Hi,
> "Dada Madonna"?
> I Googled it, and that didn't help much.
> You're going to have to help me out here, Bob!
Dada was an art movement of the 20s and 30s which set out to shock and
scandalise. It can be considered a precursor of surrealism. It often
used the juxtaposition of unrelated obj
> Fra: John Mustarde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I sure won't be ponying up my hard-earned bucks for any expensive new
> lens with this nice CA "feature". As far as I'm concerned, the DA 14
> is crapola just because of the color fringing. I thought the purpose
> of making a digital-specific lens would
So the *sit D is a flag ship, that's supposed to support P&S sales, which is
supposed to support the sales of medical/industrial products...:-)
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Pål Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 29. ju
>Say these are correct. How do Canon & Nikon deal with it? Do they have
>more effective solution?
>Alan Chan
1) Throw more ED and other special glass at it, upping the price of the lens.
2) Optimize to limit CA at the expense of other optical flaws.
3) Supposedly the 14/2.8 Nikkor has problems
Thanks to all who commented. I confess I _did_ play around with the sky a
little in PS Elements, but was never happy with what I got so I left it
alone. It _was_ a grey November day and after the bright Indian Summer days
of October, November in Wisconsin is mostly grey, cold and rainy. It prime
I'd concur - don't waste $ on hot lights. If she wants studio lites, check
out Alien Bees - http://www.alienbees.com/ - lots of bang for the buck.
Example - http://home.earthlink.net/~allaround6/371581-R1-25%20web.jpg - One
Alien Bee w/umbrella and a white reflector.
Paul
- Original Messag
That's right. Works great for my SONY. I hardly ever think of the "missing"
viewfinder anymore. It works great - and even enlarges the image center for
manual focusing.
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: That Guy [mailto:[EMAIL P
Don't underestimate the power of capitalism. Pentax makes money from
cameras. In the nineties, they were among the leaders in the P&S camera
market. They may yet get a comeback. The day they don't make enough money,
the will stop. Investments go where the profit is - like the branches of the
trees
First i was very happy with that lens - a real WW for DSLR but after
nearly half a year with that lens i don't like it anymore. I never had
the impression of real sharpness with that lens even stopped down to 11
and its quite huge.
Regards Rolf
The viewfinder could be replaced by a tiny LCD viewfinder... Might not be
the greatest thing to manual focus with but it would be better than using it
like range-finder IMO.
-That Guy
-Original Message-
From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2004 12:22 AM
To
I believe people think Pentax (and Minolta) are P&S cameras. Some easy to
use camera for the pocket or the bag - to bring to the party or the beach -
even on hollidays. And perhaps a few enthusiast cameras - typically with a
Sigma lens - that some people by as their first time, entry level camera.
www.mynetcologne.de/~nc-kellersv2/19.JPG
Wow!!
Malcolm
>
> Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2004 11:03:37 +1000
> From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: 20mm filters
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
> Content-description: Mail message body
>
> On
Hello TIA
Working with 500W/250W light bulbs is no fun. It's HOT! The model sertainly
don't have much fun sitting in the tropical heat, smiling relaxed! And it's
an expensive solution, because you'll have to replace the bulbs frequently
(short life time). In a very short time this setup will be as
I get
Page Not Found
We're Sorry! We can't locate the page you requested.
Check the spelling on the Web address (capitalization and punctuation
count). Otherwise, go to EarthLink.net, enter a search key word, or
check out any of our services below.
rg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://home.
I second thaa
aaa
aaat!
rg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I had this idea of taking them all out on a bright day - for a family
photo of
Pentax gear. Here is the result:
www.mynetcologne.de/~nc-kellersv2/19.JPG
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) |
Ya, and your hotmail bounces inbound messages too!
I tried to complement you on your PUG photo.
Regards, Bob S.
frank writes:
> I hate Hotmail. I guess ya gets what ya pays for, eh?
>
> cheers,
> frank
Herb wrote:
what what i have been reading, the only reason that Pentax is still in the
camera business is to give brand recognition to its medical and imaging
components sales.
REPLY:
That must be stretching it a bit far. Pentax camera division is 50% of the company
Late 90's published fig
Me too, Shel.
"Page Not Found
We're Sorry! We can't locate the page you requested.
