Re: Converted to digital photography !
Yes, digital is excellent and only getting better and I can only second everything you say in your post. I just hope Pentax gets on the ball and gets a digital body out. Pentax has carved out a niche by being the most backward compatible of all major camera manufacturers. But backwards compatibility only works if you keep current. The digital day is young and hopefully Pentax will rise to the challenge - heck, I like getting up at 10 am, hopefully they do too (it's about 9:30, digital time.) - MCC At 11:06 PM 12/9/01 +0100, you wrote: Hello the list Fist of all, forgive me for this long post. But I wanted to shere these thoughts with you. I just bought for my Club (an old-timer Car club) a new compact digital camera. Not a reflex, no. Just a standard 4 megapixel camera. A Casio QV4000. To tell you the truth, Im totally surprised. Astonished. Converted ! First of all, I like and practice photography since the late 70s. My first SLR was a PRAKTIKA MTL3 with a 50mm and a 135mm. Then my first PENTAX was a Me SUPER, bought new in 1981. I stayed with PENTAX since then (do not ask me why, its just like this ) and I used several Program A and SUPER A (I still have a SUPER A now), one Z-1 (that I still have), several Zoom 70 R and X (I have a 70-X) On the lens side, my jewel collection is made of a 17mm f/4, an A 24mm f/2,8, two A 50mm f/1,4 and f/1,7, one A zoom 35-105 f/3,5 and one A 70-210 f/4 Like everyone of us I think, I started with black and white, easily developed in a quickly transformed bathroom. Then I tasted slide photography (with a number of bad photos far more important !). Now 90% of my pictures are colour prints. Since 1996, I scan the best of my prints, to use them for web or to duplicate 10x15cm prints on colour printer. The scanning operation being quite long (with my HP 6300C scanner) I often ask my lab to give me my photos on CD. The offered resolution of 1500 x 1000 pixel is (for my own use) sufficient. Well, for some years now, I practice digital photography, but with classic equipment. And then came the day when I used an all digital camera and then for me, everything changed ! But what is so different from a 35mm SLR to an all digital camera ? One big only answer : instantaneity ! By viewing the pictures just after taking them, one feel about the same magic as with a Polaroid, but with even faster response, and above that, without the feeling of wasting a print if the shot is not good. What a pleasure to have the possibility to judge a shot immediately The focus is not good ? One erase the picture and do it again. This part of the picture is too dark ? One re do several shots while overexposing until the right exposure is found. The subject moved or did not keep the pose ? One just has to ask a new second of attention and shoot again All the tricky photographical situations can be approached without any fear; the photographer is reinsured and never comes back home without a couple of good photos ! Now that I am CERTAIN that digital photography will totally overpass chemical photography in a very short period of time, what an attitude to adopt ? At the date of today, my choice is very basic : either I buy for my personal use, one of these digital cameras, with a more or less futurist look, not often cute (the Casio QV 4000 is ugly!) and I try to resell all my old equipment, either I wait But to wait for what ? To wait for a solution allowing me to reuse all, or part of my existing equipment. To wait for the successor of the e-film in 24x36mm size for instance, to be able to reuse my SUPER A and my Z-1 and theur accessories To wait for PENTAX to manufacture 24x36mm digital backs for my SUPER A and my Z-1 Or to wait for PENTAX to make a true 24x36mm digital SLR to be able to reuse all my lenses Today, to wait corresponds better to my photographers aspirations. I think Im not alone in my case ! And in front of such a situation, what do the camera manufacturers think ? Why a so genius idea like the e-film has not given birth to a sellable product ? Have they received pressures from camera manufacturers ? Why the big manufacturers offer expensive equipment without any real interest for the amateurs ? Do they think they will push us to throw away all our ancient equipment, and buy one of their non finished digital mutants ? When will they offer us the digital equipment we are all waiting for ? A solution which should allow to digitalise all the existing park of SLR (like the e-film) would give to its promoters a significant amount of profits for years. An intermediate solution consisting of supplying 24x36mm digital backs, would be very widely acceptable. While the solution consisting of providing 24x36mm digital SLR cameras, where our existing lenses could be used would be acceptable as well. So what do they wait for ? - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget
Re: Converted to digital photography !
And where do you draw the line? Would we be allowed to talk about digital manipulation of film images? Digital printing of film images? What's more, although I don't own a digital camera, I want to keep up to date on the possibility of a digital camera that would use my pentax lenses. It's all part of the same game. It's not a separate issue. You can always set an e-mail filter to eliminate messages with the word digital in them, but, at least in terms of the digital darkroom, you would be missing out on some information that is important to conventional photography. Paul Jim Apilado wrote: I just say form a list for digital Pentax users. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Converted to digital photography !
