Re: GESO - Party and various
On Sun, 3 Dec 2006, Scott Loveless wrote: On 12/3/06, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://homepage.mac.com/cottycam/PhotoAlbum4.html Excellent! Got a phone number for the young lady on the right in C057465? Yes, but will he share? Will he f... Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: How Long ...
On Sun, 3 Dec 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote: .. have you participated in the PDML, in its various iterations. 22 July 2003. I found out about it as I was struggling with the aperture simulator of my MZ-50 missing and decided to buy a MZ-5n or a MZ-6. I asked a question about the relative merits; the first person to answer was gfen, the second was Boris. Blame them... Actually I had been browsing the archive for aperture-simulator reasons since March of that year. One of the first posts that I read off there was Boj's goodbye. As for enablement... Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Published!
On Mon, 4 Dec 2006, Dario Bonazza wrote: All text pictures by me, on shooting live concerts and performance: http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/PC200612.jpg It's been published on december issue of PC Photo magazine in Italy. Congratulations Dario! Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 16-50 f2.8
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, John Francis wrote: Decisions, decisions ...What would you do? Depending on your attitude to cost you could buy the 16-45 now and sell it to buy the 16-50. That is not, in principle, terribly nonsensical, in that the lenses are complementary and you can expect them to live in parallel in the market. Except if Pentax surprise us with the cost of the 16-50. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D Wireless Flash
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, Bruce Dayton wrote: daylight for weddings and portraits. Problems that I encountered were that sometimes it would not fire the main flash - it seemed to do with how bright it was outside - something like the popup wasn't powerful enough to be seen. Pentax or Sigma? Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Some random thoughts on my K10D
On Sun, 3 Dec 2006, Peter Loveday wrote: Well, I disagree with some of that. I understand what you're saying, but it seems to make the assumption that choosing MTF is telling the camera to always use the sharpest aperture for a given lens. Correct It *does* already make a choice as to which shutter speed / aperture combination is best; it *will* drop the aperture to less-than-ideal sharpness values in order to keep a reasonable shutter speed, yet it arbitrarily chooses not to go to f1.4. Because it is well known that the lens is pretty mushy down there. Use another Program type. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: First K10D Post: Trying to Stay Calm
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, Paul Stenquist wrote: Thanks Bob. They do have a great relationship. When my mom walks down the hall with her walker, Grace helps her along. BTW, sorry for reposting the same shot. It is incredible, don't apologise. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Size matters [Was: Re: Speaking of Firmware]
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Why do I ask? Well, I just woke up curious this morning, but also, I'm trying to understand why some digital cameras are so big compared to some film cameras. And, since film cameras have a larger mirror and mirror box, the firmware/software seemed that it might contribute to the size of the camera in some way. I was wondering about that myself (esp since the left side, where film cartridges went, has disappeared), then I looked at a picture of the back of the K10D. LCD (where size matters, some think), joystick, buttons, the lot. Weather sealing also adds (think LX vs MX). But I think that Ken has accounted for the form-factor increase in a previous email; many customers who buy high-end stuff want it to show as an expensive thing, so big is good for them. That's why Canon sells such bricks. The high-end, PJ-aimed Z-1p was also an unwieldy, wide brick in terms of appearance, but it was so competent at the time... Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: K10D image quality
On Fri, 1 Dec 2006, Rob Brigham wrote: Immediate thing that comes to mind here is that the K10D shot has waaay too much contrast and the mid range in addition to the shadow areas are dissapearing into blackness. I think you have also gone too far (on my monitor) away from the red cast and the K10D shot now has a greenish cast. I have to say that I would be seriously unhappy with the K10 shot here - unless processing is the cause... Thanks Rob. All that from a post-it size jpg? Am I missing something here? http://tinyurl.com/y5mqe4 Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D list penetration
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Brendan MacRae wrote: K10D. It seems as though Pentax has gotten it right in the DSLR arena for those not sold on the ist cameras. I believe the K10D, and it's brethren the K100 and K110, were the tipping point for Pentax in the minds of many a camera shopper. Let's hope its sales live up to its hype. While I too am chuffed that Pentax seems to have got it right, I would not underestimate the value of the *ist digital cameras in this transition. If I am honest, the Ds still is the most appealing of the lot for me. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D list penetration
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Jaume Lahuerta wrote: Why is it more appealing that the K10D? First of all, I think the K10D (will be) responsible for millions of grins and gazillions (scientific term) of excellent pictures. It is a runaway success for a very good reason: it does what the people want. Size?, high ISO? or is one of that obscure Flash functions that you seem to like? ;-) All of the above. To me. I would miss the grip, but judging from the pictures of the K10D grip, it's too big and ugly. I would miss SR, but I am not prepared to go K100D for that. And I would really miss dust-shake, but there ya go. I think (but should see the Digis face-to-face in order to make a meaningful statement, as opposed to opening gambits) that the functional elegance of the MZ-S is still unsurpassed. The K10D looks to me like the PZ-1p, too wide and in your face. Horses for courses. And no, I won't buy your -Ds, it does not shoot film. Kostas (with a serious Barcelona craving at the moment) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Lens case for FA12-24
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, David Savage wrote: The Tokina is a Pentax lens without the SMC :-) Not sure about that; I think someone (Ken? Dario?) has mentioned that the Tokinas also feature SMC. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: A question about A 70-210/4 lens
