Re: SV: For the Collector who needs one of everything.
On Sat, 17 Sep 2005, mike wilson wrote: Cotty wrote: IFAIR the endoscope is currently the main source of income for Pentax. If it's not #1, it's certainly right up there... I don't think Pentax appreciates being made the butt of a joke like that... Yes. Enough of the wisecracks. Sadly, I doubt we've reached the end of them yet. Time for me to split, then. Yeah, must dash - I'm still at the orifice. That's hole-ly inapproriate. Not sure I agree. The bottom-line is to talk out of the right aperture. Kostas
Re: It's Here and It Works!
On Thu, 15 Sep 2005, John Francis wrote: To beg a question is to side-step it, and to assume the answer; to ignore the fact that there possibly might be a question there. Isn't this what he meant? It's certainly what he ought to do if he is happy with his method! Only i don't think Shel shoots slides (mode akin to the metering digi requires), but he can adjust. Kostas
Re: OT: Historic documents in computer science
On Fri, 16 Sep 2005, David Mann wrote: On Sep 16, 2005, at 7:15 AM, Bob W wrote: I have a font on my PC called Dijkstra, based on his handwriting. Way, way cool... Can you share an excerpt? Kostas
Re: Mirror prism
On Thu, 15 Sep 2005, Frankie Lee wrote: Please advise which camera in MZ/ZX series consist of mirror prism instead of glass prism in viewfinder? Thanks. I don't see this info on Boj's site: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/bodies/MZ-ZX/index.html Which one concerns you? The -S, the -3, the -5/5n are all glass. The -30, -50 and -60 are all mirror. Not sure about the others. HTH, Kostas
RE: *ist D or DS AF500FTZ for Weddings?
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Jens Bladt wrote: I wonder how the flash actually DOES work, if the light output is indifferent to the ASA setting? The flash quenches when its sensor is happy. If your lens aperture and distance were correct (indicated by the slider and thus affected by the ISO setting), you are OK, if not, you are not OK :-) Or so I think. From Boj: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/technology/hot-shoe/index.html Automatic Flash --- An automatic flash is one that can limit the flash duration and therefore the amount of light that it outputs. The control function is performed by electronics contained inside the flash and guided by a light-sensitive sensor located on the front of the flash. When the sensor detects that enough light has returned back to the flash, the control electronics terminate the flash discharge. In the simplest flashes, the flash capacitor is shorted (so the extra charge is lost), but in more advanced ones (those labeled thyristor), the charge is preserved for the next flash discharge. An automatic flash achieves proper exposure not only when GN = d * F, but also when GN d * F. Automatic flash operation achieves correct exposures not only in straight-on applications, but also when the flash head is tilted, swiveled or covered with various gels and reflectors. To perform its calculations, the flash assumes that some F (usually f/4 or f/5.6) is selected on the lens. Failure to match F results in under- or over-exposure. Program Flash - Pentax did not make any purely automatic flashes. Instead, they added another feature, called program flash, and gave the flashes in this category the SA designation. Program flashes solve the problem of the photographer forgetting to set the correct F before every flash exposure. When used in program exposure mode, the flash and the body work together to set F. This capability requires an extra contact, mode, so the flash can tell the body what brightness it will produce. Knowing the film speed, the body calculates and sets F. Some SA flashes have the extra functionality of signaling when proper exposure was achieved. This is done either by lighting up a lamp on the back of the flash or communicating with the body (via the ready contact) and letting it make the flash symbol in the view-finder blink. For the reasons mentioned earlier, I harly ever use a flash in bright daylight. I know PJ's do it all the time. I never understood why. Contrast control. You get even illumination and remove the shadows under the eyes. I believe light looks better comming from above. I agree, it is softer and more diffused, but requires some direct flash as well to eliminate the shadows. Thus the common white card (or diffuser) trick. Kostas
Re: Another quiz!
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Dario Bonazza wrote: And if I was a woman, I'd be Aphrodite. Interesting... Was she his wife as well? Can't remember. Kostas
Re: How bad is the 135 F2.5 TAKUMAR?
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Glen wrote: For what it's worth, the lens I was asking about is the K-mount version. I'm not sure what difference that might make, other than the SMC coating. I think different formula as well, check Boj's site (and compare with the SMC Pentax 135/2.5). Kostas
Re: Some Posting Suggestions
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, John Francis wrote: On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 12:45:46PM -0700, Shel Belinkoff wrote: BOTTOM POSTING: many listers post their replies to the bottom of original messages, or at the bottom of a series of replies and threads. Often the post is just a simple me too type post, or something simple and short. How about posting such responses ABOVE the messages, and, while you're at it, perhaps trimming the messages to reflect just the relevant comments to which you're responding. A. Because it reverses the normal flow of reading messages I read a different meaning in Shel's suggestion. He did not go into futile TB-BP herecy, but recommended TP in the case of a Me too answer, particularly if one cannot be bothered to trim before answering. Sure, there is overlap with the trimming recommendation. Perhaps the above could be phrased as an alternative to trimming in the case of Me toos. Shel will correct me if I misread. Kostas
Re: Re: Another quiz!
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, mike wilson wrote: From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/09/14 Wed AM 10:20:01 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Another quiz! On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Dario Bonazza wrote: And if I was a woman, I'd be Aphrodite. Interesting... Was she his wife as well? Can't remember. Shame on you! 8-))) What do you mean shame on me? You think that cartesian products of all people in a set (irrespective of gender) is an Eastenders invention? The real soap opera starred the Olympian Gods! When Zeus fancied a quick one he would turn to rain, or even manure (but not a cricket umpire[1]) to get it! Kostas [1] Sneakily going back on-topic.
RE: *ist D or DS AF500FTZ for Weddings?
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Jens Bladt wrote: Well, if the ISO setting on the back doesn't have any effect on the adjustments in the flash unit (if it's just a visual memory indication, as suggested by you) the flash meter will not know when to cut off the flash duration, will it? It will always cut when its sensor thinks that enough light has reached *it*. That's not always the same as how much light has reached the film/sensor, which is affected by the aperture (which is in turn affected by the ISO setting). It is not just a visual memory indication, (and I never suggested that); as you change the ISO setting on the flash, the aperture *indicators* on it, change too, so you adjust the aperture accordingly. Kostas
Re: RE: *ist D or DS AF500FTZ for Weddings?
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, mike wilson wrote: All assuming that you are using the maximum synchronisation speed. Not sure that comes to play (and you mean minimum, no?). It's far longer that the discharge time, so why would it matter? As it's not fixed across cameras, I would expect the flashes to have provisos or sth (or a calculator parameter). Kostas
Re: *ist D or DS AF500FTZ for Weddings?
