For Super A/Program or Program A/Plus, S76/SR44 is recommended.
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
Are you using the right batteries?
Alkaline A76 will have no life.
_
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
Hi!
I've just tried the above combination. Before that I was taking
advantage of aufo-focusness of the lens on my MZ-6...
Anyway, I've observed that straigtforward focusing with split screen
gives rather odd results. Here what I observed:
1. closer than infinity distance reported by Takumar
on 28.10.03 3:19, J. C. O'Connell at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I still dont believe that camera has a sensor that cost
CANON $700 if thats what your trying to say.
Why not? Analog EOS-300V (EOS Rebel Ti) costs about 200$ and it has far more
built-in mechanics than its digital sibbling.
Hello Jostein and thanks for your report, but...
frightened by your report I've made several shots with different apertures
in high contrast situations, and slight chromatic abberations apeeared only
on one shot - they weren't big though, althought visible. In all other cases
they were not visible
Hi!
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 08:50:14 +0100
Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
on 28.10.03 3:19, J. C. O'Connell at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I still dont believe that camera has a sensor that cost
CANON $700 if thats what your trying to say.
Why not? Analog EOS-300V (EOS Rebel Ti) costs
[EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit:
Are you using the right batteries?
Alkaline A76 will have no life.
Regards, Bob S.
Yes, sure !
Two good S76 batterie that work again with K2, KX !
Michel
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have a Program Plus (Program A) wich show allway 'low battery'
(000 blinking).
Has
Sylwester Pietrzyk escribió:
Hello Jostein and thanks for your report, but...
frightened by your report I've made several shots with different apertures
in high contrast situations, and slight chromatic abberations apeeared only
on one shot - they weren't big though, althought visible. In all
on 28.10.03 10:22, Carlos Royo at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps Jostein's FA 100 mm. 2.8 macro is slightly out of alignment. I
have seen this before, last time I observed that problem was in my
brother's Sigma 70-200 AF. He had it realigned and the problem dissapeared.
It could be,
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, graywolf wrote:
My prediction? Color film will be hard to find in 5 years.
Have you taken into account that 35 mm film is used in cinema as well?
There will eventually be a shift to digital there as well, but hardly in
five years time.
anders
-
that's interesting because the 5400's predecessor, the 5000, is specified to
have a lag of 55 milliseconds when prefocused.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: alex wetmore [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 9:44 PM
Subject: Re: What DSLR Improvements
in the US, there is wholesale replacement of film with digital projectors
for commercial movie theaters. yes, they will retain film for a while, but
not a long while, since the films wear out so quickly. after that, it will
be the boutique and art film theaters only that continue to use film.
I thought 70 mm had displaced 35 mm to a large extent.
Don
___
Dr E D F Williams
http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams
Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery
See New Pages The Cement Company from HELL!
Updated: August 15, 2003
- Original Message -
From: Herb Chong [EMAIL
Okay folks I've made a stupid mistake -- another one. I have bought an
AF220T thinking that it was an update of the AF200T and would have auto. All
it has is TTL and is quite useless to me. Any takers?
Don
___
Dr E D F Williams
http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams
Author's Web
Hi Boz,
I have seen you inserted some optical diagram images
from the Japanese web site . Do you know what the
colors of the lenses mean ? I can't find any info
about that .
I understand that
blue is ED glass ,
green is glued acrylic Al-lens ,
yellow is ? molded Al-lens ?
red is ? high
Pat White a écrit:
Mark Erickson wrote:
In particular, my A* 200/F4 macro lens only displays the aperture in the
viewfinder if the lens is set on A. I can put the camera on Shutter
The viewfinder never displays the aperture set on the lens for A lenses.
On 'A' setting, it displays only the
Herb wrote:
HC in the US, there is wholesale replacement of film with digital projectors
HC for commercial movie theaters.
What resolution would that be? I am concerned as the best commercial
(not industrial) digital projectors are a measly 2 MPixels, and in
my experience it lacks not just
I don't think their use of colour is consistant.
blue is ED
green: AL
yellow: extra-LD
red: high refractive LD or AL depends on which pictures
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
_
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2
On 28/10/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
The last thing that I found said that the sensor in the Pentax *ist D
and Nikon D100 cost about $700 each in quantity.
Well that's what they'd like you to think, makes the bitter pill more
palatable
if there is some other entity to blame.
I blame the
yes, but all film is being replaced by digital pretty quickly in theaters.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Dr E D F Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 5:47 AM
Subject: OT: Film disappearing? Re: What DSLR Improvements I'd Like To See
I
can't tell except that it is at least as good as ordinary 70mm film. these
projectors are part of million dollar systems.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Alin Flaider [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 6:15 AM
Subject: Re: What DSLR
On 28/10/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
Have you taken into account that 35 mm film is used in cinema as well?