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Paul Stenquist wrote: Might as well wait for the new DA* version. There is a *serious* difference in price between the two lenses. Without much research, in the order of 10 times. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: A question about A 70-210/4 lens
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Boris Liberman wrote: By the way, you don't have to smack yourself, really. No! It was all going so well... Since I have preliminary permission to shell out for K10D I seem to have to avoid older lenses... What would happen if you dialled in the longest length in zoom lenses? Until the new lenses come out, you don't have that many options for a mid-range 70-200-odd lens (and actually, given that you shoot digi, the 50-200 my be your best bet right now, even though a consumer lens). Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: A question about A 70-210/4 lens
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Nov 28, 2006, at 5:22 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: It appears to me (although I may be potentially wrong) that photography as a technology has submitted itself to Moore's law. Thus I cannot be sure if in so many months some kind of breakthrough will happen that will make me very unhappy. Since I don't deal in gear but rather use it, I decided I should be very careful not to bleed my money all over the bleeding edge... So I wouldn't even consider biasing new lens purchases to accommodate a 35mm SLR at this point ... it's a complete waste of money in my eyes. I would only buy new lenses for the new DSLR bodies. The best lenses for the current and future bodies are the ones Pentax is producing now, not the ones they produced in the past. Reading between Boris's lines above (Moore's law/breakthrough), he seems to believe that APS-C does not have long to run and Pentax will supercede the limited-circle lenses with newer, FF ones. So what he is doing is delaying the investment in limited-circle lenses. To me it makes sense. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: A question about A 70-210/4 lens
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, John Francis wrote: And those lenses probably won't auto-focus on most of the Pentax bodies sold after 2025 or so, or whenever it is that Pentax drop mass-market support for the screwdriver AF. This applies to all lenses currently available, though. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: GESO: Street shooting with the K10D
On Sun, 26 Nov 2006, Juan Buhler wrote: http://static.flickr.com/99/307064768_7764848c1a_o.jpg Nice one Juan, thanks for sharing. The other three did not feel BW to me. Can I quantify this? No. Maybe I can try to qualify it further if anyone thinks they care. http://static.flickr.com/113/307064968_1be0260699_o.jpg http://static.flickr.com/122/307064888_8bf741ee50_o.jpg http://static.flickr.com/105/307065245_6d4ce69e6d_o.jpg Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Difinitive answer on Sigma flashes and K10D?
On Mon, 27 Nov 2006, David J Brooks wrote: I emailed Sigma friday about this, but no answer recieved yet. James, apologies for answering in a more general than the above way, but I would not use untried and untested equipment on a shoot that matters. This could include the K10D as well. Just thinking slightly outside the box. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Handled the K10D today
On Mon, 27 Nov 2006, cbwaters wrote: Damn, that's a lot of bugs. I wonder how many calories you get just from bugs in your teeth. I guess it depends on the gaps between teeth. But it's mostly protein I guess. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K!0D with 800mm lens at 1/350th
On Sun, 26 Nov 2006, Paul Stenquist wrote: length. This seems to work nicely with my A 400/5.6 and A2XS converter. I shot this at f5.6 @ 1/350th, handheld of course. ISO 1600. It's just a birdbath turned upside down for the winter, but it made for a good test subject. Gotta love SR:-)). http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5257615size=lg Even taking into consideration *who* was handholding, this is absolutely stunning. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT - Prius Fuel Economy
On Sun, 26 Nov 2006, graywolf wrote: An accident, as you say, is unlikely; but after 9/11 that does not seem like an unneeded safety feature. I think that the impact is so great that, even without the increased probability, you cannot ignore the risk. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: No more K10 talk please
On Sat, 25 Nov 2006, Mark Roberts wrote: No, no. You've got it all wrong. It's K and M lenses that are now useless and have to be used as doorstops. Absolutely not. Although built well, with plenty of metal, they just don't have that disctinctive doorstop feel of Canon bodies. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: SMC-DA 10-17mm f3.5-4.5 fisheye-zoom and super macro
On Sun, 26 Nov 2006, David Savage wrote: http://www.arach.net.au/~savage/Misc/IMGP5038.jpg I would see a doctor right away. http://www.arach.net.au/~savage/Misc/IMGP4979.jpg Custom-made? Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: AW: question about *istD controls with grip
On Sat, 25 Nov 2006, Markus Maurer wrote: So the main reason to use a grip is not the additional battery for you? Are you asking in general or for the -D? I use a grip with my MZ-50 (and used to do the same when I had the -5n) 100% of the time I use it. It handles better and the AA Lithiums are a boon. Even with it the camera fits in a generic case. But it lacks the vertical shooting control. The MZ-S grip has the verticals, but I use it only 85% of the times. The vertical controls are excellent, pity they don't appear on the body sans grip. But with the (very sexy to look at and handle) grip, the camera gets just a tad too large. Oh well, there is never a perfect camera... Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Mark is back! (Was 70~210 F vs A)
On Thu, 23 Nov 2006, Mark Cassino wrote: I played around with my brother's Canon 12 megapixel camera this summer, just a little, and was pretty impressed by the improved detail that the extra megapixels bring in. Hi Mark, Great to read you back. Is that the 1.3x camera? I suspect that this may play a bigger part than the pixelage. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Pentax 1.8 85mm
On Fri, 24 Nov 2006, William Robb wrote: We can no longer discuss certain subjects due to the thread hijacking that Fuckface insists on perpetrating. Essentially, we have lost the right to discuss non A series bayonet lenses, and Pentax backwards compatability. I know you think killfiles are for wimps, but, I assure you, they work miracles. Kostas (killfiles work miracles, not wimps) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Thread hijacking, etc.