Jim writes: I enjoy conventional photography be it with a 35mm, APS, 110, or medium format. I like reading about conventional photography on the Pentax list. I glance at the digital offering but don't find any of it of interest. Those that do I just say form a list for digital Pentax users. That's one point. I personally couldn't give two hoots (!) about 6X7 gear (although I scan every post [digest mode] for anything of value or relevance to my interests) but that doesn't mean I think anyone wanting to participate in 6X7 chat should go off and found a new email list. The PDML is for users of Pentax gear, and as Pentax make digital cameras, that surely is fair game. After all, it's much easier to hit the delete button, or in the case of digest users, keep scrolling! Besides, I've still got plenty to learn, and there's people on this list, yourself included with plenty to teach. I'd hate to split us all up for fear of missing something valuable. .02 pence Cotty ___ Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out the UK Macintosh ads http://www.macads.co.uk - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Converted to digital photography !
Begin Original Message From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:45:50 + To: Pentax List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Converted to digital photography ! 'Cotty Penned' i snipped . If there is no anouncement, I'll be buying either a new or used Canon D30 at that point, as the prices will fall rapidly IMHO after the release of the EOS D1. . Later, if the Pentax D then becomes a reality, I'll switch to a Pentax Digital. If not and the Pentax DSLR remains a myth (perhaps in favour of P and S or whatever), I'll probably invest in some more Canon (mount) glass :-(, and have to ll a K mount lens or three :-(, which is a shame but it will suit the kind of photography I do, and that's the most important thing, much as I love Pentax equipment and good Pentax glass. so I can still use a Pentax camera :-) and contribute to the PDML and PUG :-) . Why? Well, you just have to hold an LX to know ;-) Cotty I would have loved to wait and have Pentax sell me a quality digital SLR type camera,but the opportunity to by the D1 has come before any production by Pentax. I am in the same boat you might find your self in Cotty,in that i have to buy Neigh Neigh kon glass for it.(35-70 and looking for the 80-200 f2.8's) So far i'm able to keep the Pentax glass to use.It may not be super quality(35-80 and 80-200) but i'm happy with it. BTW any one use the SMC fa 100-300 zoom(f 4.5-6.7)i think. I say one in a small store today for $359.00 Cand.I have the Sigma 100-300 f 4.5-6.7 and have nothing to compare it to.I payed slightly less for the Sigma than what they want for the Pentax. Dave ___ Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out the UK Macintosh ads http://www.macads.co.uk - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Converted to digital photography !
A long time ago there were photographers who distained the new photography that George Eastman created when his You push the button, we do the rest camera came out. Some photographers thought it wasn't photography if a photographer didn't make the photographic materials or developed the film themselves. I was exposed to digital a few years ago. Indeed, it was cool to be able to see the results immediately after exposure. That, to me, was the only thing that was good about digital - the immediate gratification. A year ago, I purchased a Kodak Hybrid APS camera that allowed me to see what I just photographed. The image wasn't as sharp as a digital, but I could see what I just photographed, and I could decide if I wanted to print the image or not. I like this approach. I am 60 years old. I started photography in my twenties. I figure that conventional photography will be around for a while. Evidence for me is that I had a large class take my 35mm photography class recently. None expressed any desire for digital. Finally, perhaps a new Pentax list should be developed for those who want to talk digitally. I prefer the Pentax list only in the conventional photographic way. Jim A. From: Cyril MARION [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:06:18 +0100 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Converted to digital photography ! Hello the list Fist of all, forgive me for this long post. But I wanted to shere these thoughts with you. I just bought for my Club (an old-timer Car club) a new compact digital camera. Not a reflex, no. Just a standard 4 megapixel camera. A Casio QV4000. To tell you the truth, Im totally surprised. Astonished. Converted ! First of all, I like and practice photography since the late 70s. My first SLR was a PRAKTIKA MTL3 with a 50mm and a 135mm. Then my first PENTAX was a Me SUPER, bought new in 1981. I stayed with PENTAX since then (do not ask me why, its just like this ) and I used several Program A and SUPER A (I still have a SUPER A now), one Z-1 (that I still have), several Zoom 70 R and X (I have a 70-X) On the lens side, my jewel collection is made of a 17mm f/4, an A 24mm f/2,8, two A 50mm f/1,4 and f/1,7, one A zoom 35-105 f/3,5 and one A 70-210 f/4 Like everyone of us I think, I started with black and white, easily developed in a quickly transformed bathroom. Then I tasted slide photography (with a number of bad photos far more important !). Now 90% of my pictures are colour prints. Since 1996, I scan the best of my prints, to use them for web or to duplicate 10x15cm prints on colour printer. The scanning operation being quite long (with my HP 6300C scanner) I often ask my lab to give me my photos on CD. The offered resolution of 1500 x 1000 pixel is (for my own use) sufficient. Well, for some years now, I practice digital photography, but with classic equipment. And then came the day when I used an all digital camera and then for me, everything changed ! But what is so different from a 35mm SLR to an all digital camera ? One big only answer : instantaneity ! By viewing the pictures just after taking them, one feel about the same magic as with a Polaroid, but with even faster response, and above that, without the feeling of wasting a print if the shot is not good. What a pleasure to have the possibility to judge a shot immediately The focus is not good ? One erase the picture and do it again. This part of the picture is too dark ? One re do several shots while overexposing until the right exposure is found. The subject moved or did not keep the pose ? One just has to ask a new second of attention and shoot again All the tricky photographical situations can be approached without any fear; the photographer is reinsured and never comes back home without a couple of good photos ! Now that I am CERTAIN that digital photography will totally overpass chemical photography in a very short period of time, what an attitude to adopt ? At the date of today, my choice is very basic : either I buy for my personal use, one of these digital cameras, with a more or less futurist look, not often cute (the Casio QV 4000 is ugly!) and I try to resell all my old equipment, either I wait But to wait for what ? To wait for a solution allowing me to reuse all, or part of my existing equipment. To wait for the successor of the e-film in 24x36mm size for instance, to be able to reuse my SUPER A and my Z-1 and theur accessories To wait for PENTAX to manufacture 24x36mm digital backs for my SUPER A and my Z-1 Or to wait for PENTAX to make a true 24x36mm digital SLR to be able to reuse all my lenses Today, to wait corresponds better to my photographers aspirations. I think Im not alone in my case ! And in front of such a situation, what do the camera manufacturers think ? Why a so genius idea like the e-film has not given birth to a sellable product ? Have they received pressures
Re: Converted to digital photography !
