able to purchase it (I already am, financially > speaking at least, but I'm waiting to hold one in my hands). > I'm a bit afraid that the customs duties are quite high by now > (they recently started to add duties even on used products every > now and then - I almost quit looking on eBay items in North > America for that). The usual duties are the VAT (20%) and the > import toll (dunno the exact amount, around 24%, maybe more). I > should still save something that way, though. > > Ciao, > > Gianfranco > > = > > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search > http://shopping.yahoo.com >
Re: I got my *ist D and I LOVE IT !!!
Our case is No.2, since the discussion was about having a lesser depth of field when using a 24mm lens on the *ist D, compared to using the same 24mm lens on 35mm format (from same distance and with different cropping due to different sensor size). Dario - Original Message - From: "Robert Gonzalez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 8:53 PM Subject: Re: I got my *ist D and I LOVE IT !!! > I way I interpreted the photo.net explanation it sounds like the > magnification factor has an effect on the DOF. Since it takes more > magnification for a smaller sensor to fill the 8x10, the DOF will be > different. In what you are saying, it sounds like M, the magnification > factor is effectively the same since you are getting the same final crop > in terms of subject sizes? Here is a summary of what that web site has > (I have substitued the *istD for his original example): > > 1. For an equivalent field of view, the *istD has at least 1.5x MORE > depth of field that a 35mm film camera would have - when the focus > distance is significantly less then the hyperfocal distance (but the > 35mm format need a lens with 1.5x the focal length to give the same view). > 2. Using the same lens on a *istD and a 35mm film body, the *istD > image has 1.5x LESS depth of field than the 35mm image would have (but > they would be different images of course since the field of view would > be different) > 3. If you use the same lens on a *istD and a 35mm film body and crop > the 35mm image to give the same view as the digital image, the depth of > field is IDENTICAL > 4. If you use the same lens on an *istD and a 35mm film body, then > shoot from different distances so that the view is the same, the *istD > image will have 1.5x MORE DOF then the film image. > 5. Close to the hyperfocal distance, the *istD has a much more than > 1.5x the DOF of a 35mm film camera. The hyperfocal distance of the *istD > is 1.5x less than that of a 35mm film camera. > > I'm not sure, but I think what you are saying is consistent with this, > correct? > > rg > > > graywolf wrote: > > DOF does not have much to do with the size of the Circle of Confusion > > (COC) on the film or sensor unless you only look at contact prints. > > Normally DOF is based on an 8x10 print viewed at 10 inches. > > > > When you reduce the formulas to their basics the only things that matter > > is COC in the final image, the size of the subject in the final image > > (magnification M), and the diameter of the aperture A (not f-stop). If > > you use a uncropped 8x10 @ 10 inches as your reference COC becomes a > > constant. > > > > What that means is in that the same size subject in an 8x10 print, a > > given f-stop (f4.5 in the mentioned case) with a given lens (24mm NOTE: > > you have to specify the focal length if you use f-stop, because what is > > involved in DOF is the diameter of the aperture and you need the focal > > length of the lens to convert f-stop to aperture) has exactly the same > > DOF with the small sensor as it does with 35mm film. That applies > > whether you move closer to fill the larger film frame or crop down to > > match the smaller sensor as both methods give the same overall > > magnification. > > > > I repeat, in the final image the DOF is exactly the same with both formats. > > > > > > > > Dario Bonazza 2 wrote: > > > >>>> Good point. The 24mm should become a 36mm, while depth-of field must be > >>>> conidered one stop less, hence pictures taken with the 24mm f/4.5 are > >>> > >> > >> like > >> > >>>> those taken at 36mm f/3.5, while 24mm f/11 is like 36mm f/8. > >>>> However, I was expecting some more sharpness there (not more unsharp > >>> > >> > >> mask!). > >> > >>> Can you explain your logic here? In my experience the DOF is based > >>> on the lens focal length, not the 35mm equivelent focal length. > >>> > >>> The 24mm on the *ist D gives you the field of view of a 36mm lens but > >>> the depth of field of a 24mm lens (because that is what it is). A > >>> 36mm lens at f3.5 would have much less depth of field. > >> > >> > >> > >> Glad you noticed that. I'll try to explain this concept (all but mine). > >> > >> The depth of field is based on the concept of confusion circle: > >> 1) Your eyes see as pinpoint each spot size below their resolution. > >> 2) Your eyes can appreciate dimensions of each spot size above th
Re: I got my *ist D and I LOVE IT !!!
Alex wrote: > What suggests to me that your method is wrong is that it would give > me a narrower depth of field than 35mm (using an equivelent lens). > I know from practice (using a prosumer digital camera with a 1 2/3" > sensor) that this isn't the case. Alex, we are discussing using lenses designed for 35mm on smaller sensor here. Using lenses specifically designed for the smaller sensor (and their smaller circle of confusion as a design parameter) will be a very different matter, so your experience with digital cameras having their own fixed lens is not relevant to this discussion. Using medium format lenses on 35mm cameras will be relevant to this discussion. Has anybody noticed that USUALLY the most acclaimed medium format lenses are just good glass when used on 35mm? This can be a very similar case to look at. However, my point was another. Apart from depth of field and lens performance on a smaller format (which other DLSR's also have to deal with), I've got the impression that most pictures taken with the *ist D are worse than you could expect from a good 6Mpix DSLR, and more and more pictures are confirming such an impression. However, as I wrote before, next weekend I'm going to compare it to the S2 Pro (same subjects in same conditions with comparable lenses), so I'll hopefully have my answer. Yes, I'm going to publish comparison pictures somewhere and I'll acknowledge you. If I'll conclude that the *ist D is approaching the S2 with similar lenses, I'll be very very happy. Dario
Re: I got my *ist D and I LOVE IT !!!
No, I make unsharp masking in Photoshop, not in camera. Dario - Original Message - From: "Bill Owens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 2:24 AM Subject: Re: I got my *ist D and I LOVE IT !!! > Have you changed the sharpness in the camera to maximum from medium? > > Bill
Re: I got my *ist D and I LOVE IT !!!