There will eventually be a shift to digital there as well, but hardly in
five years time.
in the US, there is wholesale replacement of film with digital projectors
for commercial
on 28.10.03 12:54, Cotty at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have bad news. Motion pictures for cinema release are still shot on
35mm negative. True.
Exactly. They are converted to either positives for cinemas or digital At
the later stage.
--
Best Regards
Sylwek
On 28 Oct 2003 at 13:15, Alin Flaider wrote:
What resolution would that be? I am concerned as the best commercial
(not industrial) digital projectors are a measly 2 MPixels, and in
my experience it lacks not just (obviously) in definition but also
in dynamic range.
Could it be
Use the matte screen for focusing with this lens .
Alexander
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 10:39:45 +0300
From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi!
I've just tried the above combination. Before that I
was taking
advantage of aufo-focusness of the lens on my
MZ-6...
Anyway, I've observed
Hi,
Herb wrote:
in the US, there is wholesale replacement of film with digital projectors
for commercial movie theaters. yes, they will retain film for a while, but
not a long while, since the films wear out so quickly. after that, it will
be the boutique and art film theaters only that
On 28 Oct 2003 at 11:54, Cotty wrote:
I have bad news. Motion pictures for cinema release are still shot on
35mm negative. True.
Not entirely.
http://millimeter.com/ar/video_digital_desert/
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Robert Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course its a lens aberration. But I think she thought that it could
be corrected post capture. And what I replied was that I didn't think
that the software could do something like this.
There is indeed software for correcting chromatic aberration:
Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 27 Oct 2003 at 15:49, alex wetmore wrote:
The last thing that I found said that the sensor in the Pentax *ist D
and Nikon D100 cost about $700 each in quantity.
Well that's what they'd like you to think, makes the bitter pill more palatable
if there
On 28 Oct 2003 at 7:29, Mark Roberts wrote:
Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 27 Oct 2003 at 15:49, alex wetmore wrote:
The last thing that I found said that the sensor in the Pentax *ist D
and Nikon D100 cost about $700 each in quantity.
Well that's what they'd like you to
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003, Cotty wrote:
I have bad news. Motion pictures for cinema release are still shot on
35mm negative. True.
Some music videos as well, even though they're only intended for
tv viewing.
anders
-
http://anders.hultman.nu/
On 28 Oct 2003 at 7:26, Mark Roberts wrote:
There is indeed software for correcting chromatic aberration: Picture
Window Pro (http://www.dl-c.com/) There's a review of it at
http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/chromatic.shtml (though the
before and after photos are swapped at one point!)
You should check dpreview - it's there!
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxistd/
Alex Sarbu
---
Acasa.ro vine cu albumele, tu vino doar cu pozele ;)
http://poze.acasa.ro/
I've been using an ES and ES II with several SMC lenses.
The SMC 50mm f1.4 and the SMC 28mm f3.5 are beauties.
They remind me of the current Pentax Limited Lens line.
I've also used the SMC 135 f3.5 and would like to find the f2.5.
Regards, Bob S.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] quotes and writes:
I've been
Michael,
I have had a Super Program run for years with a single set of Silver Oxide
MS76's. I never turn the camera off. I expect the same with the Program Plus
(Program A). The only time I have had problems, the bottom plate of the camera
was loose and made bad contact with the battery. I
Don't know about 5 years, but the new Sony theaters around here are supposed
to get their movies in digital via satellite. No more film...
Regards, Bob S.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, graywolf wrote:
My prediction? Color film will be hard to find in 5 years.
on 28.10.03 13:43, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You should check dpreview - it's there!
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxistd/
Nice to see that *istD performs so well! There are few small grips, but for
first, real DSLR very good results overall! And AFAIK - it was
I visited my favorite local camera store here in Central New Jersey, USA,
last night. They finally received the long-pomised *istd, and called me to
let me know.
I really liked the feel and operation of the camera. The price, $1375 for
body only, didn't seem out of line. Still I hesitate.
Sorry about the low precision level on the methods. I will try to put
something up later. I have realised that if I want to publish all the tests
I want to undertake, I will have to reorganise the pages anyway.
As to cropping; I took up the image in photoshop as TIF, and set the view to
actual
On 28/10/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
See: http://www.henninger.com/library/hdtvfilm24/
The Fall of Film Production
Thanks Rob, very interesting. The author predicts a chang-over period of
20 years. I'll stick with my original assertion that it won't be for at
least a decade.