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Igor Roshchin wrote: I am not sure if it was entirely my fault or indeed, a) this flash does not work as well with the DS as it does with ZX5n as a fill-in flash; Having spoken to a (Nikon) wedding photographer and read this list for a while, TTL flash does not work consistently on digital. The histogram is your friend, RAW is your saviour. Kostas (film is *my* friend and I need no saviour ;-)
Re: Ashes (was: Rob Studdert)
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, frank theriault wrote: Sorry, I still don't understand the game. However, what I really like is that they all look so smashing, dressed in white and all. Absolutely, and wooly-pully too! The sign of a true sport. The butchers watching over them too, hands behind back, I think it's great! There are rumours the UK will introduce it in the 2012 Olympics, except they are worried *that* competition may not finish in time for the 2016 successor. Kostas (plus, there's just 5 countries in the world that understand what's going on. Or at least they think that something is going on) p.s.: Thanks for the URL, Mike. Does it say that the coin draw is instrumental to the final outcome more often than not?
Re: Ashes
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, E.R.N. Reed wrote: Kostas (plus, there's just 5 countries in the world that understand what's going on. Or at least they think that something is going on) There are more than 5 countries in the Commonwealth Caribbean. They're small, but they're still countries. My statement is a clear hyperbole, as big as the size of the countries you are mentioning is small :-))) Kostas
Re: CR-2016 Lithium Batteries for istDS
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Mark Roberts wrote: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sep 13, 2005, at 2:15 AM, danilo wrote: I fear it is one *more* thing to be concerned about, as a button battery needs a simple removal/replacement procedure when it reaches its end of life, while a condensator needs *soldering*. but maybe its life is long enough to make no difference at all... Capacitors last virtually forever. They just don't store as much energy as a battery does. Aluminum electrolytics dry out and die with age. This must be the type in the PS of my 8-yo telly. They were all replaced at the tune of 73 GBP this week... Kostas :-(
RE: *ist D or DS AF500FTZ for Weddings?
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Jens Bladt wrote: The AF280T, however, will allow you to set the flash unit to a faster speed than the camera, which makes it possible to cheat the flash unit into giving slightly too litle light = this is a fill flash option. What in TTL mode? Using the slider at the back? I doubt it. Can you elaborate? Kostas
RE: *ist D or DS AF500FTZ for Weddings?
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Jens Bladt wrote: Moving the slider in the back of the AF280T does not have any effect, when working in TTL Mode. I doubt it has an effect in Auto mode either, but I will let the more experienced/knowledgeable people speak. The slider is only an indicator for the aperture that the user manually sets, was my understanding. Now a question for you and Bruce: I don't have this flash, sorry. Kostas
Re: PAW: G and A
Many thanks to those of you who commented on my PAW. Kostas
Re: MZ-5
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Frankie Lee wrote: Are their viewfinder is bright enough in focusing manual lens? I have no problem even with the MZ-50 (which has a penta-mirror). But your mileage may vary, and the maximum aperture of your lens is a critical factor. Kostas
RE: Pentax SMC F 35-135 f3.5-4.5
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005, Robert Whitehouse wrote: Thanks for the link - great photos. I tested this lens against a Pentax AF 28-90 and it came out a lot sharper. (tested = took a few shots in my back yard !) Look out for the bokeh (240KB, folks :-) http://www.epcc.ed.ac.uk/~kavousan/owl2_1200.jpg Kostas
RE: Pentax SMC F 35-135 f3.5-4.5
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005, Don Sanderson wrote: -Original Message- From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2005 11:59 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: Pentax SMC F 35-135 f3.5-4.5 Look out for the bokeh (240KB, folks :-) http://www.epcc.ed.ac.uk/~kavousan/owl2_1200.jpg That's a beautiful shot Kostas. Thanks Don. I really like owls as well. I should get my act together and support it in our zoo. Shame about the Bokeh, makes it look like the owl was positioned in front of a painting of grass. ;-) Certainly seperated the subject though. I have not taken many pictures with that lens (as I have said in the past, although the FL looks ideal for my kind of things, the minimum focusing distance is very long). When I took that picture I was very near/touching the wire that keeps the owl in our zoo, so the bokeh may be affected. But I also saw quickly the water cloud pictures of one of the previous posters (Portuguese? Brazilian?) and again the bokeh looked suspect. Kostas
PAW: G and A
Never posted a PAW before. This is actually two, but very similar pictures. I would normally dislike the first one, as I have chopped the son's head on the left: http://www.epcc.ed.ac.uk/%7ekavousan/GandA.jpg (100KB) However this one I like less, but do you agree/understand why? http://www.epcc.ed.ac.uk/%7ekavousan/GandA2.jpg (100KB) Both are with the MZ-50, one of my 50s, Tri-X [EMAIL PROTECTED], scanned from (traditional machine process, not digital scan, and BW paper) print using a bottom-line Canon scanner. Thanks in advance for any comments. Kostas
Re: Rob Studdert
On Sat, 10 Sep 2005, Cotty wrote: On 10/9/05, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed: Hey Gang ... Has anyone seen or heard from Rob? I sent him a private email last week that has gone unanswered. Seems like it's been a month or so since his pixels have appeared here. Same here. I telephoned him last week and left a message on the answerphone. He may be off trekking in the wilderness I was thinking about him the other day myself. I seem to recall him announcing he would leave the list for a while, to be refreshed (I think it was on the thread that Graywolf announced he was getting tired). Kostas
Re: MZ-5
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005, Frankie Lee wrote: Anyone could tell me the major functional difference between MZ-5 and MZ-3? I may choose one of them. Thanks. http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/bodies/MZ-ZX/index.html and the links hanging off it. The -5n is closer to the -3 than to the -5. When looking for an upgrade (no cripple mount) to my -50 I rejected the -5 as it did not have DOF preview and exposure ML. I also rejected the -3 on grounds of (unjustified to me, just a slightly faster shutter) cost and it was a toss-up between the -5n and the -6 (which has very good flash features, in addition to DOF preview and exposure ML), but has a penta-mirror, rather than a penta-prism. If I was to make the same decision again, I would again hold the same toss-up, and the first one to arrive at a good price I would buy. Except if one could stretch to the MZ-S, which is my ultimate goal right now. HTH, Kostas
FA: Pentax P30n
My auction, so thought I would promote it. While there are no bids we can set a price and do a Buy it Now. If we do that, I offer free, 1st class recorded postage in the UK/5 pounds postage discount around the world. http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=7545191996 Kostas
Re: [OT]First compact digicam with APS sized CMOS...