Alex wrote: > Don't forget that I shot these with a 24mm lens, so the depth of field > is very large. Even at f4.5 everything from about 15' to infinity > would be in focus, and nothing in most of these pictures is closer to > me that 15' away. Good point. The 24mm should become a 36mm, while depth-of field must be conidered one stop less, hence pictures taken with the 24mm f/4.5 are like those taken at 36mm f/3.5, while 24mm f/11 is like 36mm f/8. However, I was expecting some more sharpness there (not more unsharp mask!). > http://phred.org/~alex/pictures/pentax-istd/ has some other pictures > which were mostly shot right after I bought the camera. Most of these > have much less depth of field and the plane of focus is much more > obvious. True. > http://phred.org/~alex/pictures/pentax-istd/IMGP1331.JPG is a suitable > example (shot with the A50/1.4, I think the focus distance was a few > inches). I find the center of the flower to be sharp but the depth of > field is under an inch so almost nothing else is (even the tips of the > flower). True. > > Not to speak of the dynamic range: clouds in direct light should look as > > being 3D, not like painted in watercolor as they look. > > And what about the color balance? Greys of distant rocks must be tones of > > grey (not pinkish as they are in IMGP1412), while the sky looks unnatural > > cyan... > > That is my fault, I accidentally shot for most of the day with the > camera's white balance set to flourescent and didn't correct this > before posting them. I had hoped to retake some of the pictures on > the hike back down after doing this, but it started raining by that > time. OK Well, I feel a bit better now :-) So I only need to test that *ist D coming soon against a good DLSR (same pix in same situations) and then decide if Pentax is still worth my bucks. Work for the coming weekend, I suppose. Dario
Re: New Nikon D2H has same AF-pattern than *istD
Last July, Rüdiger Neumann wrote: > It is interesting, that the the new D2h uses the same AF pattern than the > *ist/*istD. New Nikon and Pentax AF systems are very very close aeach other, with the same layout, the same 9 cross-type + 2 linear type sensors, arranged as follows: + + + | + + + | + + + I couldn't find the AF sensitivity for the D2H, while the *ist D has EV 0-19 (at 200 ISO). So, two months later, is anybody from Japan (or capable to read Japanese) able to understand which of the two companies patented the 11-segment AF system? I searched US patent database and could only find the 6-segment MZS-type AF, a newer version of which has been filed lately with No. 6618560: http://164.195.100.11/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/neta html/search-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=ptxt&s1=6618560.WKU.&OS=PN/6618 560&RS=PN/6618560 Any further info? In case, thanks for sharing it. Dario Bonazza
Re: New lens series?
Pål Jensen wrote: > These are lenses particularly suited for digital but it is not lenses with reduced image circle. Hmmm, sure about that? Dario Bonazza www.aohc.it
Re: Pentax is a Zeiss name?
Pål Jensen wrote: > I don't remember but the Pentax name was considered, but not used by another company in the mid 50's. It was either Nikon (!) or Contax. > > Pål It was Nikon. Nippon Kogaku considered the Pentax name among those possible for their rangerfinder cameras, but since such a name had little sense for rangefinders, at the end they choose Nikon. Then, a few years later, maybe they were willing to resume the Pentax name for their first pentaprism SLR, but at that time Asahi was already using it for two years. Bye, Dario www.aohc.it
Re: One AF option on SF1n lost on MZ5n?
The MZ-5n is supposed to be able to automatically choose between single AF and continuous AF (by detecting subject's motion), while the SF-1n has a manual switch for choosing between those options. Despite such auto-switching AF works rather well (the MZ-5 cannot detect lower speeds and its AF cannot follow higher speeds, so the auto-setting works well only for medium speeds, such as running people) I'd prefer the manual switch, also present in the MZ-S. Dario Bonazza www.aohc.it - Original Message - From: "Andre Langevin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 6:05 PM Subject: One AF option on SF1n lost on MZ5n? > I noticed that the SF-1n has two types of AF and MZ-5n only one. Is > the MZ-5n "down-graded" on this aspect? > > Andre > -- >
Re: Pentax, a trademark bought from Zeiss???
Andre, As far as I know, things were more complicated tha stated by Mr. Gandy. Both Asahi and Zeiss "invented" the name Pentax for their own purposes, in different times and unaware each other. Then, when Asahi Pentax cameras were put on sale internationally, Asahi folks discovered that Carl Zeiss already registered the Pentax trade name for some movie projectors on sale on certain markets (South Africa, East Germany and maybe Finland). So Asahi Pentax cameras sold in those markets were called either Asahiflex (like older models) or Asahi Pentar for a few years. In that same period Western and Eastern Zeiss companies were fighting for getting Carl Zeiss and other famous Zeiss-related brand names, but the Pentax trade mark was of very minor interest for them, since it was never used for renowned Zeiss equipment. At the end, Zeiss Jena lost the suit and all Zeiss brand names (such as Contax, Sonnar, Tessar, and so on). Later, when Pentax name was well established worldwide, I believe that Asahi probably bought from VEB Pentacon (or maybe from Zeiss Oberkochen?) the rights for using the Pentax name in those small markets too. I think it had to be a cheap agreement, since at that time everybody "knew" that Pentax was a Japanese camera company and not a Zeiss trade name. It is also possible that Asahi paid nothing, since Eastern VEB Pentacon was no longer capable to claim their old Zeiss trade marks on international markets. Just my guess here. Dario Bonazza www.aohc.it - Original Message - From: "Andre Langevin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 11:36 PM Subject: Pentax, a trademark bought from Zeiss??? > Stephen Gandy writes: > > until bought by Asahi. It was originally derived from "PENTaprism" > and "contAX."> > > Was it really bought to Zeiss Ikon? > > Andre > -- >
Re: *ist D was not production type :-(
Even the 645N II housings are magnesium-like plastic, with the same look of the MZ-S, so why the *ist D should be magnesium? Only for fighting against the EOS 10D? If it's magnesium, do you really believe that Pentax could miss to point out that in their press release? It's possible, but not very likely. I'm afraid it's plastic. Dario Bonazza > - Original Message - > From: "Arnold Stark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 10:00 AM > Subject: Re: *ist D was not production type :-( > > > > How do you know that it is plastic? The sample that I handled was so > > stiff/hard that I thought it was magnesium although it was as light as > > plastic. I still am not sure. Are you? > > > > Arnold > > > > >>What finish? Is it plastic or magnesium? > > >> > > >> > > >I'm afraid it's plastic. > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: *ist is TIPA camera of the Year, 450 now in the shops
Confirmed by Italian importers too. Official TIPA motivation will be released very soon. Bye, Dario Bonazza www.aohc.it www.dariobonazza.com - Original Message - From: "Rüdiger Neumann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 8:54 PM Subject: *ist is TIPA camera of the Year, 450 now in the shops > Hallo > there is a text from Pentax Swiss (use altavista translator) > > http://digitalfotonetz.de/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1680 > > regards > Rüdiger >
Re: *ist D was not production type :-(
No, not sure, I'm just afraid it is plastic. Dario - Original Message - From: "Arnold Stark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 10:00 AM Subject: Re: *ist D was not production type :-( > How do you know that it is plastic? The sample that I handled was so > stiff/hard that I thought it was magnesium although it was as light as > plastic. I still am not sure. Are you? > > Arnold > > >>What finish? Is it plastic or magnesium? > >> > >> > >I'm afraid it's plastic. > > > > > >
Re: Happy Pentax to me
My frst camera was an MX, bought new in 1982. I still own it and I took some pictures using it at 8th Pentax Day last June 22. Dario Bonazza www.aohc.it www.dariobonazza.com > > Gasp! I've been a Pentax user > since 1963 - Honeywell > H3. Still have the > > camera. > > > > Jim A. > > > > > From: Caveman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 04:09:42 -0400 > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Happy Pentax to me > > > Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Resent-Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 04:07:58 -0400 > > > > > > Writing the previous message with "10 years ago.." I just noticed > that > > > this year I should celebrate 10 years since I got my first Pentax. > > > > > > cheers, > > > caveman > > > > > > > > >