On Fri, 24 Nov 2006, Mark Roberts wrote: How about not only hijacking a thread but combining several topics into it at the same time? Here's my attempt: http://www.robertstech.com/temp/vfr.jpg It's a photo of my MOTORCYCLE Which I'll be using today in lieu of my TOYOTA PRIUS This shot was taken with my new PENTAX K10D :-) And my old K-SERIES 15mm f/3.5 (sans APERTURE SIMULATOR) Have I missed any other thread topics which might also be covered by this photo? (If only I'd done this shot in infrared with Paul Stenquist's mom on board and used an 85mm f/1.8...) Errr, no flare to assess how the 16-45 would do. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Thread hijacking, etc.
On Fri, 24 Nov 2006, Cotty wrote: On 24/11/06, Dario Bonazza, discombobulated, unleashed: What about a dog? Mark's bike? Bad one Cotters; it would have 2 legs - be crippled - dare-I-say-it. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Tokina 2.8/50-135 in the field
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006, Dario Bonazza wrote: http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2006/11/21/5079.html This is reduced-circle, yes? Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D Build and Size
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006, William Robb wrote: I have found over the years that we share a taste in cameras and loose women. snip The tension is exquisite, on par with some of my other pastimes. Filling up the quotation file, are we? Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Flash voltage for K10D
On Thu, 23 Nov 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: What is unusable about the built-in flash unit? It should operate just as the *ist DS and other models do: full output, unmetered. Hi Godfrey! How is the Prius doing with the coal consumption? What? Hib-what? How do you spell that? Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: OT - Prius Fuel Economy (was: Flash voltage for K10D)
On Thu, 23 Nov 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Nov 23, 2006, at 6:21 AM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: Hi Godfrey! How is the Prius doing with the coal consumption? What? Hib-what? How do you spell that? I'm not sure what you meant by coal consumption or Hib-what in the questions above. I was cheekily comparing the progress of TTL vs manual and tables against coal and hybrid cars :-) But the report on the Prius was good too. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: 70~210 F vs A
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006, Bruce Dayton wrote: Along with that, the F version is a two touch, the A is a one touch. So for the A, you focus and zoom at the same time. For speedy zoom and focusing, this is much better. But it can cause problems with zoom creep when on a tripod and hands off. The F lens has a ring for focus and a ring for zoom. One big issue is whether you need/want AF or not. Only the F has AF. FWIW, I have the A 70-210/4 and am very happy with it. I generally don't mind MF lenses, and frequently MF AF lenses. However, I found the A to be far too heavy and unwieldy to focus and zoom, and replaced it with the F. AF is effectively another hand for me. Mid-range long zooms were a 15-year problem for Pentax, until the 50-200 came about. The few of us still using film still have the same problem. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K 18 f/3.5 on Digital (was Any screens for manual focusingon*istDS?)
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006, John Whittingham wrote: element. I've had a MIR 20mm as well, neither the MIR or Tokina seemed as good as the K 18mm IMHO and apparently both are longer than their stated focal length, although I cannot confirm this. I think the K18 is also more of a 19; I seem to have read this on the list at some point. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K 18 f/3.5 on Digital (was Any screens for manual focusingon*istDS?)
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006, John Whittingham wrote: Yes, I think you may be right there. To be honest I rarely use anything wider than 24mm on film unless I need to. Each year I have to shoot large groups on people at work and occasionally I need something as wide as the K 18mm. I think it's great for interiors (on film), though anything from 24 and wider stumps me with flash; always something like a sofa is too close and affects the lighting. Have you gone digital yet Kostas? No, still Superia 400 and Tri-X @ 800. And 1 GBP stamp (thank you Royal Mail) and prints and CD land on my doormap. Good to see you're still here on the list. Erm, have you asked the fellow-members? Kostas (thanks John) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K 18 f/3.5 on Digital (was Any screens for manual focusing on*istDS?)