It's a logical
I don't know how much this lens vary between samples, but I have tried two
of these lenses, and they are both the same.
Cheers,
Jostein
-
Pictures at: http://oksne.net
-
- Original Message -
From: Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL
On 28/10/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
I have bad news. Motion pictures for cinema release are still shot on
35mm negative. True.
Not entirely.
http://millimeter.com/ar/video_digital_desert/
I stand corrected!
Thanks Rob.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places,
I shall certainly check if that can be ruled out. I have no big faith in it,
but thanks for the tip, Carlos.
Jostein
-
Pictures at: http://oksne.net
-
- Original Message -
From: Carlos Royo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RS See: http://www.henninger.com/library/hdtvfilm24/
RS The Fall of Film Production
I went to the theater to see the technicalities behind Star War
episodes presented as reference in the above link. I did notice
almost involuntarily the pixelization and general lack of details.
Hi,
in the US, there is wholesale replacement of film with digital
projectors
for commercial movie theaters. yes, they will retain film for a
while, but
not a long while, since the films wear out so quickly. after
that, it will
be the boutique and art film theaters only that
Okay, so far so good...
I have tried to print the photos that had the most chromatic aberrations;
the FA100/2.8 macro at f/2.8 and the Sigma APO 70-200/2.8 at 70mm and f/2.8.
The good news is that from the suburb houses shots, nobody would be able
to see any aberrations in an A4, unless they were
John Francis wrote:
I suspect there's a chicken-and-egg argument here. There are
several other good reasons for keeping the mechanical-shutter
design of DSLRs (not least of which is dust control), so there
is no need to use fast-clear sensors; the sensor is in the dark
(and cleared?) at all
Graywolf wrote:
Very strange, when I go to that page the links insist the pictures are in my
C:\Windows\Temp\ directory. Of course they are not. How are others managing
to
see them?
Usually when this happens to me it means that I need to reboot, somehow my
browser is messing up.
The page
Dan mentioned his Optio S today.
I'm sad to report that the Optio S is off with my daughter now.
The thing is so damned cute that I'm thinking about buying another one and chucking
film entirely...
(well not really) (g)
I had it around my neck for the past two days, and I couldn't tell I was
Hi,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What drivel! How many digitally projected movies have you seen? Thge
results that we've seen in the US have been excellent. Apart from a
different grain pattern, the projected image is virtually impossible
to tell from (some) film - colors were great, detail
i have a minor problem once every 6 or 8 months. the printer is always
turned off when not in use for more than about 15 minutes. this caps the
heads and preserves the ink. i also print at least once a week because that
is how often i have a batch of photos to print. i have concluded that i wore
BW is damn near impossible to find now (but won't be by Wednesday) as there
has been a run on it here, apparently!
Aside from that, slide film will be slow to depart. Damn sure I will not be
going to digital, without my LX filled and latterly developed with slide
film for the Christmas annual
Hi,
Bobolini wrote:
You score 8½ for intellectual snobbery g
Infamy! Infamy! They've all got it in for me!
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dan mentioned his Optio S today.
I'm sad to report that the Optio S is off with my daughter now.
The thing is so damned cute that I'm thinking about buying another one and chucking
film entirely...
(well not really) (g)
I had it around my
Sylwester Pietrzyk schrieb:
on 28.10.03 13:43, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You should check dpreview - it's there!
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxistd/
*SNIP* ...performed
poorer than *XYZ* in dark places (also I've noticed, that it usually
focused
Hi,
Tyrone wrote:
What drivel! How many digitally projected movies have you seen? Thge
results that we've seen in the US have been excellent. Apart from a
different grain pattern, the projected image is virtually impossible
to tell from (some) film - colors were great, detail high.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe I've already read this here and don't remember it. Been lots of
discussion how many labs can now do digital printing (well, a limited few).
And I think there has been some discussion that one can get their jpegs (or
whatever) converted into film. Hasn't there?
Got a question for those better acquainted with the universe of Takumar
screw-mounts than I.
I've got a 35/2.0 Super-Takumar (new type) which has a yellow
discoloration. I'm told it's a common problem for this lens due to
aging of the coating. Since I'm shooting mostly slide film I'd like to
From
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/pressReleases/pr20020304-02.shtml
(i.e. dated fourth of March this year)
To show first-run movies, the Kodak Digital Cinema projector,
which is part of the Kodak
system, offers a major step forward in digital image quality. It
incorporates Kodak
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or maybe it means the sensor Pentax is using is not quite as good as Canon's.
I tend to think one cannot draw any conclusions yet.