Re: Happy Birthday Canada
And since July 1 is also my birthday, it must be a great day indeed :-) Dario (hoping not to hurt Canadian friends with such an irreverent comparison) - Original Message - From: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 3:35 AM Subject: Happy Birthday Canada > July 1, 1867 was the day that the British North America Act was passed > in London. That basically ended Canada's status as a colony of Britain, > and set us up as a more or less indepentant nation. A few more things > had to happen (most notably the Statute of Westminster in 1931) before > we became truly independant. > > But never mind. July 1 is Canada Day, and we turned 136 today. Lots of > folks walking around wearing Canadian flags, with red maple leafs > painted on their faces, lots of local celebrations, lots of fireworks > tonight. We had a beautiful day for it, and I must have walked about 10 > miles, just taking pictures of smiling faces - everyone was in a good > mood, and no one seemed to mind having their pic taken. > > I'm a pretty cynical fellow sometimes. But days like today remind me > that, for all it's faults, there is no other country I'd rather live in > than this big, beautiful place. > > Happy Birthday, Canada! > > cheers, > frank > > -- > "What a senseless waste of human life" > -The Customer in Monty Python's Cheese Shop sketch > >
Re: *ist D was not production type :-(
I wrote: > To be more precise, the hardware was production type for sure (including a > standard serial number), nice finished and working well I meant that all of the controls of the *ist D on show at Pentax Day were working well, unlike the flimsy dials and 4-way controller seen on prototype at PhotoShow 2003. So that camera is a production hardware for sure. In my opinion, Pentax is currently manufacturing the *ist D, to be loaded with production firmware and put on sale next August/September, as planned. I'm not worried about sales date and I don't expect further delays. However, I'm still worried about image quality, since I was not allowed checking it, and a firmware so much behind of completion doesn't encourage great hopes. Bye, Dario Bonazza www.aohc.it www.dariobonazza.com
Re: *ist D was not production type :-(
Rüdiger Neumann wrote: > Hallo Dario, > is there something new about the K-mount. > Will it work in the same way as the analog *ist with all the restrictions? > regards > Rüdiger Of course. This is the (revised) Pentax way! Cheers, Dario Bonazza www.aohc.it www.dariobonazza.com
Re: *ist D was not production type :-(
Pål Jensen wrote: > What finish? Is it plastic or magnesium? > > Pål > I'm afraid it's plastic. Dario
Re: Re: Got the MZ-S afterall
The green dots match well :-) Dario Bonazza www.aohc.it - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 9:37 AM Subject: Re: Re: Got the MZ-S afterall > > Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > I don't think they match very well. The 77 would look much better on my > > > LX > > > > > > DagT > > > > > > > one vote for 77 black on MZ-S ^^ > > http://home.pchome.com.tw/personal/kimlee123/7.jpg > > If you give it to me I'll show you how great it would look on the LX :-) > > DagT >
Some more (digital) pictures in my website
Hi all. For those who have a few minutes to get rid of, I added some pictures to my web gallery: http://www.dariobonazza.com/galle.htm Those taken in Padua (http://www.dariobonazza.com/padovae.htm) were all shot using the Optio 550, with the only exception of the "stripes and Lancia", shot with my Optio 330. Bye, Dario Bonazza www.aohc.it www.dariobonazza.com
*ist D was not production type :-(
Hi friends, I forgot to tell you that the *ist D on show at Pentax Day last June 22 was not production type :-( To be more precise, the hardware was production type for sure (including a standard serial number), nice finished and working well (as opposed to that on show at PhotoShow last March), but the firmware was still incomplete and not fully working (heavy underexposure when taking pictures, exposure compensation not working, etc.). For that reason I was not allowed to shoot and get picture files on my compactflash card for close inspection at home, like I was hoping before the Pentax Day (or Pentax D-Day, as Caveman suggested). So, in order to know how well the *ist D will work, we still have to wait some more time :-( Despite that, I'm rather confident that the production *ist D will be on sale very soon, as promised. Bye, Dario Bonazza www.aohc.it www.dariobonazza.com
Anybody interested in AOHC membership No.500?
Hi friends, Since AOHC member No. 499 just joined the club, next member will be No. 500. I wanted to let you know that, so that in case anybody is interested in getting such a "round" number... For those of you who don't know AOHC, please visit www.aohc.it Cheers, Dario Bonazza www.aohc.it www.dariobonazza.com
Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format
Hmm... not so bad idea, but according to my secret source Pentax is going even further. Very soon they will start selling just promises of outstanding products to come. You pay a yearly fee and get nothing. They earn money and spend nothing in annoying stuff such as R&D, manufacturing, quality control, and so on. No worries of possible uncompatibilities, No obsolescence, No faults, No service, No problems at all. Always top equipment available in your dreams. As long as it will last... Cheers, Dario Bonazza - Original Message - From: "Caveman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 9:37 AM Subject: Re: Pentax announced development of digital medium format > Anthony Farr wrote: > > Caveman, > > > > S! Don't go putting dangerous ideas like that into their heads. > > I have even better ones ;-) You could do it like with calling cards / > mobile phones. You buy the card, scratch it and get the code, enter it > et voila, instead of 30 minutes of talk, you get 24 exposures. Or you > may buy professional cards for 36 exposures, or XL packages of 240 and > XXL of 360. > > Naah, it's too obvious. We can hide it. After a number of exposures, the > camera blips and displays E734. You look in the manual and find out it > means "Error 734 - service needed". Next time it's "E345 - shutter > calibration required". etc. The guys don't actually have to service > anything, they just take your money, reset a cmos counter and here you > go for another round of shots. > > cheers, > caveman >
Re: Pentax's future
Next June 22nd we'll have a production *ist D to try at Pentax Day, so at the end I'll get an idea of how it works. Dario Bonazza www.aohc.it - Original Message - From: "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 9:08 PM Subject: Re: Pentax's future > Tom wrote: > > > Oddly enough, the latest issue of American Photo lists the *ist-D as > > an Editor's Pick in the DSLR category, complete with picture. > > If the august release hold water, then the *ist D production almost certainly has started already. Working samples, not prototypes, has shown up. Production is probably tied up with the *ist. > It is almost certain that Pentax will try to release the camera when they made sufficient of it in order to meet the intial demand. > > Pål > >
Kites & Rally pictures
Hi folks, Maybe it's just a try to relieve after Pentax self-killing mistake of getting rid of K-mount compatibility, but I added some new pictures to my website. BTW, pictures were shot with MZ-S and SMC Pentax FA 24-90 and SMC Pentax-F 300 f/4.5 lenses. Some kite pictures were shot with SMC Pentax-A 15mm f/3.5 and SMC Pentax-FA* 85mm f/1.4. Anybody interested can see them at: www.dariobonazza.com Cheers, Dario Bonazza www.aohc.it www.dariobonazza.com (Afraid Pentax won't survive such a mistake)
Re: FA-J lenses (WAS: Re: *ist)
I won't believe that for one second. When you (Pentax) remove diaphragm simulator from top end models (like the *ist D undoubtably currently is), removing aperture ring from your (Pentax) lens line is just a matter of time. Dario Bonazza www.aohc.it > REPLY: > I've been told that the FA-J lenses are strictly entry level and that there will be no higher end FA-J lenses. > > Pål >
Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)
Alexander wrote: > Still I > think expensive stuff will support the aperture ring, > similar as the expensive Nikon gear does. *ist D is expensive stuff, and it does not support aperture ring. I see no turning point here. Dario Bonazza www.aohc.it