- Original Message - From: Jim Apilado [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 10:17 PM Subject: Re: Converted to digital photography ! Finally, perhaps a new Pentax list should be developed for those who want to talk digitally. I prefer the Pentax list only in the conventional photographic way. Sorry, digital isn't going away, and there are fewer and fewer clear cut boundries when it comes to conventional/digital processes. Most of my good images are printed digitally these days even though they were captured on film. If you are involved with photography in any way, digital will come up... Isaac Jim A. From: Cyril MARION [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:06:18 +0100 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Converted to digital photography ! Hello the list. Fist of all, forgive me for this long post. But I wanted to shere these thoughts with you. I just bought for my Club (an old-timer Car club) a new compact digital camera. Not a reflex, no. Just a standard 4 megapixel camera. A Casio QV4000. To tell you the truth, I'm totally. surprised. Astonished. Converted ! First of all, I like and practice photography since the late 70's. My first SLR was a PRAKTIKA MTL3 with a 50mm and a 135mm. Then my first PENTAX was a Me SUPER, bought new in 1981. I stayed with PENTAX since then (do not ask me why, it's just like this.) and I used several Program A and SUPER A (I still have a SUPER A now), one Z-1 (that I still have), several Zoom 70 R and X (I have a 70-X). On the lens side, my jewel collection is made of a 17mm f/4, an A 24mm f/2,8, two A 50mm f/1,4 and f/1,7, one A zoom 35-105 f/3,5 and one A 70-210 f/4. Like everyone of us I think, I started with black and white, easily developed in a quickly transformed bathroom. Then I tasted slide photography (with a number of bad photos far more important !). Now 90% of my pictures are colour prints. Since 1996, I scan the best of my prints, to use them for web or to duplicate 10x15cm prints on colour printer. The scanning operation being quite long (with my HP 6300C scanner) I often ask my lab to give me my photos on CD. The offered resolution of 1500 x 1000 pixel is (for my own use) sufficient. Well, for some years now, I practice digital photography, but with classic equipment. And then came the day when I used an all digital camera. and then for me, everything changed ! But what is so different from a 35mm SLR to an all digital camera ? One big only answer : instantaneity ! By viewing the pictures just after taking them, one feel about the same magic as with a Polaroid, but with even faster response, and above that, without the feeling of wasting a print if the shot is not good. What a pleasure to have the possibility to judge a shot immediately. The focus is not good ? One erase the picture and do it again. This part of the picture is too dark ? One re do several shots while overexposing until the right exposure is found. The subject moved or did not keep the pose ? One just has to ask a new second of attention and shoot again. All the tricky photographical situations can be approached without any fear; the photographer is reinsured and never comes back home without a couple of good photos ! Now that I am CERTAIN that digital photography will totally overpass chemical photography in a very short period of time, what an attitude to adopt ? At the date of today, my choice is very basic : either I buy for my personal use, one of these digital cameras, with a more or less futurist look, not often cute (the Casio QV 4000 is ugly!) and I try to resell all my old equipment, either I wait. But to wait for what ? To wait for a solution allowing me to reuse all, or part of my existing equipment. To wait for the successor of the e-film in 24x36mm size for instance, to be able to reuse my SUPER A and my Z-1 and theur accessories. To wait for PENTAX to manufacture 24x36mm digital backs for my SUPER A and my Z-1. Or to wait for PENTAX to make a true 24x36mm digital SLR to be able to reuse all my lenses. Today, to wait corresponds better to my photographer's aspirations. I think I'm not alone in my case ! And in front of such a situation, what do the camera manufacturers think ? Why a so genius idea like the e-film has not given birth to a sellable product ? Have they received pressures from camera manufacturers ? Why the big manufacturers offer expensive equipment without any real interest for the amateurs ? Do they think they will push us to throw away all our ancient equipment, and buy one of their non finished digital mutants ? When will they offer us the digital equipment we are all waiting for ? A solution which should allow to digitalise all the existing park of SLR (like the e-film) would give to its promoters a significant amount of profits