There is some evidence that the Canon sensor is a bit better, or Canon's
handling of it is better. It's a more
I second that. These days, this is just the way how I use my cameras
as well: Optio S is such a great take it anywhere camera that it gets
most of snapshooting. For that purpose, results are just great.
OTOH, when I pick up MZ-S with 24 or 77 attached to it, my first
thought is like Oh yeah,
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
I just saw on TV that gateway has a 5Mpixel
digital PS for $249.99
I think 35mm film's days are really numbered.
Why does a DSLR cost $1250.00 more WITHOUT
a lens???
Apples and Oranges. Why does a pro SLR cost so much more than a film
You should check dpreview - it's there!
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxistd/
Alex Sarbu
At last a comprehensive review on the *ist D has finally filtered through!
It is a pretty extensive and balanced review, I am glad he used the FA
50mm 1.4 lens in the tests but would have liked
You score 8½ for intellectual snobbery g
Infamy! Infamy! They've all got it in for me!
Kenneth Williams (RIP), Carry on Caesar, IIRC.
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 14:00:52 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe I've already read this here and don't remember it. Been lots of
discussion how many labs can now do digital printing (well, a limited few).
And I think there has been some discussion that one can get their jpegs (or
whatever)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
MS wrote:
Aside from that, slide film will be slow to depart. Damn sure I will
not be going to digital, without my LX filled and latterly developed
with slide film for the Christmas annual show. I like the
inconvenience of the big screen going up
Maybe I've
Since we saw the announcement of a 67 Limited lens
might we also see IS (equivalent) first on the 645 67?
Just a thought. It would be consistent with Pentax' approach to Pro.
CRB
Just to be sure, I checked with my computer technician and, after
looking at my PC, he has assured me there is no virus on my system.
Anything coming in my name must be from elsewhere.
Can jpegs be converted into slides? Yet? If not yet, is it forseeably doable?
Yes, they can be made into slides by a service bureau, but I'm told it
costs about $5 EACH. Primarily this is done by pros, although apparently
folks who like to do photo-based art in photoshop sometimes have their
Both of the smaller (49mm filter thread) 35mm F2.0
lenses, the super-takumar and SMC takumar lenses have
the yellowing problem, but it is the glass, not the
coatings. They can be cleared by subjecting them
to UV light thankfully.
The earlier large 35mm F2.0 Super-Takumar (67mm filter thread)
Bob,
You're singing my tune. That is exactly what I have done. The Optio
S (when I can get it away from my wife) takes all the snaps.
Sometimes I have to use my Coolpix 990. Anyway, All the snapshots,
family stuff, etc. - anything I would have shot on 35mm is now shot on
the little digi's.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 2:47 PM
Subject: Re: 5 Mpixel price breakthough
Apples and Oranges. Why does a pro SLR cost so much more than a film
point-and-shoot? The sensor size is the same (35mm
-Original Message-
From: Collin Brendemuehl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Since we saw the announcement of a 67 Limited lens
Did I miss something?
tv
Try comparing the *istD to the Canon D30, which was Canon's first digital
camera. That sort of points out how far Canon has come, and how good
the *istD is for a first DSLR.
DJE
Good pt.
Marnie aka Doe
Of course digital images can be transfered to positive transparency film --
slide film if you will. But why not shoot film if you want film? Real slides
will be cheaper and of higher resolution. Can't imagine why anyone would want to
work backwards from digital to a slide.
Paul
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 28 Oct 2003 at 10:43, Mark Roberts wrote:
I was the Components Engineer responsible for optical sensors (as well
as discrete semiconductors, crystals, filters, oscillators and several
other commodities) at Harris Corp's RF Communications Division at the
time I got the $1000.00 per unit
On 28 Oct 2003 at 17:23, Alin Flaider wrote:
I went to the theater to see the technicalities behind Star War
episodes presented as reference in the above link. I did notice
almost involuntarily the pixelization and general lack of details.
There's no real comparison to the film, HDTV
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003, Paul Stenquist wrote:
Of course digital images can be transfered to positive transparency
film -- slide film if you will. But why not shoot film if you want
film? Real slides will be cheaper and of higher resolution.
Can't imagine why anyone would want to work backwards
Hi,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You seem to be basing your original comment on something you read
rather than having seen the results with your own eyes. That doesn't
lend much credence to your POV.
Agreed. But this is baby technology that very few (comparitively)
people have had the
On 28 Oct 2003 at 13:36, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Try comparing the *istD to the Canon D30, which was Canon's first digital
camera. That sort of points out how far Canon has come, and how good
the *istD is for a first DSLR.