Re: Paradigm change of Pentax and the consequences (long)
That's exactly my opinion too. Dario Bonazza www.aohc.it > Pentax loses thereby the only selling arguement in relation to the > competition, the k-mount compatibility. Why should I buy a *istD with the > pertinent lenses, if I can not use these lenses with my LX and MZ-S? > > If I transfer to a digital camera, I can equaly buy a 10D and the suitable > lenses equal, since lens compatibility is not any more with Pentax design > objectives and I cannot trust Pentax when I investment in it. > > I have now 20 F/FA (4 FA*, 2 Limited) lenses and only one A* and one K lens, > as well as a LX, a Z-1p and a Mz-s. > I will not buy anymore lenses, I will start to sell a part of my equipment > to have the money for buying a 10D and with 3 lenses. > Now, I can understand Boz (K-Mount page) very well, who changed to Canon. > >
Re: Dedicated lenses for DSLR
That's interesting to me. However, apart from more or less sexy body, more or less complete line of lenses, more or less Pentax feeling camera (all of them being important), the most important question among Pentax film camera users (all of us) is: Will the *ist D line capable to give pictures with a quality comparable to Canon and Fuji? Among film SLRs, the answer was undoubtably a big YES! Many of us choose Pentax for their lenses, giving excellent results with an excellent film (and a decent photographer behind them). With digital cameras, the technical quality is all inside the camera: lens, sensor, software... (and meter, shutter, AF, of course). I believe the lens+sensor+software mix to be very critical, doing the big difference in overall picture quality. I'm very anxious for seeing actual pictures taken with the *ist, like everybody can see actual pictures taken with the Canon 10D. If I had to buy a DSLR today, I'll probably buy Canon. Since I can wait, I still wait for Pentax, then decide before this year's end. Will I have to buy Canon next autumn? Dario Bonazza - Original Message - From: "KT Takeshita" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax Discuss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 12:49 AM Subject: Dedicated lenses for DSLR > Hi, > > Pentax Japan's web site does say that "further, the planning and the > development of high performance and compact lenses dedicated to DSLR have > been proceeding, with the expected sales commencement in this fall". > > So they are now explicit in saying this. I am sure the new series will > include fast lenses. And maybe :-). > > If the new lens lines are attractive, the competitiveness of the *ist D has > to be measured as a "package" rather than the body alone. > > And, as Pentax say, *ist is a brand name for Pentax's SLRs, digital or film. > *ist film and *ist D are just the first two of the series. They said > earlier that there are at least 3 chassis or something to that effect. So, > relax folks, there must be a lot to come and expect. > > Cheers, > > Ken >
Re: It's HERE!... NOT Bah!
Pål wrote: > Pentax have been bleeding edge in everything they have done except 35mm slr's where they havent been bleeding edge for 20 years. This has sent their marketshare for slr's from 30% to 4%. > Digital is a totally different ballgame anyway. Where they're trying (not sure they'll succeed) to step from current 2% to 5%, when the big five (Sony, Olympus and three more manufacturers) are 15% to 20% each :-( Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Re: *ist D photos
Five pix here: http://digilander.libero.it/aohc/pressrelease/istde.htm Bye, Dario Bonazza - Original Message - From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 7:41 PM Subject: Re: *ist D photos > > Hi All, > I've been gone for four days and just resubscribed. Where are the *ist D > Photos. (I assume that's the new digital body). > Paul >
Re: *ist complete specifications
* * * * * * * * * * * > 11 AF sensors, does anyone know the distribution?
*ist complete specifications
I agree with Pål in finding it rather ugly, certainly not stylish. To me, it recalls an APS SLR (do you remember the Pronea?), and that's not so good news. I do hope the DSLR will be different, but I'm afraid it won't. Time to switch to serious stuff? Bye, Dario Bonazza *ist Specifications Type: TTL autofocus, auto-exposure multi-mode 35mm SLR with built-in retractable TTL auto flash Film: 35mm perforated cartridge DX-coded film Image Size: 24mm x 36mm Lens Mount: PENTAX KAF bayonet mount Usable Lenses: PENTAX KAF2- (power zoom not available) and KAF- mount lenses PENTAX KA mount lenses (AF available with optional AF adapter) When the aperture ring is set at other than A position, release lock or unlock selectable by Custom function No.17 Focusing System: Type: TTL phase-matching 11-point autofocus system (SAFOX VIII) Applicable illumination range: EV-1 to EV18 (at ISO 100 with F1.4 lens) Mode: (1)AF-Single (with focus-lock function); (2) AF-Continuous (with Predictive AF mode); (3)Manual focus Exposure Control: Metering system: TTL open-aperture 16-segment metering Metering range: EV0 to 21 (at ISO 100 with F1.4 lens) Mode: (1)Auto Picture Mode; (2)Picture Mode; (3)Shutter-Priority AE; (4)Aperture-Priority AE; (5)Metered Manual; (6)Bulb TTL programmed auto pop-up flash Exposure compensation: ±3EV (1/2EV steps) AE Lock: 20-second AE Lock with AE Lock button Auto-bracketing: 3 frames within range of ±0.3, ±0.5, ±1.0 Multiple exposure: No limit for number of frames Shutter: Type: Electronically controlled vertical-run focal plane shutter Speed: (1) Auto: 1/4000 - 30 sec. (stepless); (2) Manual: 1/4000 - 30 sec. and bulb; (3) Flash sync : 1/125 - 30 sec. and bulb Viewfinder: Type: Fixed molded penta-mirror type Focusing screen: Natural-Bright-Matte focusing screen Field of view: 90% vertivally/horizontally Magnification: 0.7X (with 50mm F1.4 lens at infinity, diopter position -1m-1) Diopter adjustment: -2.0 to +1.0m-1 AF Frame: 11 Focusing frame with superimposed display Viewfinder LCD indication (with automatic brightness level adjustment): (1)Built-in flash status; (2)Standard Program; (3)Portrait Program; (4)Landscape Program; (5)Close-up Program; (6)Action Program; (7)Night Scene Program; (8)In-focus; (9) Shutter speed; (10)Aperture value; (11)AE Lock signal; (12)Exposure compensation indication; (13) Bar graph; (14)Auto focus frame Mode Dial Indication: (1)Auto Picture Mode; (2)Standard Program; (3)Portrait Program; (4)Landscape Program; (5)Close-up Program; (6)Action Program; (7)Night Scene Program; (8)Shutter-Priority AE; (9)Aperture-Priority AE; (10)Metered Manual; (11)ISO film speed; (12)PCV sound; (13)Custom function External LCD Panel indication (with automatic illumination): (1)Film loading, film advance (single-frame/consecutive), film rewind, film loading error; (2)Exposure frame number; (3)Shutter speed and/or/aperture value; (4)Manual-set film speed; (5)Auto pop-up flash function; (6)Flash use recommendation and recharge incomplete/complete; (7)Flash off; (8)Red-eye reduction; (9)Self-timer; (10)Non-applicable lens warning; (11)Battery exhaustion warning; (12)Auto bracketing; (13)Focus point indication; (14)Exposure compensation; (15)Date indication; (16)Date indication; (17)Audible PCV signal; (18)Remote control (instant release/3-second-delay release); (19)Bar graph; (20)Multiple exposure Film Handling: Loading: Quick auto loading (automatic film advance to first frame) Advance/rewind: Automatic (Mid-roll rewind possible) Advance mode: (1)Single; (2)Consecutive (approx. 2.5 frames/sec.) Film Speed Setting: (1)Automatic with DX-coded film (ISO25-5000); (2)Manual (ISO6-6400 in 1/3EV steps) Built-In Flash: Type: Series-control retractable TTL auto pop-up flash (RTF) Guide number: 11 (ISO100/m) Angle-of-view coverage: 28mm wide-angle lens Flash synchronization: With RTF and via hot shoe Sync. Speed: 1/125 sec. set automatically with RTF or PENTAX dedicated flash unit at recharge completion Self-Timer: Electronically controlled type with 12-second delay Remote Control: Infrared wireless remote control Instant release or 3-second-delay release switchable Drive Mode: (1)Single advance; (2)Consecutive advance; (3)Self-timer; (4)Remote control (instant release/3-second-deley release); (5)Multiple exposure Custom function: 17 custom-programmable functions Date Imprinting: Five-mode switchable, "Year-Month-Day", "Day-Hour-Minute", "Month-Day-Year" "Day-Month-Year"and blank Power Source: Two 3V lithium batteries (CR2 type) Dimensions: 122.0 (W) x 84.0 (H) x 63.5 (D) mm (4.8" x 3.3" x 2.5") Weight: 335 g without batteries (11.8 oz.)