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: On 2005-09-08, at 20:16, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: How, they are the same price as a DSLR, more or less, aren't they? Add to the price of *istDl price of FA 24-90 or DA 16-45 and you end with 1050-1100$ price. So far SRP for R1 is 999$ but I guess street price will be more likely about 800$. So the price isn't the same is it? ;-) No, why add the lenses? You were talking about a backup body, you already have the lenses. Kostas
Re: Spotted in Future shop
On Wed, 7 Sep 2005, Adam Maas wrote: Good prices, although I popped into my local FS tonight and they were out. Then I hit Blacks and they provided me with a bigger dilemna. They've now got the D at $899 body-only. Same price as the DS body (And damned near $800 cheaper than anywhere else I've seen D's new). It's a no-brainer if they were doing a kit with the 18-55, but as it is, I've got some thinking to do. Check ebay's completed auctions for the 18-55, you may be able to afford it. Just a thought, Kostas
Re: [OT]First compact digicam with APS sized CMOS...
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: Dario Bonazza wrote on 08.09.05 15:07: Thanks Sylwek. This shows what Sony thinks of 4:3 for serious cameras :-) And I think it's a good sign for future image sensors from Sony :-) Ah, but do they still have a reason to make them available to Nikon and Pentax? If I were Sony and knew that Nikon is planning to build its own fab (and others may do so too), I would feel that in little time I would be left on the lurch. I would thus try to buy someone (say KM) to make money from making and selling added value too. They have done it, and look who now looks like they are in the lurch. Just speculating (there may well be contracts in the way of the above plan), Kostas
Re: [OT]First compact digicam with APS sized CMOS...
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: Dario Bonazza wrote on 08.09.05 16:51: Seriously, I'd like to see something like that with Pentax on it (will Pentax ever make a prosumer digicam?). Many people would like it :/ With dedicated hot shoe and now with big sensor it can be even backup body for DSLR. How, they are the same price as a DSLR, more or less, aren't they? Kostas
Re: Decisions, decisions...
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Herb Chong wrote: all of Pentax's SLRs and all of their DSLRs have limitations that prevent me from capturing in about 10% of the situations i shoot, by design. these are situations where i know the mid-level Nikon's and Canons are capable of getting the shot. Out of interest, what are the features in question that the mid-range Canons and Nikons have over the Pentax DSLRs? Kostas
Henry's and USPS (Hello Wendy! :-)
Thanks to Dave Brooks' enablement, I confirmed Henry's shipping policy. The point I recited from memory reads: Sorry, unless otherwise stated in the listing, we do NOT ship by courier. And, we do NOT ship by UPS, or FedEx, even if it is on your account. We ship ONLY by Canada Post/USPS Priority Mail. If that is unacceptable, please do not bid. Their shipping FAQ also reads: Can I pay extra for a courier service and have my item shipped faster? Sorry, but no. If you insist on using on using a courier, please do not bid. As you can tell by our feedback and experience, we have determined that using the postal system is the most economical and efficient method to get your goods to you. It has been our experience that with all good intentions on our part with using a courier service to ship goods from Canada to the US, these intentions are usually hampered by customs paperwork, delays at the border and excessive brokerage, customs and duty charges. Having said that, we do not offer any other shipping service other than what is quoted on the auction page. Kostas
Re: 28-70/4 is Soft
On Tue, 6 Sep 2005, P. J. Alling wrote: This looks like veiling flare, a symptom of the Aspheric lens element in the lens separating. It certainly is not blooming :-( Sorry Patrice... Kostas
Re: Teleconverter F 1.7x AF: any comment?
On Wed, 7 Sep 2005, Tom Reese wrote: have you ever used this Teleconverter? Have you some comments? In my experience, it doesn't work well with long lenses because it has a limited focusing range. The instructions are to set the lens at infinity then allow the teleconverter to do the focusing. With telephoto lenses, this only works when the subject is at or near infinity. When the subject is closer, the lens has to be focused closer too. The teleconverter will then fine tune the focusing. I think the TC was designed with long lenses in mind. What the manual says is that if you move away from infinity, the combo will likely vignette, but that's a physical limitation (is my guess). My other guess is that the limited focusing range is a trade-off with the multiplication (and thus the loss of light, and the minimum maximum-aperture of lenses usable with it). Other points: - The maximum aperture you will get is 2.8, irrespective of the maximum aperture of the lens you attach. So, with the 50/1.4 you get a 2.8 combo, just like with the 1.7 (that's more like 2.9, but you get the drift) and the same is true for the 1.2. - The 50/1.4 and the 50/1.2 are not recommended for macro work with the extender, for reasons of flatness of focus, as discussed at the list in another thread. The cheap-as-chips but lovely 1.7 is a better fit perhaps. - Theoretically, the minimum maximum-aperture of lenses you can use it with is 2.8; this tallies up with the theoretical limit on AF lenses of 5.6. In practice I think people get away with slower lenses. - http://www.pentaximaging.com/files/manual/SMC_PENTAX-F_AF_ADAPTER_1[1].7X.pdf - I love it. Kostas
Re: split negatives
On Wed, 7 Sep 2005, Shel Belinkoff wrote: What brand camera is **pples? It does not matter, it has gaffer tape all over the logos. Kostas
Re: Film Lenses on Digital
On Mon, 5 Sep 2005, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: A D-FA50 macro lens is designed to be best at flat-field imaging, stopped down to f/8-f/32, in the near-focusing range. An A50/1.4 is designed for general pictorial use at wide apertures, and will not perform at its best at copystand distances. It was either in the general Pentax lenses and accessories booklet or the manual of the 1.7x AF T/C that I read that the 50/1.7 is recommended for macro work with extension tubes; the 1.4 was recommended against. Kostas
Re: setting white balance with studio flashes with istD
On Tue, 6 Sep 2005, Colin Miller wrote: Any thoughts would be appreciated. While others will make suggestions that apply to film as well, how about shooting RAW with Auto WB and fixing (in batch mode??) later? I would not be able to guide you on this either, but others may. Good luck with the gig, Kostas
Re: 28-70/4 is Soft
On Mon, 5 Sep 2005, Patrice LACOUTURE (GMail) wrote: What I mean with soft, is more like a sharp image, with a kind of halo around every contrasty detail... Can you post a picture somewhere? While others have covered the element separation angle, I an wondering if you are experiencing digital blooming. Kostas
Re: Optio S40 ???
On Sun, 4 Sep 2005, John Celio wrote: 3. If you can't find the WR, then the Optio WP is the next best thing. Smaller, more zoom, better screen, faster performance, and is even more rugged and waterproof than the WR. And lens quality? Thanks, Kostas
Re: OT: Digital High Key
On Sun, 4 Sep 2005, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: You mean like http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/33.htm ?? Wow! Some attitude! Did you capture it like that or is it processed (other than the BW conversion)? And is it backlit? Very good. Kostas
On films
I was buying film from my favoured on-line outlet. I noticed the following: - Fuji has a new 1600 they call Super G; they still have Superia 800, which may mean that, unexpectedly, they have a new formula. - Kodak now has a product called Elite; should be a rebadged Supra. - Kodak (UK at least) has discontinued High Definition; never tried it myself. - I am trying a KM formula they call VX Super and which goes 100-200 ISO only. - I can still buy Superia, Centuria Super and Tri-X (all 400 ISO). Kostas
Re: FedEx Hoovers!