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote: OK. I think that on this lens - and a few others - the front filter can really degrade the image as the front element is strongly curved. Ah, so this is why some come with built-in filters. Thanks Shel. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Using a Super Tak w/ istDS
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, John Francis wrote: On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 08:40:51PM +, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: What these in particular do have is a 1.5x magnification, . . . They don't, you know. Ooops! Thanks John. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Using a Super Tak w/ istDS
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, J. C. O'Connell wrote: Newer cameras dont have magic finders that change the laws of physics... What these in particular do have is a 1.5x magnification, which should change your perception about what you are argumenting on/trying to focus. Sure, an 105 may be easier to focus *all else being equal*, but the 35 is no longer a WA, not when mounted on an APS-C body. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Interesting Article
On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, frank theriault wrote: mode. A similar situation is when body is bought as a kit with a consumer zoom, and that zoom is never taken off the camera. Why buy a camera with the ability to change lenses if that feature's never used? Bigger negative, better flash, better ergonomics, perhaps better lens... Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: OT - Only in England :-)
On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, Bob W wrote: I rather like the allergy information printed on bags of nuts: Warning - may contain nuts. Yes, and underneath that a warning that it has been produced in a facility that handles nuts... Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: DPReview taking a new stance?
On Mon, 6 Nov 2006, Bruce Dayton wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0611/06110601nikond40.asp It's really been designed for people who want to say they have a Nikon, but don't really want to take any pictures. So anything that can be removed, has been - lowers the cost. grin Flash sync 1/500? Surely not. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: DPReview taking a new stance?
On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, Thibouille wrote: Why not? D70/D80 use electronic shutter (sensor) to achieve those speeds AFAIR... Is that different to the technology employed by Pentax? Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: DPReview taking a new stance?
On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, Adam Maas wrote: Yes, it's a hybrid shutter [explanation deleted] Thanks Adam. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Pentax Story
On Sun, 5 Nov 2006, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff Subject: Re: Another Pentax Story Well, I can't shoot underexposed to get darker images and darker shadows as I've done in the past without incurring gobs of noise that ruin the image. A couple of the people I hang with, one is a third generation portrait guy, have mentioned that digital seems to fall apart somewhere around Zone III. They note both excessive noise and a loss of shadow detail due to blocking up. Without first-hand experience[1], I think that we are confusing exposure and outcome. Yep, shoot to the right to include a lot of information on the digital negative. Then post-process as you like to produce the image that you prefer. Sure, you won't get the character of Tri-X pushed that many then developed in agitated urine or whatever. Kostas [1] That's exactly the thing, I still shoot film because I prefer to have someone else do all these things for me. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Pentax Story
On Mon, 6 Nov 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote: I posted a shot here a while back - Bette's Diner - in which I shot so far to the right to the right that I literally had to paint in some highlight details, yet the darker areas of the photo were still very noisy. This may have been the result of having to shoot @ 1600 ISO, but, as has been said, that area in Zones 1,2,and 3 were a bit of a mess. Maybe using noise reduction software is a solution. This? http://www.mail-archive.com/pdml@pdml.net/msg337082.html Can't access the picture (the apostrophe?). Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Pentax Story
On Mon, 6 Nov 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote: I took the pic down but, for you, have just put it up again. You can see all the noise in the dark apron and pants of the waitress, and the muddiness in Zones 1,2, and perhaps 3. http://home.earthlink.net/~ebay-pics/bkfast_at_bette's.html Thanks Shel, I see what you are saying. Did you shoot it jpg? Is the RAW somewhere and would you consider posting it for people to experiment? I am curious. Coming from the please do it for me, guv crowd, an idea of what you might ask trained personnel could be a nice experiment (or so I think :-)). Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Pentax Story
On Sun, 5 Nov 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I'm interested in that psychological rift and how it affects the experience and expression of photography. This says that I will most likely dust off a couple of my remaining film cameras sometime soon and explore the Rift. Not sure you will exeprience much, Godfrey. You are prety acclimatised with the digital workflow; if it weren't for you, you would have gone back. But I am really curious about your findings. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Home made ring flash
On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Brian Walters wrote: Came across this on the Digihack site. Ugly but interesting. It even uses an old Pentax AF 280T flashgun (think I've ot one lying around, somewhere) http://www.dennisonbertram.com/hackmaster/2005/02/build-your-own-ring-flash.htm Disconcerting weight on the mount... Kostas (just sold my AF080C; didn't quite use it enough) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Home made ring flash
On Sun, 5 Nov 2006, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Kostas Kavoussanakis Subject: Re: Home made ring flash http://www.dennisonbertram.com/hackmaster/2005/02/build-your-own-ring-flash.htm Disconcerting weight on the mount... Its a couple of peices of cardboard and some styrofoam. Yes, but the whole rig (including the flash) hangs off the end of the lens: http://www.dennisonbertram.com/hackmaster/images/ring%20flash9.jpg Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Pentax's Tatamiya Interview Part II, #2
Many thanks Ken. I am going through them slowly. On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, K.Takeshita wrote: Dropped dust would be gathered on the adhesive tape placed below the SR unit. ANy idea if this will be (user) replaceable? Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Pentax's Tatamiya Interview Part II, #3