Check the spelling on the Web address (capitalization and punctuation
count)."
keith whaley
Peter J. Alling wrote:
I get a page not found for this one Shel.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
http://home.earthl
Ha...lots of luck..if your serious don't fondle them between now and the
sale! Give each of them a goodbye kiss and put them in the box quick, or
you might have to send the money back!
> -Original Message-
> From: Keith Whaley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 8:05 P
I get a page not found for this one Shel.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
http://home.earthlink.net/~sbelinkoff/paw/18.html
#18 is the first of a series that'll be posted over the next few weeks.
Shel
Never fear, I'll be putting most of them on eBay in the next 3 or 5
months...
keith
Cotty wrote:
On 28/6/04, Keith Whaley, discombobulated, offered:
I almost "thudded" too, until I counted them--and realized how many I
have in my _own_ "collection!"
Pentax bodies and lenses together surpass t
G'day Pål,
You probably don't know me, I'm a relatively recent subscriber.
The only reference I've seen to this camera was hidden in the "Nikon to
abandon Film" thread of a couple of weeks ago. Tanya wrote:
"Graywolf, a salesman at Pentax Australia told me when i bought my *istD
(Feb 04), that t
I think we can safely say you have moved into the realm of collector. That
is a lot of Pentax gear. Reminds me of the poster I bought a couple of
years ago. Hope you have fun with them.
Jeff
At 05:34 PM 6/28/2004, you wrote:
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 22:09:40 +0200
From: "keller.schaefer" <[EMAI
what what i have been reading, the only reason that Pentax is still in the
camera business is to give brand recognition to its medical and imaging
components sales. in total camera sales, Pentax has been hovering around 3%
market share for nearly a decade. the camera division lost money for a
coupl
your wedding lab should be able to do all the same things for you at the
same cost per image, if it is a decent professional lab.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Jim Apilado" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 3:13 PM
Subject: Re: A photographic w
I wrote:
Another area particularly open for Pentax is DSLR's that take the medium format system
lenses. Pentax can make a high-end DSLR with K-mount, increase mount/sensor distance
with 1,2 cm - inflate prism/mirrorbox etc as necessary and put in a larger sensor and
they have high-res DSLR.
http://home.earthlink.net/~sbelinkoff/paw/18.html
#18 is the first of a series that'll be posted over the next few weeks.
Shel
if they have to do any hand work on the elements for even 1% of them, the
price of the lens would skyrocket.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Bob Blakely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 4:28 PM
Subject: Re: Lens manufacturing
> It was a very
Bob,
"Dada Madonna"?
I Googled it, and that didn't help much.
You're going to have to help me out here, Bob!
cheers,
frank
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist
fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
From: Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Leicas. He lies o
Frantisek wrote:
On the issue of DA lenses, quite many photographers would like a DA
equivalent of standard 70-210 2.8 zoom. With the crop factor, it's
just too long and too heavy. I know many shooting Nikkors who would
like such a lens like 50-140 2.8 or similar. With most zooms in this
standard
Dag wrote:
It could be, but it does not fit with the quality of the new 14mm, which seems to be
to well built to be aimed at the mass market.
REPLY:
Pentax mid- and upper level products the last few years have been well built: MZ-S,
Limited lenses, DA lenses, *ist D. It seems like this is a
Jens wrote:
So, my point is: Don't expect line up of 3-5 digital SLR's
from Pentax. The never claimed they would try to compete with N and C in the
pro market. If they really wanted to, they would have produced the digital
full frame MZ-D, which was announced at the same cost as the current 11MP
Edwin wrote:
My guess is simply that no-one is buying high-end Pentax gear, so Pentax
is no longer producing things like the MZ-S and the FA 80-200/2.8
Pentax users seem more inclined to buy 80-200/4.5-6.7 kinda lenses, and
Pentax's market share is so weak already that this is where they have to
Hi, Ann,
I fear that I've been missing lots of posts lately. I suspect that Hotmail
is the culprit, as I've been receiving complaints from friends (yes, I do
have friends ) that their e-mails to me bounce on average several times
before they get through.
Anyway, to the subject at hand, which i
There are lots of wedding shooters who shoot all digital. It's a workflow
efficiency issue that is developed with knowledge and experience. Many folks
can go through 1000-1500 images and come up with a set of files for proofs
in a couple of hours. The key is batch operations and not getting fancy o
Malcolm wrote:
It's like the *ist D all over again. I have never figured out the Pentax
marketing strategy. With all the competition out there, you would have
thought that advertising and products in shops readily available was a must
do. Getting an *ist D when they first came out involved putting
Well, was this just an empty rumour or what? If so, quite a good one with pictures of
the camera and the box it came in.