On Thu, 1 Sep 2005, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Glad to hear it. The USPS often amazes me at how quickly they get letters and small packages delivered. Henry's take pride in using USPS; they think they are delivering superior service to their customers. I have seldom bought from the US, but have always asked for USPS; small values (50 pounds max?), but never paid import duties either. As a UK recipient, I hate couriers with a passion; I am never in and have to drive to their depots, usually half an hour out of town (and I am already out of town :-). With the standard mail service, I just walk to the depot on a Sat, or drive by on the way to work and that's pretty much the case for everyone in inhabited areas, I should think. Kostas
Re: FedEx Hoovers!
On Fri, 2 Sep 2005, wendy beard wrote: --- Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Henry's take pride in using USPS; they think they are delivering superior service to their customers. Henry's? From Canada? Yes. I thought about that, (US rang a bell :-). I thought I had seen this in a (now long completed and unavailable) auction. I will keep an eye open to confirm. Kostas
Re: New Pentax Digitals
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, Cotty wrote: Hi team, 2 new Optios: WPi: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0508/05083107pentax_optiowpi.asp No SMC lens. (in a very posh hotel in Berlin - been filming for a couple of days at short notice - cock up over hotel bookings for me and reporter, so got upgraded to Ritz Carlton :-) There's a presidential suite upstairs! My bathroom is so big I was in there for ten minutes and never reached the far side. Busy days, but home again tomorrow. Be good) Enjoy :-) K
Re: Advice needed: to switch or not to switch....
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, Michael Spivak wrote: Yeh i thought about it... but it's older and you know how fast things goes with the development of new features in DSLR cameras. The general statement should not matter in this case, you know exactly how fast it has gone so far: what are the differences between D and DS2 and do they matter to you? Also, i do need a display, since i shoot models and have to see the results on site (i don't have a laptop) I am sure all digi owners will shout at once: don't do it on the LCD, no matter how big, it isn't big enough. Kostas
Re: Advice needed: to switch or not to switch....
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, Christian wrote: I'll risk the flaming. Stick with the 300D. Except for the plasticy build and sub-par viewfinder, if you like it already, why switch? Features are pretty much the same as the Ds. Neither has a PC terminal. The upgrade path with Canon is clear at this point. Pentax is an unknown quantity for the future. Will they release a higher-spec camera than the *ist D in the future? Probably. When? who knows? Will it be behind the equivalent-priced option from Canon? most likely. No flaming (none due I did not think), just a follow-on question for Michael: Do you care? The man is happy shooting ME Super! Kostas
RE: Color Plus and other Kodak films?
On Sat, 27 Aug 2005, Jack Davis wrote: Did the article define what was meant by best? As long as I can find it, I'll use no film with an ISO higher than 100. I have the same question, but for different reasons: I dismissed Kodak colour print film (I don't do slides) years ago as I found it garishly yellow; I now use Konica Centuria 400 and Fuji Superia 400 interchangeably. Kostas
RE: Color Plus and other Kodak films?
On Sun, 28 Aug 2005, Jack Davis wrote: There was a time I avoided using Fuji print film due to my perception of a yellow bias. In my case (and as I was typing I thought that) the issue may have been the lab warming up colours. I found a mail-order lab that uses Fuji equipment and paper and I ask them not to warm colours; the fact I see that written on their return envelope and that I like my prints puts my mind at rest :-) Do you rarely make enlargements and find the 400's an exposure convenience? I started with the 400s because I only had slow zooms and it stuck. Scotland is rather dark as well, usually. Plus I frequently shoot indoors with flash. I occasionally use Reala 100 for the garden colour but this year it just rested in the fridge. The largest I have had printed is A4, both Superia 400, and the critical eye of a colleague commented favourably. I also seldom bracket; in the general case I rate them as 320 and meter off my palm. Try them, you may like them. Certainly don't take my word for it. Kostas
Re: Flat contrast [Was: 55/1.8 Tak on 20D]
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Flat contrast is probably best described as a general lack of tonal separation. If you look at the histogram of a flat image, the tones will be all huddled in the middle of the range. Thus, they are too close to each other in terms of their relative brightness and lack of the same. You might still have a dark shadow or a bright highlight or two in a flat image, but it's the close huddling of the middle tones that makes it flat. That can be nice in some cases. Or it can be dreadful. The difference is aesthetic and hard to pinpoint. Thanks Paul. A friend showed me this week how to look at histograms. Would you have a flat image as described above to email me/post on the net for my education? No hurry, whenever you stumble on one and remember will be great. Thanks in advance, Kostas p.s.: I cannot follow PAWs and PESOs :-(
Re: Qs about metering
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, mike wilson wrote: Impressive but that's a 500Kb image, Kostas. Not everyone is on broadband.. 8-) Apologies, I hope I did not offend people :-( Kostas
Re: film advance problem on MZ-5n
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, marco ferrari wrote: Sometime, but mainly with CR2 battery with about 10 rolls life, the film does not advance correctly resulting in a partial double exposures of some frames. This problem occurs at mid roll, for 1 or 2 shots, it causes a change in the gauge between the frames and so I had many mis-cut slides. My MZ-50 did that (only it did it consistently) and it needed a service. I think it's a common fault on the MZ series. Talk tou your Pentax dealer/friendly repair shop. Kostas
Re: question about primes: 100/2.8 and 135/2.8 FA (D)
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, Igor Roshchin wrote: Thanks to everybody who responded to my question. I am still open to further comments, but I particularly interested to hear people's opinion about: What would be reasonable prices that one can find for any of these lenses used, in good condition? Have you checked the splosdb http://www.jcolwell.ca/photo-gear/_SPLOSdb/ Also, can anybody comment on A 135/2.8 lens compared to F and/or FA 135/2.8 ? http://stans-photography.info/ has film-based comments. Kostas
Re: Full specs for the AF540FGZ
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Thibouille wrote: 3. Auto discharge-angle adjustment When mounted on a PENTAX autofocus SLR (after the Z-10 and including digital-format models) equipped with an FA-, FA J-, DFA- or DA- series lens, the AF540FGZ automatically adjusts its angle of discharge to the lens' focal length.* * This automatic function may not be available for certain combinations of a camera body and a lens. Not with -F lenses ? If yes, a step back from the 500 (checked) and 330 (from memory). I don't believe it. This *has to be* a very high-spec unit. Kostas
Re: Qs about metering
I asked 3 weeks ago about getting white out of spot metering something white; I reminder below: On Fri, 5 Aug 2005, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Aug 5, 2005, at 2:52 AM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: - The rule of thumb says that, in order to get a very snowy picture to look white, you add +2 to whatever the (say, CW) meter says. Will the +2 correction work with a white flower on a macro (ie mostly white) shot? Rules of thumb are approximations. It all depends where you want to place Zone IX ... Zone IX being defined as the brightest part of the scene that you want to retain detail in. - How many stops between 18% gray and pure white? Is it 2, as per the rule of thumb? 18% reflectance gray is Zone V. So if the flower is to be Zone IX, it's three stops brighter than Zone V. And here is the result: http://www.epcc.ed.ac.uk/~kavousan/Orchid.jpg Z1-P, Tamron 90/2.8 SP, Superia 400, handheld. Spotmetered on the petal with EV+2. Many thanks! Kostas
Re: OT: Need help with flower identification. Urgently!