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, K.Takeshita wrote: Q: What happens on dust gathered on adhesive sheet? Oops, spoke too soon. Specifically, in sensitivity priority mode, the sensitivity can be set at either 1/3 step or 1/2 step by a wheel on the grip, and aperture and shutter speed change accordingly. In shutter speed aperture priority mode, when shutter speed and aperture are set by dials, the optimum sensitivity would be set automatically. So, in M one sets 3 values? Sounds good. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Enabled - with a D200
On Thu, 2 Nov 2006, Amita Guha wrote: On 11/1/06, Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Amita, as long as will *keep* posting *your* pictures to *this* list, I shall not flame or blame... Even if they're made with a Nikon? ;) I don't think there is a limitation on the PAWs and PESOs. The PUG is a different matter. Perhaps if you use a Pentax UV filter? :-) Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Pentax's Tatamiya Interview Part II, #1
On Thu, 2 Nov 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Nov 2, 2006, at 1:46 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote: The obvious difference between digital and film bodies is of course with a digital body you are stuck with the sensitivity/capabilities of the sensor for the lifetime of the camera whereas for film bodies you could select from a vast number of film types specific to the photographers requirements. Of course, if the vast number of film types dwindles to two or three, and none of those provide even comparable quality compared to the least of the digital bodies ... I find your answer to miss the point. Paal compared film with digital, Rob replied also comparing the models, to explain why sensitivity is now a camera issue. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D aimed as D200 killer
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006, Paul Stenquist wrote: 135 Kodak TMZ 3200: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=800895 Extemely interesting picture, but I have to concentrate on the subject at hand. How much (if any) of the grain comes from the scanning? How much (if any) from the development/processing? Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D aimed as D200 killer/Translation of interview
Thanks Ken! Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: AW: Metz 32CT4 ist DS
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006, Markus Maurer wrote: Will I be able to use an Pentax AF280T or AF400T flash in auto mode only on the new Pentax digital bodies or should TTL work? The same question for my Metz flashes with 372 module... The story is a bit complicated and I should not get it wrong. However, Pentax has been gradually dropping TTL in favour of P-TTL; I believe the K10D will not do TTL and someone may enlighten us about the K100/110D. Pentax has had the P-TTL-capable but puny AF360FGZ available for yonks and recently and at last released the much beefier AF540FGZ (still not available in the UK, BTW). Metz on the other hand are not releasing a P-TTL module. Auto (the kind that's measured by the flash) should always work as well as it has always worked with your flash of choice. If I was keen to use my flash I would check the camera manual before buying. HTH, Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D Availability in U.S.
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, K.Takeshita wrote: Imagine what might happen if BH (i.e., the U.S.) are allowed to sell the new products one month earlier than anyone else. There would be a lot of unhappy/angry importers, some of whom might even refuse to buy Pentax in the future? Esp. with the current dollar price and the traditionally higher European (esp UK) pricing, our dealers this side of the pond might lose significant sales. K10/100D a bit earlier, they would not have announced certain release date, only to delay it in a matter of a few weeks. I don't think they could. They were between a rock (Photokina) and a hard place (Xmas). Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Pentax 16-45 vs 18-55
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Adam Maas wrote: It also focuses much closer (28cm instead of 50cm). Yes, of course, it's a 45, not a 90 at the long end. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: AW: AW: Metz 32CT4 ist DS
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006, Markus Maurer wrote: Maybe I can disable Preflash on the Pentax D to be able to trigger some old slave Osram flashes with the build in flash, Check the manual very carefully. I would absolutely *not* take such functionality for granted. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: OT: Snowflake
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006, Bob W wrote: Try coke some time. It's the real thing. Nah, too many bubbles... Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Dealing with eBay vendors. Was: Re: The JCO survey
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Cotty wrote: XXX may be a nutty distant cousin to the devil, but YYY is no angel IMO. Come on folks, what kind of crap is that. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Support your Local Camera Shop (was: Re: Price of K10D in Oz)
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, John Celio wrote: They had money to burn, but the way I saw it, they were too greedy to pay for the services I/we provided. How many of them used the service? How many had already done the research, asked for specific items then asked to pay? wanted to punch them in the face. I could understand Joe Shmoe needing a discount, but Daddy Warbucks? No, sir. So what was your social policy? Did you offer Joe Shmoe a discount if they were too shy to ask? Were you asking to see the payslip of people asking for a discount? How could you tell? And was your policy consistent with the shop's? I send my films to be developed at the other side of the country. It appears to be a small lab, but it's not local. I chose them because they have Fuji equipment and paper, but I would choose a mail-order house anyway, as I don't need to take the film there nor pick it up, a service that my local labs do not provide (actually someone tried to charge me more for the privilege). There are reasons for everything. I am conscious to shop from the little shops, but I won't take local tat because it's local. YMMV. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Dealing with eBay vendors. Was: Re: The JCO survey
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Scott Loveless wrote: Give Kostas a break. He's good people. ;) Thanks Scott. Forbes goes straight to /dev/null anyway. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: [second try] K10D official prices in France
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, mike wilson wrote: If you can afford a holiday in Switzerland from America, the last thing you will worry about is saving $100 or so on the price of a camera. Gentlemen, Two words: business trips. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Anyone checked this out yet?