Anyway, it would have been nice with an MZ-S with magnesium back and weather sealing.
Anyone with any clues?
Pål
Erwitt uses techniques that most photographers avoid these days: he moves
around, bends his knees, remains mobile, eschews zoom lenses, preferring to
shoot light and quick with the Leica.
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The way I figure it, if this was a
It looks like a Jack Russel. (and yes they are weird, although not
exactly hairless).
I think it's cute. (Well I think everything about this photo is cute).
frank theriault wrote:
Again, one of what's becoming a series:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2479712
Just a friend (Milan),
Hi, Boris,
First, thanks for looking, and thanks for your comments. I'm always
interested to see what you think, and hear what you ask about my photos.
Second, it may not appear to be, but it is actually a "hairless" dog. It's
especially noticeable in this photo in the area between Milan's
it's *working*
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm just getting this post now (almost
7pm EST, Monday), and I posted it at around 11:30 pm last night.
I hate Hotmail!! There's a post re: Shel's "Marilyn's Shoes in the Garden"
(or whatever it's called) that hasn't shown up yet at all (I think I said I
li
On 28/6/04, Keith Whaley, discombobulated, offered:
>I almost "thudded" too, until I counted them--and realized how many I
>have in my _own_ "collection!"
>Pentax bodies and lenses together surpass the total number in our photo,
>and when you add the non-Pentax items...well...it's almost decaden
I almost "thudded" too, until I counted them—and realized how many I
have in my _own_ "collection!"
Pentax bodies and lenses together surpass the total number in our photo,
and when you add the non-Pentax items...well...it's almost decadent!
A number of more Pentax lenses, but fewer bodies.
Add t
O-M-G!! THAT is one cool photo!
What a collection!
Thanks so much for sharing.
:-)
tan.
-Original Message-
From: keller.schaefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, 29 June 2004 6:10 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: a 'family' photo
I had this idea of taking them all out on a
holy crap, man, are you like obsessed or something?
that is the most impressive collection i've ever seen! (well, maybe on a par
with Cesar's)
thanks for sharing, Sven, that is such a cool pic...
tan.
-Original Message-
From: Steve Desjardins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, 29
>I had this idea of taking them all out on a bright day - for a family
photo of
>Pentax gear. Here is the result:
>
>www.mynetcologne.de/~nc-kellersv2/19.JPG
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Great Portrait!
What is the smaller, grey and white camera to the right of the MZ-5n?
keller.schaefer wrote:
I had this idea of taking them all out on a bright day - for a family photo of
Pentax gear. Here is the result:
www.mynetcologne.de/~nc-kellersv2/19.JPG
Only one member could not be present,
try to make some photographs with the lens wide open, the aperture should not close
then. If the aperture is at fault, it would be correctly exposed. If it is still over
exposed, there must be something else wrong.
On Monday 28 June 2004 21:24, alexanderkrohe wrote:
FJW> Mark wrote:
FJW>
FJW> >
I think you are right if you're talking about experenced users.
Most people give their films to industrial labos which really give you back
only crap.
It is not very difficult to switch to digital in these conditions.
However if usually use a little pro-like labo then, of course, it can make a
hug
frank theriault wrote:
>
> You may be "annsan the procrastinatoress" (I wouldn't have spelled it that
> way, but who am I to argue with a Scrabble Babe? ), but you're also
> "annsan the linkless" (as in: where's the link for the pic?)
>
> ever hopeful,
> frank
>
Dear Hopeful,
You (and others
Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Yes, I have the same problem with "save for web." I think it's because
>PS changes it to SRGB. I do as you do: compensate with extra brightness
>and lightening on hue and saturation.
I found a way around this by setting the compensation to Standard
Wi
Intersting. I had no idea about the "tool" and the "blank". Imagine - after
using lenses for the last - eehh... some 40 years!