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Stan Halpin wrote: On Aug 23, 2005, at 7:45 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: Okay, Pentaxian gardeners. I need an ID. I'm finishing up a garden article for a sunday supplement mag. I have one flower pic I want to use, but I can't find the little bloom in any of my reference book. It's tiny, only about a centimeter or so across. I put it up on PhotoNet. Hope someone here can identify it. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3663172size=lg Some form of lily, possibly a star lily variant... Not sure about that. The stamens don't look right to me; I think it looks closer to an orchid. Here is a picture of the one in my living room; sorry I don't have a picture of its leaves. http://www.epcc.ed.ac.uk/~kavousan/Orchid.jpg Have you tried http://images.google.com? Kostas
Re: The Photographer's Rights
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005, Bob Blakely wrote: I think it important to let folks talk as they wish. Otherwise, how would we know the fools among us. Hell, if they kept their mouths shut, we might think them wise. Occasional lapses of judgment aside (we all have them) we learn who is worth listening to and who is worth dismissing. So, you will dismiss my photography comments because you dislike my political orientation. Great idea! I think I will offer Bill Gates a job now that our house-cleaner is unfortunately for her off sick. This is now an extremely OT thread. Can the lot of you still feeding/reading it take it elsewhere. Kostas
Re: What Would Make a DSLR Obsolete?
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Bob Sullivan wrote: I think the same is true for digital cameras. That old Sony Mavica still shoots the exact same 640x480 jpegs that we marveled at, but we expect a whole lot more today. Better performance cheaper price... I agree, but with a pinch of salt: if the 6MP *ist-D can produce as good as as 35mm and nearly as good at MF, the rate of obsolescence could be on the decline (good here includes noise; there is room for improvement at higher ISO, perhaps on off-camera JPEGs, but...). This is how I read Herb's stats as well: people have been buying, are perhaps still buying, but at one point there will be little need to buy more (at one month's salary as well!). Come on in to the digital SLR world. I am a reluctant convert, but have shot 900+ jegs on my *ist DS in 80 days. Bill Robb Paul Stenquist have it right - it may not be film, but it is good enough to be very entertaining! Which brings us to my number 1 suspect: shutter may go. The fact one no longer pays per click and that one expects to replace them in 3-5 years makes for a lot of clicks. My second suspect would be fried electronics. I am not too sure about the sensor durability, but many other electronic things could give way. Kostas :-)
Re: GESO (my first) - KC Ethnic Festival
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Bob Sullivan wrote: Nice set of pictures Stan. I liked the people best - Contrast and Dancers, although Cooking put me right there. The masks don't do much for me. Contrast is really good, worth a 2nd 3rd look. My favourite too. Can you correct it in Photoshop to show us the black lady's face as well? Kostas (cheeky mode :-)
Re: Why full frame?
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, E.R.N. Reed wrote: Kevin Waterson wrote: I really dont see why the rush is on to get a full frame sensor for 35mm. The current Sony chips used by Pentax seem to do the job for most folks just fine. How many folks need the extra size when I can make 40x30 prints from the current sensor. Kind regards Kevin People who want to use their fast normal lenses the same way on digital as they do on film, for example. I think you can't. I think you will have problems with the edges of the pictures and you will eventually end up buying new lenses, at the same FL, optimised for digital. If the diameter of the K-mount can accommodate any real optimisations, that is. If it can't, you may need to also kiss teles and normals and everything good bye. Kostas
Re: What Would Make a DSLR Obsolete?
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The same things that make any computer obsolete: 1. Memory capacity 2. Storage capacity 3. Processing speed 4. Form factor 5. Paradigm 1, 2, and 3 are givens. It's why not a single one of us can do any serious image editing on a 386sx system. 1-3 are not relevant to a camera. They are the same all the time. There is no constant bloatware churn-out to obsolete your memory, storage and processing speed. 4 and 5 get less consideration but are equally important. Anyone remember Micronics, or Altos? CPUs the size of a desk, 8-inch media, fix removable platters, Wyse Televideo terminals? In 10 years we WILL be looking at the current DSLR systems in this same light. The software and the whole environment will change so completely as the field matures, 10 years from now it will be difficult to use these cameras in the same capacity. They'll still be usable -- like a Pentax 110 Super. Neat pieces of history, but who really wants to use one. Seriously, that is. Again, the 110 film was never good. Kostas
Re: What Would Make a DSLR Obsolete?