On Tue, 24 Oct 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote: A 35/1.4 is such a perfect focal length/aperture combination. I've wanted such a lens from Pentax for years. Well, you had that (if we are talking FOV). It's not going to be FF, so, if it happens, it's a direct replacement for the K/M/A/F/FA 50/1.4. What do issues like backfocus spell for an intended 35/1.4? Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: [second try] K10D official prices in France
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, David Savage wrote: Wouldn't work for me, Switzerland is land locked so I wouldn't imagine it has a big shipbuilding industry. Let me entertain you: they even have military navy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Switzerland#Naval_Patrol Kostas (as the article says, you can only say that to tease them :-)) p.s.: Our Markus was/is a sailor, no? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Anyone checked this out yet?
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, Lucas Rijnders (Priv?) wrote: More to the point: Boz lists details for an M35/1.4. When compared to the M50/1.4 you see three more elements, two more groups, more complicated construction, much larger and almost twice as heavy... Things have moved on since then, I am sure... It's a good thing you shoot film, Kostas :o) Absolutely, for many other reasons too :-) Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Moulton Barn
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, Jack Davis wrote: Appreciate it, Ken. My slight concern has been that it makes the scene somewhat heavy on the left. I like the tree on the left. Framing and another piece of information. Kostas Jack --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A wonderful capture Jack, but I personally would have left out the tree in the left hand edge, It doesn't add anything but is distracting. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Jack Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PESO: Moulton Barn Another barn. This time, my favorite overall barn scene. I don't suppose this scene needs to be identified to many of you. This, and another barn close by are both owned by the Moulton family. Both are maintained in an arrested state of decay, (I think is the term) primarily for photographers. Saw a photo of it some years back and was impressed. Went to Teton National Park a couple times before I got around to locating it one early fall. Early on a semi cloudy morning. I've often wondered if I should have included so much of the tree on the left.(?) LX, and I believe an A-28~80 f/3.5-4.5. (don't recall film)..not Velvia. Jack Thanks for all comments. http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=191 __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Comparison examples FA77...
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: The Canon 85/1.2L is a superb lens ... not that I think it's better than the FA77, but it is quite comparable at least in sharpness from my short experience using one. What is the open-aperture difference of these lenses, 1 stop (at 1.2!)? Can you really compare them given this (and with the longest being the brightest)? Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: [second try] K10D official prices in France
Got them both :-) Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: [second try] K10D official prices in France
On Tue, 24 Oct 2006, P. J. Alling wrote: At about $1.25 to to the euro, that's not that amazing a price. Once you add in the taxes... The comparison is with France (cheapest stated so far) for us Europeans (830 vs 650+taxes Euro). But I think customs come into play when buying from Switzerland? American prices are a different ball-game, as we have discussed in the past. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: For those who worry about K10D release...
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, J and K Messervy wrote: They should have anticipated the demand. Anyone could see a body with those specs for that price would be in high demand. Their problem was that they *had* to announce at Photokina. The development slipped a little, so everything slipped a little. I ag ree with Paul, everything is nice and dandy. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: For those who worry about K10D release...
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, Jaume Lahuerta wrote: So, regarding your latest coments on the K10D, don't forget to take it with yout in your next visit to Barcelona... Err, I am well pleased for Pentax and for all you happy people with preorders and intentions to buy it. The K10D is going to be one fine camera, apart from its catastrophic flaw: it does not take film. I am pleased to say it's going to be the MZ-S again :-) Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: For those who worry about K10D release...
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, J and K Messervy wrote: have it in my hands before 13 Dec as I'll be going with a bunch of mates to a local racetrack where I'll be using it to take shots of them circulating on their motorbikes. The DL's autofocus will be hopeless for that. Being conservative by nature, I would avoid shooting with a new to me equipment without much practice/familiarisation first. Oh, and I can only photograph kids on a swing if prefocussed; extrapolate for racing :-) Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: The JCO survey
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, P. J. Alling wrote: How many people actually wade through the entire manual, except for the anal retentives on this list, that is. What a load of bollocks. So (forget Pentax, K lenses and the rest for now) it's the company's fault that the user can't be arsed to read the manual? Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: The JCO survey
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, Toine wrote: You probably also want matrix metering with M lenses? Yes, it actually is possible, or at least it was with the film bodies, with the modification Mark Roberts and others have made to their lenses. But, as we have said in a different thread, Pentax won't tell us what/if something has changed in the matrix metering of the DSLRs, so people speculate that this is just another mindless decision to cripple the cameras further. Sorry, to make them cheaper. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: The JCO survey
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote: I suspect you are pretty close to accurate. I also suspect that Pentax will, if this scenario plays out, make a larger throated mount with the same registration distance to allow adapted K mount lenses to function via a non optical adaptor. Or maybe they will go 2mm longer, who knows? After all, they have to sell lenses (and the customers *must* care about the companies' needs). Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: The JCO survey
On Sun, 22 Oct 2006, P. J. Alling wrote: William Robb wrote: Use A series lenses or later rather than 30 year old outdated equipment. Simple. Once again, why? Because money (which makes the world go round, lest we forget) is no issue. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: The JCO survey