Re: PMA News: Pentax ist, new Lenses and Optio 450 and 550
It takes A-series lenses. Dario Bonazza > Doesn't say if it will take the SMCP(K), M,or A series lenses. (I'd bet > on A but who knows).
Re: PMA and Pentax DSLR
Pål Jensen wrote: > They did say "models" so I believe its more than a digital slr. It could be a DSLR and a point&shoot, or maybe a DSLR and two lenses, or any other plurality of introductions. It could also be an APS-size DSLR (targeted to 35mm users) and the long awaited 645D (don't forget the many patents on that topic filed by Pentax). > Anyway, an APS sized sensor DSLR isn't very prestigious anymore. If you know Pentax, that can mean anything, including an Optio S4 (4Mpix version of the Optio S) > As the new DSLR is supposedly built on a new chassis, > I believe this could be the introduction of a totally new generation of cameras. I'm strongly convinced of that. > I still hope for the flagship they have been working on for so long... I'm far less convinced here. I'll only believe a film flagship when I can touch it in a photo store. Bye, Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
PMA and Pentax DSLR
Hi friends, Not true info here, but some clues from a Pentax press release I got. Pentax is managing an international press conference next 13 March 2003 on occasion of CeBIT in Hannover, Germany. According to Pentax, on that occasion, they will reveal "new prestigious models" as their "European first". Ok, since PMA will take place next 2 - 5 March, I believe we'll see those new models introduced in Las Vegas, just before CeBIT in Hannover. Also, remember that Pentax did not manage an international press conference for launching the OptioS. The last time Pentax did that was in September 2000 in Cologne, when announcing their MR-52 DSLR prototype. I believe this coming press conference can only mean another important introduction. OK, that's little news, since we all know that Pentax is going to launch its DLSR, however, we're starting marking dates on agenda. Bye, Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Optio S specifications
Published in both my websites: Pentax Club: www.aohc.it Digital photography news: www.fotone.it Direct link to specs page: http://www.fotone.it/pentax/prpen301e.htm Okay, okay, I'm way too late, but has everybody seen the full specs table? Isn't it interesting that Casio EX-Z3 features a wider LCD than Pentax Opto S? Bye, Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Not true fusion, Konica acquires Minolta!
According to Financial Times, it's not exactly fusion, and Konica will be the survivor: http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c =StoryFT&cid=1039524244022&p=1012571727108 Bye, Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Re: fa 85mm 1.4 vs 77mm limited
Hello Arnold, You wrote: > just one question about your testing procedure: Do you do focus > bracketing? I found careful focus bracketing to be quite important in my > own tests. Most previous tests were done by Carlo Lastrucci, not by me (with the exception of the 24-90mm, published in Spotmatic No. 30, October 2001, that we made together). Then I commented Carlo's pictures on Spotmatic magazine. No, we usually don't do focus bracketing, since most people in most pictures don't. I'd appreciate your further comments on this. Carlo's tests were done focusing with MZ-5 autofocus, with the exception of the latest comparison (35/2 FA vs. 31/1.8 Ltd, published in Spotmatic No.34), where focusing was manually adjusted by looking at the split-image in MX viewfinder. My test about the 24-90 was done with MZ-S, autofocusing on subject (either infinity or mid-distance) always going farther away from a closer subject (hence reaching focus from close distance). I was thinking of doing the same this time. Suggestions are also accepted. Bye, Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Re: fa 85mm 1.4 vs 77mm limited
Pål Jensen wrote: > > I've got a 77mm Limited to test (again!) against two different 85mm f/1.4 > > Star lenses (Mr. Lastrucci's one, which was tested by himself some months > > ago, and mine, bought one month ago). > > A pity you don't have two Limiteds as well as your previous opinion on this matter could indicate that you had dog of a 77mm lens. The 77mm I got this time is different (S/No. 327) from that tested last year (S/No. 302). > I was sure that my sample of the FA* 85 was a bad one but Pentax made tests shootout > with another sample and the result was indistinguishable. So we'll see if I get another dog of a star with the second sample I'm going to test alongside the good one. Bye, Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Re: Honda Racing Team Camera Strap?