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Bob Blakely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 28. juni 2004 22:29
Ti
Nice family. I see we have some mutual relatives, even though my family is
smaller (not counting the German relatives - Pentacons, Exaktas, Rollies of
course :-)
Cheers
Jens
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Steve Desjardins [mailto:[EM
Interesting2 of you that are digitally enabled choose to still use film
for the important have to get it right images. There is no doubt that film
still does have it's advantages. In our society where time is everything,
letting the labs do it has it's own good points vs. the general advertis
Thanks!
I showed this to my wife and now she agrees that I´m not that bad after
all, even after buying the 14mm :-)
DagT
På 28. jun. 2004 kl. 22.09 skrev keller.schaefer:
I had this idea of taking them all out on a bright day - for a family
photo of
Pentax gear. Here is the result:
www.mynetcol
I have made lenses before - for a homemade telescope. I did it years ago for
the "experience." I used "crown" glass and "flint" glass bought from a
scientific supply company. The glass came as flat, round disk pairs, one
became the "tool" and the other the lens. I worked them against each other
usi
Holy Mackerel! What a great mass of Pentax gear! I'm way behind and
have to go the KEH website right away . . .
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/28/04 04:09PM >>>
I had this idea of taking them all out on a bright day - for a family
photo of
Pentax gear. Here is the result:
www.mynetcologne.de/~nc-kel
Hey Sven,
Wanna buy a camera?
A.
On 28 Jun 2004, at 22:09, keller.schaefer wrote:
I had this idea of taking them all out on a bright day - for a family
photo of
Pentax gear. Here is the result:
www.mynetcologne.de/~nc-kellersv2/19.JPG
Only one member could not be present, a 2,0/35 Tak that is cur
28-200mm is Tamron one, I thought ...
-Message d'origine-
De : Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Envoyé : lundi 28 juin 2004 12:40
À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Objet : Re: Lens manufacturing
"Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Do Pentax make ALL their own lenses
All except the 100m
Hi MArk
This looks like the well known Pentax lens disease: Slow aperture closure!
My M 2.0/85mm does that if it haven't used for some time. The Aperture
blades reach working aperture some time too late AFTER the shot is taken.
This should not occure in a new lens - perhaps on an old, tired one, l
Does the glass production (raw, unpolished lenses) take
place in Pentax own factories or do all camera manufacturers buy their raw
lenses from a few big factories.
Most do. Minolta has (or had) its own factory though and, in the
60s, 70s and 80s at least, mentionned this in their booklets, adding
I have not been keeping up with the list - I know, tell you something new -
but I actually had a good excuse the last few days. Just bear with me :-)
My next door neighbor's elder daughter got married on Saturday. She is like
my little sister. My, how they all grow up...
Anyway, I was the offi
Could it be due to inaccurate calibration of the aperture mechanism of the
lens since it shares the traditional 'A' design (something difficult to
avoid because it would be too labour intensive to adjust them just right)? I
have tested all my lenses with Z-1p and found some of them open up the
They are not underexposed, they are overexposed, by the looks of them on the web.
--
Mark Stringer wrote:
This was my first outing using the DA16-45 and F70-210 & FA50. I was really shocked
at the difference.
http://www.cmstringer.com/pentaxtest/DA16-45/index.html
Just looking at the thumbnails f
This was my first outing using the DA16-45 and F70-210 & FA50. I was really shocked
at the difference.
http://www.cmstringer.com/pentaxtest/DA16-45/index.html
Just looking at the thumbnails for each folder shows the difference.
Gallery2 from through-the-lens.net is fun. Didn't take long to th
I will be heading to south Florida on Thursday through the 11th.
Any PDMLers interested in meeting up? I should be available for lunch or
dinner during the week.
I will be in Hollywood with my own car.
Basically, anyone in the Miami/Ft. Lauderdale area want to get togther?
Not caught up to the
It appears that I will have a business trip to Ft. Worth the last week of
July. I am thinking about possibly being there early and spending the
weekend of the 24th.
San Antonio PDMLers - I can be there for the weekend! Let me know if there
is any interest in a get together.
I will be in Ft. Wort
On 28/6/04, graywolf, discombobulated, offered:
>Must be that easy to use Mac software...
Don't start!!!
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
I dont need to, I use a Mac. Was just posting it for others who may be
unaware seems it used to be just porno sites but now you can catch
a spy anywhere.
Antonio
On 28 Jun 2004, at 18:00, graywolf wrote:
Most of us here on the list know about spyware and what to do about
it. Why not do a we
Must be that easy to use Mac software...