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Oct 20, 2006, at 8:52 AM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On the ethical side and comparison with Canon that we discussed yesterday, the bottom-line is that Canon users got something from the change of register (let alone mount). Pentax users got nothing from the removal of the aperture simulator. As I have said in the past, I understand the need for progress, so I am OK with the prospect of the SSM lenses not having a shaft-AF system, because there is clearly something in it for us. There is nothing in it for the user from the removal of the aperture simulator. Buyers of Pentax DSLR bodies obtain a lower priced body with more relevant features and higher quality as a consequence of dispensing with artifacts no longer needed for their operation. I consider that a plus. Are you suggesting that you are using all the features of each of your cameras? If not, please don't isolate the particular artifact in your (non) quest for a cheaper body. Thanks! Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: The JCO survey
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, P?l Jensen wrote: If it cost $5 and you sell a million cameras thats five million. Wow! So if they sold 2 million cameras it would be 10 million! Think of all the savings they could make if they did not manufacture cameras! This feature, like all others, has been and would be sold to the customer. Until the kludge, the only complaint with it was that it had been removed from entry-level film SLRs; nobody had ever thought to complain about paying for it on the -6, the -5 and -5n. Can we drop this please, it's meaningless. I personally believe that the lens mount without mechanical coupling are more suited for robotic assembly. Mechanical linkages needs precision and is probably far more expensive to manufacture I suspect. Therefore I don't think we will see a completely compatible lens mount in anything but a top-of-the-line body if at all. A, interesting arguments/conjectures, at last. Pentax's tradition had been that midrange bodies had it as well. But, the way things have regressed, seeing it even in a top-of-the-line body would be nice. Only the current (proposed) top-of-the-line body, the -10D lacks it. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
HB John Celio [Was: Re: The JCO survey]
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, John Celio wrote: P.S.: It's my birthday today, JCO, so be nice. HB John. Hope a nice job comes your way real soon now. Kostas (whose good mate's bd is also today :-)) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: The JCO survey
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Kostas Kavoussanakis Subject: Re: The JCO survey Are you suggesting that you are using all the features of each of your cameras? If not, please don't isolate the particular artifact in your (non) quest for a cheaper body. Are you suggesting that every DSLR buyer has a raft of K/M lenses that they want to use? Or that K/M lenses can take advantage of every feature that a modeern camera offers? Not at all, William, not at all. I have K, M, A, F and FA lenses, so I know 1st hand what's on and what's not. I am complaining about isolating the linkage as a cost saving on the basis that Godders and other will not use it. Why not victimise the pop-up flash, the thinning filter, the program modes, the grip mounts, the flash shoe, heck, even the lens dismount button; how many people will only ever mount one lens on their DSLR? Because some people will use them, just like the linkage. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Anti-shake (unscientific) test
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Gasha wrote: Yesterday i mounted my old screwmount 300/4.5 lens using M39-M42-K adapters...metered 1/15 shutter speed wide open. And did some tests, while watching TV. Wow! Results are impressive. I got 1 good shot, and 1 very sharp one. Others were blurry. I noticed that i get blurry shots when firing next shot just 1 second after previous one. So - no hurry with anti-shake. Can you share? Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: The JCO survey
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote: Why do you think Pentax should cater to people who don't buy new product, thereby supporting them and their dealers? Because by buying your used lens I am giving you money to buy a new one. Isn't this why you are selling? You say they have removed the aperture simulator from the mount on DSLR cameras, but they haven't removed anything from that mount. On the ethical side and comparison with Canon that we discussed yesterday, the bottom-line is that Canon users got something from the change of register (let alone mount). Pentax users got nothing from the removal of the aperture simulator. As I have said in the past, I understand the need for progress, so I am OK with the prospect of the SSM lenses not having a shaft-AF system, because there is clearly something in it for us. There is nothing in it for the user from the removal of the aperture simulator. Not that the realisation of this will bring it back (or even introduce P.J's suggestion for Av)... Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: The JCO survey
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Kostas Kavoussanakis Subject: Re: The JCO survey On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote: Why do you think Pentax should cater to people who don't buy new product, thereby supporting them and their dealers? Because by buying your used lens I am giving you money to buy a new one. Isn't this why you are selling? I bought all of my M lenses from a guy who was selling Pentax to buy Nikon. That transaction didn't do a lot for Pentax. You win some, you lose some. They should focus on producing attractive lines so as to keep old owners and entice new. Not that they are not doing great currently in that respect! I don't think there is more to talk about in the other subject; I won't reiterate what I had just written, so you won't have to either :-) Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: The JCO survey
On Wed, 18 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote: Truthfully, it's like asking Pentax to put an aperture cam follower onto a DSLR. The big difference between Canon and Pentax regarding this is that it's recent history with Pentax. I cannot see how an aperture cam removal is the same as a register change. To me that's the major difference, not how recently it happened. We have discussed economics, so let's not go into the the $5 times 35 gazilion years argument. I understand all your other points, as we have discussed ad nauseam. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: The JCO survey
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote: Had Canon so desired, they could have left the register distance alone, and it should have allowed adapting FD lenses to EOS cameras, though the lenses themselves may have needed modification. It's a pretty simple concept to get ones head around. Thanks, I had assumed that there was an advantage to the user from the register-distance change that Canon introduced. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: FS - MZS, LX, 300A*, 15mm ...