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Mark Roberts wrote: I got two and a half years from my MZ-S before it was obsolete (that it, until I bought the ist-D). I think these were exceptional circumstances. Kostas
Re: Help me pick a Pentax Zoom Lens (please)
On Sun, 21 Aug 2005, Dave Kennedy wrote: Any idea what that lens will be and when it'll be released? No. They won't tell us, I don't think :-) I'm trying to figure out how to replace it. Do I go with the 50-200? Are you digital-only? If yes (or if you don't mind a bit of vignetting at the low end), people here like it. I was also toying with saving up for a Tokina or Sigma 70-200/2.8. Different class in terms of weight and size; if that's OK, then comes price. life was so easy when I didn't NEED a lens. 'Course trying to justify spending $$$ on a lens after holidays won't be the easiest thing either. Good luck :-) I will wait for the FF 50-200; if that comes as a reasonably priced replacement for the F70-210, I will be able to sell at least the F35-135 and the F70-210, maybe even the FA24-90. Perhaps you can do some similar restructuring, just an idea. Kostas
Re: New Digital SLR Products From Pentax
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: Dario Bonazza wrote on 22.08.05 12:25: The 2.5 LCD and the capability to use continuous AF at you leisure re-position the DS2 over the DL, which had surpassed the DS in these respects. This is enough a reason for making it. Nice little update I'd say. Just like N for MZ-5 :-) The N had serious deferences from the 5, exposure lock and the DOF preview; actually *electronic* DOF preview. Kostas
Re: New Digital SLR Products From Pentax
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005, Dario Bonazza wrote: The 2.5 LCD and the capability to use continuous AF at you leisure re-position the DS2 over the DL, which had surpassed the DS in these respects. This is enough a reason for making it. Surely the -D needs an update a whole lot more than the Ds. I don't ge it. Kostas (or is that announcement reserved for 29 August? :-)
Re: New Digital SLR Products From Pentax
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005, Dario Bonazza wrote: Of course, we'd like something better. The new AF540FGZ flash can make our good hopes grow... I was quite pleased with the announcement. But it looks very bad to me compared with the 500. What do people think? I tend to associate stylish, down to earth design with attention to detail, durability etc, and this does not give good vibes. The lens looks good too, though I don't think I will ever be able to afford one. Kostas
Re: PEOW - Pacific NW Saltwater Flyfishing
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005, Jay Taylor wrote: Here is a shot I took at Brown's Point near Tacoma Washington (USA) after a morning flyfishing excursion. http://i.pbase.com/v3/87/63987/1/48035114.JonatBrownsPoint.jpg Very nice, I think. Can I ask a question of the knowledgeable folk: on my monitor the happy fisherman looks like Jay stuck him on another exposure using some software or other. He obviously did not do that, but can I ask if that's a characteristic of my monitor, or of the lens, or of the FL, or of the in-camera software, or of post-processing, or of life with digital, or of life in general... Thanks, Kostas
Re: New Digital SLR Products From Pentax
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005, John Francis wrote: On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 01:06:14PM +0100, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Mon, 22 Aug 2005, Dario Bonazza wrote: Of course, we'd like something better. The new AF540FGZ flash can make our good hopes grow... I was quite pleased with the announcement. But it looks very bad to me compared with the 500. What do people think? I tend to associate stylish, down to earth design with attention to detail, durability etc, and this does not give good vibes. Personally I don't see anything that the 500 does better, and I see a whole lot of things that the 500 doesn't do. Yup, feature-wise it is what we all, flash-users needed. The comments on the build of the 360 I recall were not great, and the 540 resembles the 360 more than the 500. I hope I am wrong in all accounts above. Kostas
Re: New Digital SLR Products From Pentax
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Aug 22, 2005, at 8:28 AM, John Graves wrote: Does this all mean that there will be no more firmware updates/improvements for the DS.I just received my DS in time for the annoucement. Urrrhhh. Never never buy a camera and assume that anything further will appear as update/improvement. Buy a camera on the merits that it possesses when you buy it. I never bought a film camera that was improved after the fact of purchase by the manufacturer, not without me spending money to buy an improvement ... Why should this be any different with a digital camera? Have you, John, found the existing firmware deficient in any account? Why must you have a firmware update? Also, look on the bright side, if you did not pay 800 USD for the Ds. There are good things about being an early adopter and there are good things about sitting it out. I hope you now feel good enough to show us a picture or five with your new camera ;-) Kostas
Re: New Digital SLR Products From Pentax
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005, John Francis wrote: For me - I don't *want* the Dn too early; it will be bad enough trying to get a new flash as well as the 12-24. Out of curiosity, were you upgrading your film cameras as much as you are indicating? :-) And what is wrong about buying the Dn (say) a year after it's released? I think Pentax should give people as many options as possible. Kostas
Re: Help me pick a Pentax Zoom Lens (please)
On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, John Francis wrote: KEH don't currently have the 70-210, but not only do they have an 80-320, they also have a (power zoom) 28-105 f4/f5.6 for $172. Those two lenses are my minimal walkaround kit for the *ist-D (probably to be supplemented by the 12-24 when it comes out). The 28-105 never ceases to amaze me - for a consumer grade lens it produces some outstanding results, and focusses down to 18 or so if you want close-up stuff. I paid twice that for mine ten years ago, and consider it money very well spent. Dario has well-documented, factual partial dislike for this lens (I also only praise it :-). http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p13e.htm Glen, if you are not in a hurry, Pentax are planning to produce a new, quality telephoto zoom. As for the 28-105, sans voir the PZ is going to be unnecessarily heavier and slower than the lastest 28-105/3.2-4.5 which people like a lot. Kostas
Re: 3rd time lucky.
On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Cotty wrote: You're trip to Spain has one unforgivable flaw: you don't appear to be visiting Barcelona! I agree noone can afford that flaw. Welcome to activity, John! Kostas
Re: Help me pick a Pentax Zoom Lens (please)
On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Glen wrote: If there is anything else I should know, feel free to mention it, but image quality when used on an *istDS is my main concern for now. It just dawned on my you may be the person mentioning the other day that Pentax zooms are slow. There is the fearfully heavy FA*80-200/2.8 (yes, very, very constant :-) that may be right up your street, if you can get it. People have raved and raved about it on film; I *seem* to recall Herb (who, let's face it, is a nitpicker :-))) found a degradation in its qualities on digital, but I may be wrong in that recollection. Given that I am a weakling with short hands and deep pockets, my choice back when I was looking for such a zoom was the SMC F70-210/4-5.6, but I am a film user. I am looking with interest Pentax-way for the new (probably full-frame) 50-200 zoom they have heralded but not described adequately; if an f4 with close focusing and reasonable weight, I may well be tempted. Kostas
Re: Help me pick a Pentax Zoom Lens (please)
On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Herb Chong wrote: - Original Message - From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 5:46 AM Subject: Re: Help me pick a Pentax Zoom Lens (please) It just dawned on my you may be the person mentioning the other day that Pentax zooms are slow. There is the fearfully heavy FA*80-200/2.8 (yes, very, very constant :-) that may be right up your street, if you can get it. People have raved and raved about it on film; I *seem* to recall Herb (who, let's face it, is a nitpicker :-))) found a degradation in its qualities on digital, but I may be wrong in that recollection. wasn't. it's heavy enough that i don't carry it often though. the DA 50-200 is more convenient much of the time and isn't that much worse. Apologies. I thought you had mentioned that in the list of your lenses which were extremely good on film, but no quite so on digital. Was it the 24-90? Kostas
Re: Help me pick a Pentax Zoom Lens (please)
On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, E.R.N. Reed wrote: John Francis wrote: KEH don't currently have the 70-210, but not only do they have an 80-320, they also have a (power zoom) 28-105 f4/f5.6 for $172. Those two lenses are my minimal walkaround kit for the *ist-D (probably to be supplemented by the 12-24 when it comes out). The 28-105 never ceases to amaze me - for a consumer grade lens it produces some outstanding results, and focusses down to 18 or so if you want close-up stuff. AARRRGGGHHH! NO! I can't afford any enablement right now! Don't tell me stuff like this! Sorry, but, let's face it, on film at least 28-105 is extremely useful range; I actually prefer the 35-135 range, have you seen the SMC-F? Its shortcoming is long focusing, but it has a macro at 135. We aim to please, Kostas :-)
Re: Help me pick a Pentax Zoom Lens (please)
Missed the original, sorry. On Aug 19, 2005, at 8:20 AM, cbwaters wrote: Isn't that 50-200 a little long on the short end for the normal walk-around on a Digital? 28-105/3.2-4.5? http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/zooms/short/FA28-105f3.2-4.5.html Kostas
Re: Help me pick a Pentax Zoom Lens (please)
On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I have no experience with the 28-105 PZ lens, but have the current FA28-105/3.2-4.5 AL IF. Small, light, and extremely good quality for $210 new. Here's a picture of a silver finish model, fitted with a standard Kalt 58mm lens hood, mounted on the *ist DS body: http://homepage.mac.com/godders/DS-28-105comp.jpg I like the tulip hoods terribly. Of course the crop-factor allows a deeper hood, but I would think a deeper than the original, but still tulip hood would give better protection/contrast increase than the round one; useful perhaps in a 3.75-times zoom. Is the bayonet mount of the hoods universal across manufacturers? Oh, how I doubt it, Kostas p.s.: Interesting zebra effect Godfrey, and I can see why you like the small Kalt hood aesthetically. p.p.s: Sack the b who decided to bring out silver lenses.