And more: http://www.motoracing-japan.com/result/spl/908h.html Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com - Original Message - From: "Dario Bonazza 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 12:36 AM Subject: Re: Honda Racing Team Camera Strap? > another link: > http://www.motoracing-japan.com/result/spl/918h.html > > Dario Bonazza > > http://www.dariobonazza.com > > - Original Message - > From: "Paul Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 11:59 PM > Subject: Re: Honda Racing Team Camera Strap? > > > > Also Pentax sponsored a Honda VFR750 endurance racing bike in the early > > 90's. I've got an article on it somewhere. I think it was ridden by Daryl > > Beattie. > > > > This link shows The Pentax MotorGP team finished in 26th place with a > Honda > > NSR500 in 1990. > > http://www5a.biglobe.ne.jp/~uta/db1_1990.htm > > > > Regards, > > Paul > >
Re: Honda Racing Team Camera Strap?
another link: http://www.motoracing-japan.com/result/spl/918h.html Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com - Original Message - From: "Paul Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 11:59 PM Subject: Re: Honda Racing Team Camera Strap? > Also Pentax sponsored a Honda VFR750 endurance racing bike in the early > 90's. I've got an article on it somewhere. I think it was ridden by Daryl > Beattie. > > This link shows The Pentax MotorGP team finished in 26th place with a Honda > NSR500 in 1990. > http://www5a.biglobe.ne.jp/~uta/db1_1990.htm > > Regards, > Paul
Re: fa 85mm 1.4 vs 77mm limited
Pål wrote: > Dario wrote: > > > According to comparative tests made by AOHC member Carlo Lastrucci, > > the 77 Limited is not as good as FA* 85/1.4, since contrast is excessive, at > > least for Velvia film (shades are almost always deep blacks) and color > > rendition is cold, too much different from all other Pentax glass, including other > > Limited lenses. Resolution of the 77mm is rather close to that of the > > 85/1.4, but the 85mm is better at most apertures. The only true > > advantage of the 77mm vs. the 85/1.4 FA* is its size. > > > Sorry, but this grossly misleading. I've owned both lenses and so have > many PDML'rs. I've yet to hear about anyone of those who prefers the FA* > lens. Now you've heard of. > There's no difference in color rendition. They are similar to all current > Pentax lenses; slightly on the warm side. The 77 Limited is sharper at all > apertures I'm rather cautious in supporting Carlo's tests 100%, since I wasn't there at time of making them, and something could have gone wrong. However, since I know Carlo and I can hardly think he wants to fool me and AOHC friends, I usually believe his pictures (not just his words). Also, I'm sure that pictures weren't mixed up, as details have different size at infinity. According to Carlo's statements, the 77mm looks like the colder Pentax lens ever tested by him, much different from 85 FA* and even colder than the 35mm f/2 FA (the latter being the second colder Pentax lens among those tested). Unfortunately, I only have B&W pictures here, supplied to me two years ago for being published in Spotmatic magazine. > but they approach each other at F:8 and smaller. OK, we agree here. Around f/8 both lenses show more or less same sharpness and detail. > At wide apertures > the difference is night and day between the 77 and the 85. > Actually, the 77 Limited is as sharp at 2.8 as the 85 is at F:8. Sorry to contradict you, but according to my pictures, things are exactly the other way round, and the 85 FA* wins very easy against the 77 Ltd. The 85mm FA* at f/1.4 (not to speak of f/2) is far better than the 77mm at f/1.8! > The 85 is also optimized for > close range focusing. The 77 use fixed rear element to ensure consistent > quality through the whole focusing range. The FA* lens do not. The FA* 85/14 > is great for shooting test targets or portraits. Our test shots were taken at infinity, shooting houses and trees. > For general use it > basically sucks. It is the only lens I ever owned that I sold dure to the > fact that wasn't good enough; and it isn't even a consumer lens. Is it possible we got a bad 77mm Ltd and you got a bad 85mm FA*? > The 77 has also much better bokeh as bokeh was a design parameter with this lens. Apart Pentax claims, did you notice any actual difference, by comparing them in same situation? I have no opinion on that topic, as I didn't make proper comparisons. > BTW Blacks are supposed to be deep black with Velvia. That's how the film > is designed. All good lenses will have this feature when using Velvia. Pål, please don't misunderstand my words. Of course blacks must be black and I won't discuss that. When I wrote "shades are almost always deep blacks" I meant that near all shades become black, even when they shouldn't. > The part about contrast is excessive doesn't make sense either. Both this and > the rendition of the blacks points towards lab/film variations more than > lens variations. Sorry, same film for both lenses. Cheers, Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Re: MZ-S / ZX-L cable switch
Simon, If you agree, I'll be happy to open a "DIY" section in AOHC website (www.aohc.it), starting it with your cable instructions and diagram. Another cable switch was suggested years ago for the MZ-5, but I cannot remember the author (still here?). Also, if you agree, I'll be happy to publish the same information in next January issue of Spotmatc magazine. This could also start a DYI section in that magazine. Cheers, Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com > Hi All, > Some time ago I posted about a MZ-6 / ZX-L cable release "Cable Switch > CS-205". They changed the socket on the MZ-6 (Why? Anyone know?) from the > rest of the MZ range. > > Anyway, because I couldn't bring myself to shell out $80AU for a plug and a > switch I've ended up making my own. I've wrote some instructions at; > http://members.iinet.net.au/~celsim/mz6/cablerelease.htm > > But they really should live somewhere along with other cable release > information and/or FAQ. Any suggestions for a permanent residence? > Cheers, > Simon > > PS > All voltages are shown in Australian Volts. This may vary from countries > where your voltages are not metric. Please check with your electrical > supplier for clarification. Also, note that electrons move counter clockwise > in the southern hemisphere - this may reverse the polarities, depending on > where you live. >
Re: for 6x7 fans: 2003 Pirelli calendar shot with Pentax
Found the pictures: http://www.it.pirelli.com/it_IT/this_is_pirelli/communication/calendar/2003/ game_cal_it.jhtml?_DARGS=/common/calendario/gameNavigator2003.jhtml Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com - Original Message - From: "Dario Bonazza 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 4:01 PM Subject: Re: for 6x7 fans: 2003 Pirelli calendar shot with Pentax > £ukasz Kacperczyk wrote: > > > I've seen the pictures, > > Where? Any link? > > I've found the press release, but no pictures there: > http://www.pirelli.com/en_42/this_is_pirelli/press_room/newsTitle.jhtml?s1=4 > 200019&s2=4200060&display=4272&start=1 > > Thanks, > > Dario Bonazza > > http://www.dariobonazza.com >
Re: for 6x7 fans: 2003 Pirelli calendar shot with Pentax
£ukasz Kacperczyk wrote: > I've seen the pictures, Where? Any link? I've found the press release, but no pictures there: http://www.pirelli.com/en_42/this_is_pirelli/press_room/newsTitle.jhtml?s1=4 200019&s2=4200060&display=4272&start=1 Thanks, Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Re: Pentax posters
Dear friends, I put aside 5 posters for Stan Halpin and that's all. Sorry and happy to say, but now Pentax posters are no longer available. Sorry because somebody will get no posters, happy because it has been a big success. So please do not send money for more posters, as I have no more of them available. Today at AOHC board meeting in Milan we discussed the possiblity to print a second batch of them. The poster has been a big success, as we didn't expect to get short of them so quickly, but unless we'll get many (I mean hundreds) more requests, we decided not to do that. However, in case in future we'll decide to print more posters, you'll be informed. Thanks for your interest and appreciation. Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com - Original Message - From: "Stan Halpin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 1:19 AM Subject: Re: Pentax posters > Dario - please set aside 5 for me, I'll PayPal you early next week. I will > keep one of those, JCO has a standing request with me for one, and I am sure > that another 3 requests will come in from around the U.S. In fact, I need to > go back in my files, but I think there is also a second outstanding request. > I haven't been home enough lately to be organized about such things . . . > > Stan > -
No more posters available.