Oh come on, first DSLR, OK the first that they successfully
Hi,
John Francis wrote:
You score 8½ for intellectual snobbery g
Infamy! Infamy! They've all got it in for me!
Kenneth Williams (RIP), Carry on Caesar, IIRC.
Cleo.
Rambling Sid Rumpo
Reading the review, I wonder how the camera determines which AF point to
choose for the AF system.
Does the camera always makes the correct choice?
On Tue, 2003-10-28 at 14:23, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
on 28.10.03 13:43, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You should check
On 28 Oct 2003 at 14:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe I've already read this here and don't remember it. Been lots of
discussion how many labs can now do digital printing (well, a limited few).
And I think there has been some discussion that one can get their jpegs (or
whatever)
because some magazines are backwards enough to not be able to cope with
digital submissions, and like it or not, my scanned slides look better after
i have done some tweaking of them in Photoshop.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm not having much luck printing BW digitally.
I'm using a Epson 1280 and tried a few different
papers. The main problem is the blacks arent deep enuff.
Is there a particular brand of paper ( I prefer glossy )
that is know to have the best deep blacks
JCO
me too. Does anyone select the focus point or use the automatic setting?
For those of you who do, how well is it working? It seemed pretty slow to
select the focus point manually (and I don't trust the camera to know what I
want in focus).
Christian Skofteland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original
I recently had a number of digital images made into slides by a local
pro lab. I did not like the results. The film was something by Kodak
(not sure what). The contrast increased greatly and color shifted from
what I had on my screen. To get decent results would, I expect, take
much
Well, when I was taking racing photos a couple weeks ago, I was able to
select a focus point for the shot I wanted and pan as the cars came through
the frame until it was where I wanted it and bam, trip the shutter. It'd be
great for tripod shooting. For snagging kids pretending to be Tigger or
the 1280 with Epson inks will do fair to middling at best. you need to
replace its inks with a different set of inks not from Epson to get the best
BW results.
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 9:14 PM
Subject: Re: AF Select (WAS Finally)
Well, when I was taking racing photos a couple weeks ago, I was able to
select a focus point for the shot I wanted and pan as the cars came
duh...uh...
Here:
http://community.webshots.com/photo/93489626/96956971iPqszz
Some jaggies in this presentation that are NOT in the original. Not sure
why.
Cory
- Original Message -
From: Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 9:26
I got my grubby little hands on one tonight.
Really nice feel.
Also, for anyone interested they got in ...
K300/4 @ $300
M200/4 @ $80
M100/4 Macro @ $200
Extension tube set K (uncoupled) @ $30
All in excellent condition in original boxes, cases included!
And a black MX -- significant brassing but
-- -Original Message-
-- From: Chris Murray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 2:21 PM
--
-- On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--
-- Dan mentioned his Optio S today.
--
-- I'm sad to report that the Optio S is off with my daughter now.
-- The thing
It is one of the things that I really like about the *ist D, and actually I
really got to use it most recently with the camera and am getting a
workflow...
I rarely use the Auto setting, but I do use the select on the non-center
spot, and when I have to I use the center I just spin the dial.
Anyone want a deal on a Canon FS4000?
From: John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aha. 4000dpi, 14-bit scanning in the low-end model.
Maybe it's time to replace the CoolScan III.
The ISO 800 and 1600 ones look worse than the 10D or *istD samples at
those ISOs I've seen. But they are different samples, so its unfair to
compare.
Alan Chan wrote:
Here are some SD10 samples I think are pretty good.
http://www.pbase.com/rickdecker
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell
Subject: BW Digital printing
I'm not having much luck printing BW digitally.
I'm using a Epson 1280 and tried a few different
papers. The main problem is the blacks arent deep enuff.
Is there a particular brand of paper ( I prefer glossy )
They produce their own, so they don't have to pay Sony any profit. Plus
its CMOS, which is a cheaper process.
J. C. O'Connell wrote:
That cant be right or CANON couldnt be selling
the 6Mpixel rebel digital for 999.99 retail.
JCO
I was thinking the same thing...
Andrew Robinson
John Francis wrote:
Film is not yet dead...
http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1067358499.html
Aha. 4000dpi, 14-bit scanning in the low-end model.
Maybe it's time to replace the CoolScan III.
Its about time. At least it got the highly recommended rating, not
that people pay that much attention anymore. The reviews have been
accused of being biased towards Canon.
Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote:
You should check dpreview - it's there!
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxistd/
Is it me or does it seem that the new Coolscan V is nothing more then the
current Coolscan 4000 minus the ability to batch scan via optional adapters?
It does appear that it will price lower then the current discounted Coolscan
4000.
Butch
Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