Re: Help me pick a Pentax Zoom Lens (please)
On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, John Graves wrote: I just received my DS. and will exercise it this weekend. But from my film experience, I have the Sigma 70-300 APO and like it very much. People hate it on digital; looking forward to your comments. 28-105. I guess I have to wait for a 10 or 12 mm zoom. and wait and wait. It is on the horizon if Boj's site is anything to go by: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/zooms/short/DA12-24f4.html There is a Sigma in the range too, methinks. Kostas
Re: JD Powers US Digital Camera satisfaction survey
On Tue, 16 Aug 2005, E.R.N. Reed wrote: Glen wrote: I have a feeling that the Pentax point-and-shoot cameras are also better than their point-and-shoot cameras. Given the presence of smc lenses, you're probably right. Not all of them have the SMC coating. And (I think, I am not an expert in digi) some HP and Casio cameras have Pentax (SMC?) lenses. Wghile we are at it, dpreview did not like the lens of the (pricey segment) 750Z. And it is SMC :-) Kostas
Re: FA 50/1.4 discontinued in Canada
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005, Glen wrote: At 10:55 AM 8/17/2005, Andre Langevin wrote: Pentax Canada rep told my retailer that the FA 50/1.4 is now discontinued and that they won't supply back-orders. Pentax Canada gets their lenses directly from Japan, so I guess the lens is no longer produced in Japan. A new DA 50/1.4 on the way? If it were to be a DA series, I would expect something more like a DA 33mm f1.4, because of the crop factor. I would still expect a 50/1.4 because it implies minimal RD, unlike the 33; there is also a huge overlap with the existing 31. Note that these (30-odd mm) lenses are retrofocus designs and a useful 1.4 is likely to weigh a ton a be 2 meters long. Shall I make a prediction on price too? :-) I'm definitely going to be disappointed if there will no longer be an f1.4 lens of any sort. I'm getting tired of all the f4 and slower lenses which seem to dominate. I would really like to have some faster options for low-light shooting. They don't dominate. Primes are still in the 2-2.8 range. Take a look at Boj's page; what happened to the 24/28/35 3.5 lenses of yesteryear? If we are talking zooms, I recently passed on a reasonably (but still a bit of dosh) priced FA*28-70/2.8 on KEH (don't look for it :-) because I did not think it would be that better than the FA24-90/3.5-4.5 to justify the back-breaking weight and garish appearance. I'm also tired of all the zooms which don't hold their aperture throughout the zoom range. Is it that difficult or expensive to make a constant-aperture zoom? I seem to remember that once upon a time, that was the typical way of building zoom lenses. If they could do it in the good old days, then why not now? These days, constant-aperture zooms are rare. That's a design compromise, affecting size, weight and price. I see no problem with the FA24-90/3.5-4.5. The FA24-70/4 is known to self-destruct, but this may be a one-off. Why do you mind changing aperture? It's only a problem with manual flash, or am I missing something? Kostas
Re: FA 50/1.4 discontinued in Canada
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005, Steve Jolly wrote: Personally, I'm guessing that most of the people who want f/2.8 zooms for their DSLRs have already jumped ship to Canon or Nikon. How about those with the FA*, the Sigma, the Tokina or the Tamron? I know a couple of them ;-)) Kostas
Re: FA 50/1.4 discontinued in Canada
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005, Glen wrote: they replace it with another f1.4 of better quality, that would be fine. If they come out with a high quality f1.0 replacement, that would be absolutely fantastic. (To my knowledge, only Leica has made an f1.0 so far, and it was for their rangefinder.) This surely is a hint ;-) Pentax never had a 1.0 in their line and they have long discontinued their 50/1.2. Kostas
Re: FA 50/1.4 discontinued in Canada
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005, Shel Belinkoff wrote: I looked at Boz's page yesterday. Seems that almost every lens except the DA has been discontinued or is out of production. I would recommend a look at the Pentax Japan site; link circulated by Godfrey earlier. If I wanted (for example) a black limited or a 2.8 zoom and needed to buy new I would look there. Only SIX primes are shown as being in production (if i counted right), and eleven zooms. All but one of the zooms is faster than an F4.0, and that's a 3.5. I don't think there was a constant aperture in the bunch. 16-45, 20-35 and the FAs,* from memory are in that list. I still see no answer as to the problem with variable aperture lenses. Primes in the 2.0 - 2.8 range are certainly slow, at least by the standards of some people. There were/are a few Pentax lenses in the sub-2.0 range; what focal length concerns you and how much money have you got? There is a known difficulty with Pentax lenses at the moment. Things may get better. I accept donations of depressingly slow, 2.0 and 2.8 Pentax kit; please contact me off-line if interested. Kostas
Re: Fun With Buicks
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, Doug Brewer wrote: P. J. Alling wrote: Nice shots. I think this kind of photography works better when the automobile in question is a somewhat brighter color. Funny you should mention this. I was released from the lock-up just this morning, after being arrested trying to repaint all those cars in brighter colors. Now, I know of a good piece of software you can use to paint them pink without getting arrested. Only joking, Kostas
Re: The household gloves trick works well to separate filters!
