On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, Jostein wrote:
Well certainly, an *istD has less bagage to it's name than KISS.
http://www.acronymfinder.com/af-query.asp?Acronym=KISSString=exact
This camera can't be meant to be anything more than a ps with a bayonet
lens mount.
Otoh, I'm sure it'll drag a lot of
Actually there's at least an MZ-S (a naked one, without a lens
nor body cap... :-( ) on a shelf in Naples (at Sbrescia, the
biggest store here); with a price of 1109 Euro I guess it will
stay there for a lng time... FNAC, that recently opened a
megastore here, instead shows an Eos 1Ds alone
If this is the case, I should have mine around September 10
Bill
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 5:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Digital Rebel might beat *ist-D to market
According to their respective
I knew there was more to this:
RE: dslr
From: tom
Subject: RE: dslr
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 06:47:10 -0700
Ok, we'll say shipped to a dealer somewhere by 9/1/03.
What's in it for you? I don't have any old Nikon
I was out of town for some days, hence, missed the starting of this thread.
Because of my wife's liking for small, compact equipment, I useed to use LX
(that's how I am on this list)
Then I have my Minolta X700 - an excellent piece of equipment, however,
uncompatible with new auto lenses. So, I
...and I say, just as authoritatively as you, that the 300D will be a
marketing *flop*. Consumers with a thousand bucks for a camera are
much smarter than Canon realizes. The will invariably spend the extra
few hundred for the 10D rather than be seen as
kiddie-Rebel-photographer-wannabees. Or,
Clive evans wrote:
Neally all shooting is on Colour Transparency film , building a stock
library.
Hi Clive,
I've been shooting quite a bit of stock, but I've found that most stock
houses don't want transparencies. They want hi-res scans. So I shoot
negative film, which seems to scan
I use my Pentax 6x7 for most of the stuff that counts: fashion
photography for stores and stock, car shoots for magazines, and a range
of other subjects for stock. My lenses include the 55/4, 105/2.4, 165/4
LS, and 300/4. I really need a 75, but I'm holding out for a deal on a
used 75/2.8. Gotta
Is this package still available...
Vic
In a message dated 8/25/03 2:38:33 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hot shoe grip, and all the brackets and cable to make the 280T into a
handle-mount flash. $50.00
Hi everyone,
I am a newbie who has got interested in photography quite recently.
I have been using a camera for more than 5 years now but it was mostly
to take group pictures of family and touristy snaps to show where
all I went and what all I did :-)
scans from slides are less grainy and higher resolution than prints. also, you can see
what you are supposed to get. do they notice the difference?
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 23:19
Subject: Re:
Today my bag is packed with a LX (loaded with Kodachrome 64) plus 6
lenses: A20, K28/f3.5, M40, K55/f1.8, M85/f2, K135/f3.5. The LX is
replaced by a K2 DMD, KX or KM now and then.Other lenses that I pick
frequently for walking around are K28/f2, K28/f3.5 Shift, K35/f2,
FA43,/1.9 K50/f1.4,
Hi!
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 09:52:02 +0530
Gaurav Aggarwal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi everyone,
Don't think twice before sending negative, most
damnest of all remarks (ref: thread on please comments). I would
appreciate if you tell me how to improve the composition, technique,
get better exposure
Hello All,
Salikh wrote:
Well, it's time to go up from the underground:
I've been enjoying reading the list well over the year now,
but this is the first post to the list.
Same here.
Pz-1, Pz-1p FA 28-105, FA 28-80, FA 100-300
ME SUPER, M50, M28, Makinon 200/3.3 macro, Tokina AT-X 50-250
Welcome to the group Guarav, and I obviously you enjoy what you've found
here: I just hope our comments don't upset you!
My comments, and I only looked at the three showing on the link:
Wah Taj - if you're going to make a building lean by titling the camera, you
might as well go all the way! I am
Thanks John, I really appreciate your comments. No upseting me :-)
BTW, there are 27 more shots there. The links aren't that apparent.
Try: http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=748579
The shaky foundations was definitely not intended but I sort of liked
it. Taj is something that I don't
Hello!
I have an Pentax ME with winder and now the winder stopped working. I
loaded it with new batteries but still nothing... Does anybody has
any tipps how I could try to get it working again?
Thanks for any help
bye
Katrin
I *might* be able to replace my whole kit for under $1K.
CW
- Original Message -
From: Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 12:45 PM
Subject: Re: More serious competition for *ist-D - Kiss Digital/300D
i spent over $1K for only one camera,
Dear Mark,
None of the cameras I currently own, body only,
exceed the $900 mark: Fuji GS645S (used), Contax G2
(used), Pentax Z-1p (new). Nor are any of the
cameras I previously owned which forms a very long
list. (Nikon FE2, FA, F3, F2AS, F70, F801s, F601,
Canon EOS 100, 10s, 5, 630, Pentax LX)
Ineresting question, Mark. If I use that $900 as an absolute number, I have
never owned such a camera. However if we adjust for inflation. I have owned
a Rolleiflex 2.8, Linhof Super Technica, Mamiya Universal (2 of them
actually) even used they cost more than that in adjusted real dollars.
That would have too answers, Mark. 1% of serious photographers, 1/1000th of
1% if you count the pure snapshooters.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 12:31
Mark Roberts wrote:
I just thought of a better survey question to ask:
How many people have never spent over $500 for a camera?
Well, I have to back out on that one. I have spent over $500 for a
camera, several times...
(And how much of the camera-buying public falls under this category?)
How about an informal survey of how many people on this list own cameras
of any type/brand that cost $900 or more (I'll make that a little bit
approximate and include the MZ-S).
Nope. Never. Never would, either. Which is why, if in a while (three to six
months), the 300D has a street price
tricky subject line, y'all
MZ-S
Ken Waller
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 11:52:11 -0400, Mark Roberts wrote:
How about an informal survey of how many people on
this
list own cameras
of any type/brand that cost $900 or more (I'll make
that a little bit
approximate and include the MZ-S).
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and
The photo attachment is essentially a housing holding a partially silvered
mirror that splits the beam sending enough to an eye-piece (about 60/40) so
that the field can be observed and focussed. Its quite a simple but elegant
solution - designed in Dr Möllring's lab at Zeiss (Oberkochen). It
For me, $1000 is still too much for a low end camera. We need the
equivalent of the *ist body with a 6 MP senor in it for about $600.
(for those who don't realize this, the *ist and *ist D have completely
different bodies, although the AF and segment meters appear to be the
same). Also, Pentax
People have gotten spoiled by just how cheap cameras have become in the last
30 years. If one were to use inflation adjusted, constant dollars, or how
long, on average, one would have to work to pay for a camera you'd see how
inexpensive they've become. 1000, 2003 dollars wouldn't pay for a
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, Mark Roberts wrote:
I just thought of a better survey question to ask:
How many people have never spent over $500 for a camera?
Me. And I don't think I will ever spend the equivalent of $500 for a
camera (even in the UK/EU where money buys you less).
(And how much of the
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003, Gianfranco Irlanda wrote:
spare 2CR5... WRT the built in flash: the MZ series one,
although less powerful, is placed higher over the optical axis,
so it makes more difficult to have red eyes in the subjects.
I was asking about the position of the hotshoe: on the Zs it is
I've been using my Leica CL more and more often these days, probably because
I'm still trying to get the street shooting thing down pat, and the CL is
such a nice little machine for that. I probably shoot more with that camera
than any other right now.
The all-rounder is the MX, though. With
31 matches
Mail list logo