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, Vic MacBournie wrote: K100 f2.8 K105 or M100? Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: High ISO Images
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, Joseph Tainter wrote: What I mean by Pentax guys is the employees of the national/regional importers, like Pentax USA. The ones from Pentax USA usually disclose little, but others are not so reticent. What this means is that Doug's statement below does not highlight an inconsistency in what he attributes to you: 1. You say that Pentax never communicates to its customers. Yet you also, in other threads, often discount what Pentax guys do say. So basically, it appears that you want to hear from Pentax, but you won't believe what they say. It's perplexing. What Joe says is that Pentax keeps us in the dark, as far as official channels are concerned. Our source of information is (frequently contradictory) leaks, 2nd, 3rd and 23rd hand. A bit more of the former might eliminate the gravity people put into the latter; it may even eliminate it altogether. BTW, as far as I am concerned, you can safely ignore the attributions of malice to yourself. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: High ISO Images
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006, Joseph Tainter wrote: This moire business is starting to get my attention. Four K10D images downloaded today, four images producing noticeable moire. I don't see such problems with images from my *istD. Are you shooting JPG on the -D? I am not a digi-man (because I don't want to care about these things) but my guess is that you are sharpening a lossy, sharpened artifact. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K1D aperature simulator survey, part Deaux
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006, P. J. Alling wrote: I think you're being too complicated. How about this. Call it auto stop down compensation A very good use of the information already there (open-aperture metering is happening anyway, I presume). Nice one P.J. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K1D aperature simulator survey, part Deaux
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006, Cory Papenfuss wrote: No extra dials or buttons to press. If you change the aperture you get instant exposure compensation. I hadn't thought of it being used like that. It's pretty slick though... set a baseline aperture and then +- a little could be done with the ring. Ring +GB (lest we forget :-)) Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Samsung 50-200 [Was: Re: Thoughs on lenses for K100D]
On Wed, 18 Oct 2006, Jan van Wijk wrote: I have this lens for sale now (225 Euros :-) and got the Samsung 50-200mm instead (just 149 Euros) which does a lot better sofar (just got it this week). Interesting! Why the Samsung? Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K1D aperature simulator survey, part Deaux
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006, Cory Papenfuss wrote: Of course it's academic since it's not an option with the current firmware, but I don't think it would be too bad. The +-EV only works within 3 EV from wide open, and even then you have to do the math of how many stops you are from wide-open. Or 6 if you calibrate on 3 stops up from open-aperture. I have done it, Cory, it's a pain, even without having to go into a menu to indicate the aperture. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K1D aperature simulator survey, part Deaux
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006, Cory Papenfuss wrote: I still think that's more confusing than what I'm thinking. All I am saying is that what you are thinking is confusing (user-unfriendliness is what I have experienced) and will not solve the problem. How exactly do you get 6 EV? The camera meters at open no matter what you set the ring to. I set the ISO 3 stops darker than the desired exposure, so it overexposes by 3 stops. This means that open+3 is the actual correct exposure, thus I have 3 stops either side. Of course it's so user-unfriendly that I may have got the above wrong even in the description, so I quickly bought a -5n. I very frequently stopped down without fixing the compensation, and occasionally compensated the wrong way. The linkage is the only way to do it fully and properly. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K1D aperature simulator survey, part Deaux
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Kostas Kavoussanakis Subject: Re: K1D aperature simulator survey, part Deaux I haven't read a workaround from either of you that is as workable and user freindly as what is implemented now. Don't know about Cory, but the reason why I have not suggested a workable workaround is that I don't think that there is one. Which is why I concluded that the only way to do it fully and properly is through the mechanical linkage. Guess what, you deleted it from your quote. You both must be engineers. Excellent point, William. Pray hazard a guess as to the background of someone who comments without reading. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K1D aperature simulator survey, part Deaux
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006, Cory Papenfuss wrote: Seriously though... like I said before, these could be added in *addition* to the GB hack. In terms of economics, how would your suggestions stack up compared to putting the bloody thing in? Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K1D aperature simulator survey, part Deaux
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006, Cory Papenfuss wrote: Then it would be equivalent to Av mode on an 'A' lens. You'd just have to remember to change the in-body set aperture with the aperture ring if you changed that. To me that would be an improvement that could be added in addition to the 'green-button' kludge. It has the advantage of allowing multi-segment metering, allows for changing light conditions, etc. Cory, There is no real benefit from this, in my experience. You can try this by shooting a cripple-mount film body with a pre-A lens (-50 or, I think -30, the -60 just does not fire). In that case, you need to explicitly dial in over/under exposure or set the ISO from the body. It was so unwieldy and error-prone that I ended up buying a -5n. ... still much easier to put the $5 part back in of course... I would love this to be the case. Forget it. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K10D 22 bit A/D conversion
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006, Digital Image Studio wrote: The 22 bit ADC will primarily be resolving random noise in the 6 to 7 bits, in other words when combined with this sensor it's sheer overkill. What is the penalty to the user from the overkill? Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: A Call to STFU About JCO
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006, John Celio wrote: This is a call for everyone to just shut the f*ck up Since you put it so nicely, I will go out of my way. You are such a motivator. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