On Tue, 16 Aug 2005, Markus Maurer wrote: I followed William Robb's advice using household gloves (common cheap short red ones for Cotty) and it worked very well! It gives you a lot more force and your hands don't slip away from the tiny filter rings. I think the important thing to note is to *not* press the rings in sideways and distort their shape, thus making it harder to unscrew them. Of course you put marks on them this way, but... Kostas
Re: Malakoff Rockfestival
On Mon, 8 Aug 2005, Boris Liberman wrote: http://malakoff.no/pictures/35/imgp2818.jpg - is very good. I really like the repetition here. Yes, but is the focus right? I think you did a fine job, especially taking into account that you had to take pain killers :-(... Wishing you well! I know all about sciatica the hard way :-(((. I hope Tim is well recovered... Kostas
Re: Request for RAWs from FA 20-35/4
On Tue, 16 Aug 2005, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Aug 16, 2005, at 10:17 AM, David Oswald wrote: What does that tell you? The two lenses are both so good that people have mixed feelings in choosing one over the other, perhaps. I have no mixed feelings about it. I think the expression was wrong, but being a foreigner working in an English-speaking, multi-cultural environment, I tend to interpret what people say. And I got this to mean: what works for some does not for others and vice-versa, but these are both good lenses. Kostas
Re: Dreaming of a fast 70-210mm or 80-200mm AF zoom
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, P. J. Alling wrote: Bill Owens wrote: Several years ago I was able to pickup a Vivitar Series I 70-210/3.5. Only 1/2 stop slower that a 2.8 and $100.00. I have to second that, these are fantastic lenses that can be had quiet inexpensively, though the difference is more like 2/3 stop. And AF (perhaps even A compatibility, can't quite recall). Kostas
Re: DOF-preview on istD, weird restriction
On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, Jan van Wijk wrote: While checking DOF, I noticed it did not seem to work unless the lens was set to 'A'. Of course I would usually like to use the lens in AV mode, preselecting the aperture. Playing arround a bit, I found the DOF check only closes the aperture when either the lens is set to 'A', or the body is set to 'M'. This is a bit annoying, since it does not allow you to set a fixed aperture for good DOF, use automatic exposure, and check the actual DOF in the viewfinder as well. How? With an A lens set the aperture from the body and use DOF. With a non-A lens, put the camera to manual (it won't meter/fire properly otherwise anyway, if I recall correctly). What is the problem? I checked with the MZ-S too, and that definately does DOF-preview in all modes ... That's because it is not a cripple-mount. Kostas
Re: you guys will like this
On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, Mark Roberts wrote: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://homepage.mac.com/godders/uw.html Sleeps with the fishes? ;-) No bait today? Kostas
Re: canon eos d5
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Frank Wajer wrote: The dark side does it again, another full frame, arghh. Will Pentax ever release a full frame. No. They are committed to APS-C for 35mm. Kostas
Re: OT - Upping the anti
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, Cotty wrote: Sorry Mark - they should be! Even if they only build couple a thousand of the damned things. They should be. You read it here first: Cotty is selling his big grey private jet to fund Pentax's RD and losses for the FF model. Here he is taking pictures for the ebay auction: http://www.cottysnaps.com/snaps/spare5.html Kostas
Re: More Frankencam
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, Cotty wrote: I've enabled myself with one of Mr Rolfo's adapters: http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemcategory=26054item=7535484070 and will be testing it out shortly as it arrived today. My test lens is a K50mm 1.2 that I keep for R and D, so will report back. Enjoy, Cotters. What kind of automation are you getting out of the combo? Stop-down metering and no A? Kostas
Re: OT - Upping the anti
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, P. J. Alling wrote: Probably, Why won't management let us build one? Because management knows better than let you run when you can barely walk. Kostas
Re: First attempt with auto focus
On Sun, 7 Aug 2005, Shel Belinkoff wrote: my position. I've read John's comments. In this case someone says that I should remember something about a flash system. I started a response to this, but decided that someone or other is not worth it. Kostas
Re: First attempt with auto focus
On Sat, 6 Aug 2005, Cotty wrote: The flash calculates the amount of light needed to expose the scene properly with a pre-flash, and then fires the main flash instantly. For Shel's (and others' enlightenment): the -5n does *not* preflash. Kostas
Re: First attempt with auto focus
On Sat, 6 Aug 2005, Vic Mortelmans wrote: Does anyone perhaps know a comprehensive resource on the web about flash photography (with Pentax, if it could?). I still feel very unfamiliar with all concepts of flash metering. http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/technology/hot-shoe/index.html Boz is your friend. Kostas
Re: First attempt with auto focus
On Sat, 6 Aug 2005, P. J. Alling wrote: Shel Belinkoff wrote: I don't know what a flash system might be. I'm ignorant about flash. Never used it. I was thinking of the flash that's built in to the camera, where it needs some time to physically pop up and then do whatever else it does. I wouldn't own a camera with a built in flash that decided for itself when it should be used... The -5n does *not* pop up the flash itself. I think it has an automatic mode which decides, with the flash popped up, if it should fire it, but I don't use that. Kostas
Re: First attempt with auto focus
On Sat, 6 Aug 2005, Shel Belinkoff wrote: I don't know what a flash system might be. I'm ignorant about flash. Never used it. I was thinking of the flash that's built in to the camera, where it needs some time to physically pop up and then do whatever else it does. That flash does not have a focus-assist beam. There is delay associated with flash, and that is to do with it loading again after firing. Of course this delay depends on batteries and how much it discharged when it went off (remember the TTL system quenches the flash). I cannot remember if the -5n fires it again even if it has not fully charged. Kostas
Re: Enough Already!
On Fri, 5 Aug 2005, Rob Studdert wrote: On 4 Aug 2005 at 19:19, Frantisek wrote: I don't think that there is a direct correlation between size and image quality in the case of early Pentax lenses, some were just under optimized designs. A lot of the new smaller designs offer improved performance. Any examples from your personal experience? Kostas
Re: Enough Already!
On Thu, 4 Aug 2005, Herb Chong wrote: those numbers aren't well known, i.e. available in public sources. you can make some intelligent guesses based on total film SLR sales that year and knowing Pentax's market share. I certainly cannot :-) FWIW, the 1st fiscal quarter numbers are about 10K Konica-Minolta, 20K Pentax, and 40K Olympus DSLRs sold worldwide. there were just over 900K sold by Japanese companies in that quarter, and nearly all of the remaining 830K were either a Nikon or a Canon, roughly split evenly between the two. Lovely... Kostas (not)
Re: Need advice on picking a 50mm AF lens
On Fri, 5 Aug 2005, David Mann wrote: I can't find my AA batteries to check for myself, but the AF-500FTZ manual clearly states that it's IR. It may just be a reddish shade of IR... how bright does it look? Don't know, but I can see the pattern on the wall. Seeing as I am always behind the camera (and since it rarely fires in my shooting circumstances) I can't tell. Kostas