Dear friends, I put aside 5 posters for Stan Halpin and that's all. Sorry and happy to say, but now Pentax posters are no longer available. Sorry because somebody will get no posters, happy because it has been a big success. So please do not send money for more posters, as I have no more of them available. Today at AOHC board meeting in Milan we discussed the possiblity to print a second batch of them. The poster has been a big success, as we didn't expect to get short of them so quickly, but unless we'll get many (I mean hundreds) more requests, we decided not to do that. However, in case in future we'll decide to print more posters, you'll be informed. Thanks for your interest and appreciation. Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Re: Exclusive picture of "new" Pentax D-SLR
Pål Jensen wrote: >My guess is that this web site, or their Pentax source, is just recirculating old > images of a defunct prototype that might or might not be close to the real thing. I agree with Pål on this topic. That picture is identical in all details to MR-52 prototype of Photokina 2000 (see http://digilander.libero.it/aohc/photokina2000_1e.htm and I don't believe it will be the new Pentax DSLR. Obviously Pentax will save the most from their experience in making the MR-52 (aka MD-S), but I bet the product on sale will be different from that prototype. Cheers, Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Re: Pentax posters
I just wanted to let you know that I still have very few posters (20 to 25pcs) before they'll go out of stock. Cheers, Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Re: Re: Pentax posters
Here is the link: http://digilander.libero.it/pentaxday/postere.htm Bye, Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 9:33 AM Subject: Re: Re: Pentax posters > Hello! > What kind of posters are they? Do you sell them? > bye Katrin > > SorDario Bonazza 2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am 18.10.2002, 09:10:06: > > I just wanted to let you know that I still have very few posters (20 to > > 25pcs) before they'll go out of stock. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Dario Bonazza > > > > http://www.dariobonazza.com >
Re: Photokina and Pentax - the future?
Ken Waller wrote: > What was the size of the images that you were comparing? Ken, The pictures I refer to were around 50x70cm, not postcards. In any case, my statement that "good digital SLR's can match more or less the quality of 24x36mm film SLR's" means that they compare "more or less", not that I did a scientific comparison and that they are identical. Also, you can also take several shots with different film SLR's and lenses, and they cannot be completely identical. However, I saw some enlargements of shots made by my friend with his S2 Pro, and I wish my film pictures could always be so good from the technical point of view. Also, I saw some late evening shots taken with teh S2 Pro, and my friend also confirmed me that he was never able to get so good results with his film camera and excellent lenses (Pentax MX, MZ-5 and FAé 24mm/2 FA 35mm/2 and FA* 85mm/1.4). So I'm pretty convinced that good digital SLR can compete very well with film SLR's. BTW, that's also the opinion of Dr. Anders Uschold, who recently made some serious scientific comparison (paid by Olympus). OK, I'll publish his report very soon, and then I'll send you the link. Bye, Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Re: Some pictures
Deb wrote: > I also dig the athletic person in front > of the windmills at Essex. This could have been a > typical touristy shot of a buddy with the windmill, > but as it is, it's truly unique. The story of that photo. I was touring Essex together with a friend of mine and I had just taken a few typical tourist shots. I was thinking to leave the windmill, when a young girl arrived, together with her mother. As soon as the girl saw the windmill, she probably got the idea to mimic it, and did a twirl. Too quick and too unexpected, so I was unable to take a shot. However, I thought it was too nice a picture to miss it, hence I asked the girl (and his mum, of course) for a kind replay, promising them an enlargement. I was lucky, since Hannah (the girl) was a young dancer from Scotland, not shy and already accustomed to play in public and she agreed to be my subject for a couple of pictures. Of course, once back home to Italy, I chose the best picture and I mailed her an enlargement. I believe both she and me were quite happy with that picture. > The kite gallery is > really inspiring for me, especially frames 2, 5, 7, > 10, and 11. We have two kite festivals on South Padre > Island during the year, and I think one is coming up. Over here, that event usually takes place in April each year. There are also more kite festivals here and there in Italy, but IMO this is by the best one, since the place is so good both for the wind and the location for nice photos. As a bonus, it's just a few Kms from my home. Bye, Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Re: Help get me out of digest, and thrill as I detail ontopic new
There's an Italian word "tirocinio" which means apprenticeship, training, so it has to do with somebody trying to learn something. Maybe Tyro is a short for "tyrocinium", which sounds like the Latin versions of the Italian word tirocinio. Since often Latin words also became scientific or learned English words, it is possible that tyro is a common American English brief for an uncommon American/English word. Maybe one day you'll forget that "pro" stands for "professional", info means information, bino was binoculars, and so on. Just my guess. Cheers, Dario - Original Message - From: "Anthony Farr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 1:45 AM Subject: Re: Help get me out of digest, and thrill as I detail ontopic new > Afraid I don't know the word's origins, but I'm sure it's not an acronym, > and has no hidden meaning. If it's an abbreviation I don't know the full > word. > > Regards, > Anthony Farr > > - Original Message - > From: "gfen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > Tyro? > > > An enthusiastic amateur. > > > > Is that short for something, or am I missing a very obvious connection? > > > (snip) >
Some pictures
For those who can no longer withstand the talks about what did and what didn't show-up at Photokina 2002, which I'm contributing too, does anybody like any picture in my personal photography website? http://www.dariobonazza.com Bye, Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Photokina report (Italian) and press releases (English)
For those who want to see something more about Photokina 2002: www.fotone.it Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Re: Photokina and Pentax - the future?
Consider the following: 1 - It is believed that current top of the line 6 Megapixel SLR's (Canon D60 and Fuji S2 Pro) can match more or less the quality of 24x36mm film SLR's. I saw the pictures made with my friend's S2 Pro (and Sigma 15-30 zoom) and I have to admit it's true. nothing worse than you could obtain with your favorite film SLR and a first class lens. Maybe the Nikon D100 is a bit worse that Canon and Fuji, but not so far away. Such cameras are more or less half-format compared to 24x36 film cameras. 2 - Olympus tries to introduce a new standard for digital SLR's, whose format is half that of the 24x36 (linear) or one fourth the surface. The new Four Thirds (in case it will ever see light) should be 22.5mm (diagonal). 3 - Sinar (a well known manufacturer of large format view cameras) introduced at Photokina a 39x50mm 22 Megapixel, suitable for their new Sinar m camera and Sinar p3 tilt&shift bellows system. All of this stuff is a scaled down field camera system. 4 -The new Hasselblad H1 is no longer 6x6, it's 6x4.5. >From such kind of info, I'm thinking that the digital revolution could bring us a general downsizing in shooting formats. Maybe the Four Thirds standard (or any half-like format) will replace 24x36mm film, the 24x36 CMOS SLR's like Canon Eos 1Ds and Kodak DCS Pro 14n will replace medium format and the 40x50mm 22 Megapixel or (next year?) a possible new 55x70mm 40 Megapixel back will be the large format of the future. At that point, a revamped 6x7 with AF and the modern stuff could make little sense. It is better that Pentax will work on the 645D as quick as having their bottom on fire (a terrible translation of an old saying of my area meaning you have to hurry a lot). What do you think? In the mean time, Italian guys can read my Photokina report in a new website, while the rest of the world could look at the pictures and read the English press releases. The link is www.fotone.it Bye, Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com > > Well I remember a few years ago, someone here posed > > the question as to why Pentax had not introduced an AF > > 67 camera. I believe the general consensus was > > something along the lines that the motor required to > > focus such large lenses would be much too big for the > > camera body. But with USM the motor is in the lenses > > and are much smaller. Not to mention that each motor > > would be ideallized for the lens that it was in. > > > The question is whether there is a place for 6X7 at all except for film. If the 6X7 format makes sense in a digital future (I'm not sure. When does the law of diminishing returns (quality, price) start to set in for digital? 6 x 4,5?), we probably will see an AF 6X7 system. If not, the Pentax 67 will suffer a slow death. > > Pål > >
Re: Digital backs, medium format and more (was: Pentax WILL (most likely) show a digital SLR at Photokina!)
Pål wrote: > Is this impression in general or limited to the digital slr? The lacking of a digital SLR is the best example of the critical situation. However, my idea about nothing REALLY new to be shown at Photokina is general. > According to my Pentax sorces, they don't have the foggiest idea of whats going to be showed. Hard to believe. They should have received press releases to translate before the event. > They assumed that the digital slr would be shown due to the fact that product codes signify that there are new products in products segments new to Pentax. It doesn't have to be a digital slr though. > Personally, I won't be dissapointed if there's no digital slr at Photokina. I will be dissapointed if theres nothing else either. I believe there will be nothing else, but I strongly hope I've been fooled. Bye, Dario (still disappointed) Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Re: Digital backs, medium format and more (was: Pentax WILL (most likely) show a digital SLR at Photokina!)
Pål wrote: > >Other > > interesting patents (US 6370333, US 6393219) are for a multipoint autofocus > > system. > > Is this different from whats being used on the MZ-S? Cross sensors? Number of points? Go there: http://164.195.100.11/netahtml/srchnum.htm Put the numbers you want in the query field, so that you'll see by yourself more details than I'll be able to describe. > >Another patent (US > > 6388738) deals with a rangefinder. This could be the long rumored Pentax > > rangefinder system, but I'll only believe it when I'll see it. > > > I won't believe it when I see it. I will assume that I am hallucinating. Don't forget that lately that Pentax specializes in arriving late on the market. See what happens with digital cameras, especially D-SLR's. > > Summing-up, in a not so far future we can expect improvements in digital > > cameras, new Limited lenses, a new generation 35mm/CCD SLR system, probably > > introducing a new lens series, and a new medium format camera also accepting > > digital backs. Okay, most of these products were already rumored during the > > last months, and they were also expected just for common sense, but these > > patents are the best confirmation that all these innovations are truly under > > development at Pentax, not just hopes. > > It is likely we'll see something at Photokina next September, and something > > more at PMA next Spring. Looks like Pentax is working harder than during the > > last decade, after all. > > > Let's hope we're not getting too dissapointed with Photokina. This sort of stuff tends to boost expectations! I'm already disappointed. According to recent info from Pentax, I'm quite convinced most of PDML'ers will be EXTREMELY disappointed with Photokina, and then somebody else will switch to Canon, Nikon, or maybe Fuji to get an excellent D-SLR without waiting Pentax forever. I only hope that Pentax is fooling me. However, I'll be in Cologne for almost a week, and then I'll report about the event. Bye. Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Digital backs, medium format and more (was: Pentax WILL (most likely) show a digital SLR at Photokina!)
Hi friends, Here below you'll find the text on an article by me, published in Spotmatic magazine No.33, about new developments by Pentax. Is it of any interest to the current discussion about Photokina stuff? Bye, Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com Pentax patents: possible preview of new technology developments By Dario Bonazza Some Pentax patents could give us some ideas about new developments to come. Some of them (numbers beginning with 2002) were posted to the internet Pentax Discuss Mailing List by Henry Chu, from Hong Kong, while others were found by me, by searching the data base engine of US Patent Office. No. 20020102105 is a photometric device (also see US 6175693). It's a metering system that works more or less like the Nikon RGB system in F5, but retaining the traditional Pentax 6-segment metering system. Other interesting patents (US 6370333, US 6393219) are for a multipoint autofocus system. No. 20020089257 is an ultrasonic-motor control system. Finally, Pentax is working on USM motor! During the years, Pentax also filed several patents about image stabilization devices (even before Canon), and more were registered lately (US 6374048, US 6389228, US 6392804, US 6415105). All of the above patents can be signs of a new generation SLR under development. There is also a patent for a new lens bayonet (US 6421192). Unfortunately I cannot understand which kind of camera it could suit. Another patent (US 6388738) deals with a rangefinder. This could be the long rumored Pentax rangefinder system, but I'll only believe it when I'll see it. No. 20020101525 is a digital image interpolating device. According to Henry Chu's description, Pentax is working on an image processing system for reducing chromatic blur in a traditional mosaic type G-R-G-B CCD sensor. Are they planning not to use the multi-layer Foveon X3 sensor for the long awaited Pentax D-SLR or is this for improving the image quality in lower class digital cameras? No. 20020097994 is a photographic lens of 118mm f/2.5 with inner focusing system. The design deals with compactness and small filter diameter. Looks like another "Limited" lens. Then, at long last, several patents are about a prism viewfinder (US 6392820) for a 645 style medium format camera with interchangeable back, for a medium format camera with interchangeable back (US 6402396) and for a camera using either film or CCD (6337955, US 6366323, US 6374060, US 6426777). It is interesting that some of these patents deal with a 35mm film camera, while others with a rollfilm camera. Summing-up, in a not so far future we can expect improvements in digital cameras, new Limited lenses, a new generation 35mm/CCD SLR system, probably introducing a new lens series, and a new medium format camera also accepting digital backs. Okay, most of these products were already rumored during the last months, and they were also expected just for common sense, but these patents are the best confirmation that all these innovations are truly under development at Pentax, not just hopes. It is likely we'll see something at Photokina next September, and something more at PMA next Spring. Looks like Pentax is working harder than during the last decade, after all.
Optio 230: first impression
In my website (link below), you'll find my article about the Optio 230, published in Spotmatic magazine. Cheers Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Pentax in the movies
Have you noticed Pentax there? http://www.femmefatale.nl/ Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Pentax Day report and pictures
Hi friends, Among the other things, here are the final report and pictures about the 2002 edition of the Pentax Day: http://digilander.libero.it/pentaxday/index.htm Cheers, Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
Re: Photokina
I'll be there, from 24 to26. Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 5:28 PM Subject: Re: Photokina > < credentials then you might be able to get some of the Press Release packages > that each company should have (most seem to run out by the 3rd or 4th day). > > More info at www.photokina.de > > I'm also planning to attend, but haven't decided which day(s) yet. Perhaps > some other PDMLers will also be there?>> > > I can see Cotty there; "big" Mike will be playing the role of investigative reporter, pinning the chairman of Pentax to the wall and thrusting a mic at him, demanding "when's the DLSR coming, then, matey?". > I might trot along too, possibly spending more than 90 mins this time :) > > Kind regards > > Peter > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