Cotty wrote:
On 28/6/04, Frits Wüthrich, discombobulated, offered:
still doesn't work?
No! Bloody £$%&£$%&*$!! thing.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
--
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004, Mark Stringer wrote:
> Dr. Heiko Hamann wrote:
> "The 16-45 is told to underexpose one stop."
>
> I am very disappointed in my DA16-45 which I bought with my istD. I
> cannot count on it to produce useable photos. My first outing was
> to see my daughter at an equestrian even
Most of us here on the list know about spyware and what to do about it. Why not
do a websearch to find out yourself.
--
Antonio Aparicio wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3845835.stm
BBC News repoprts that: "While your home is unlikely to be infested with
tiny spies, your Windows comp
He has managed to filter out all e-mail from the PDML, or people on the PDML. GRIN
Frits Wüthrich wrote:
still doesn't work?
On Sunday 27 June 2004 21:24, Cotty wrote:
FJW> On 27/6/04, Cotty, discombobulated, offered:
FJW>
FJW> >>bloody thing
FJW> >
FJW> >refuses to work
FJW> >
FJW>
FJW> try agai
The word from Pentax sources is that the only "current" lens not actually made
by Pentax is the 100/3.5 Macro (Cosina). Supposedly they had too many problems
with the Tamron made lenses.
--
Fred wrote:
Do Pentax make ALL their own lenses
All except the 100mm f/3.5 macro.
How about the current
On 28/6/04, Frits Wüthrich, discombobulated, offered:
>still doesn't work?
No! Bloody £$%&£$%&*$!! thing.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Well, he is kinda cute, in a Scandinavian sorta chubby-cheeks kinda way.
>Oh, c'mon, he at least deserves a little peck on the cheek. ;-)
>
>Really, folks, thanks for all your work.
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/27/04 03:11PM >>>
>On 27/6/04, Cotty, discombobulated, offered:
>
>>>Cheers
>>>Adelheid
One thing to do is to logically think through what the problem may be.
If you are taking a meter reading, the camera would be calculating the
fstop without actually stopping down. So let's say that the setting
ended up being 1/125 @f8 - you shoot the picture and it is
overexposed. Now either the
Dr. Heiko Hamann wrote:
"The 16-45 is told to underexpose one stop."
I am very disappointed in my DA16-45 which I bought with my istD. I cannot count on
it to produce useable photos. My first outing was to see my daughter at an equestrian
event on a bright day. Everything is washed out, even c
still doesn't work?
On Sunday 27 June 2004 21:24, Cotty wrote:
FJW> On 27/6/04, Cotty, discombobulated, offered:
FJW>
FJW> >>bloody thing
FJW> >
FJW> >refuses to work
FJW> >
FJW>
FJW> try again
FJW>
FJW>
FJW>
--
Frits Wüthrich
Oh, c'mon, he at least deserves a little peck on the cheek. ;-)
Really, folks, thanks for all your work.
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/27/04 03:11PM >>>
On 27/6/04, Cotty, discombobulated, offered:
>>Cheers
>>Adelheid
>
>Oh yeah, forgot to say THANKS Addy, that's always a lot of work you
you
>and Jos
Nice "abstract" composition!
David Mann wrote:
A day late as I decided to watch a movie last night instead :)
http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/cgi-bin/paw.cgi?date=27-Jun-2004
Sorry about the ugly page design... it's the same basic design as
always but I've fiddled with the colour scheme to get rid
Sweet kid, sweet dog, nice shot. Thanks, Wendy.
wendy beard wrote:
Had to join in on this boy/dog theme
http://www.beard-redfern.com/tmp/boy_dog.jpg
The dog is mine (it's Tanja), the boy isn't. This was taken two years
ago at a picnic organised by the local Bernese Mountain Dog club. The
boy cou
No Way, Peter: That's a curious, playful look!
Over the years, I've had ten malamutes, and all have been gentle with
people and kids, and most other dogs. They can, however, be, ah,
confrontational with some animals. Mine were great rabbit and bird
hunters, and they would chase the deer that
on 28.06.04 13:57, Fred at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> All except the 100mm f/3.5 macro.
>
> How about the current FA 28-200/3.8-5.6 AL [IF] - might it be a
> Tamron, perhaps?
Yes it is, and older 28-105/4-5.6 (IF) comes from Tamron too.
--
Best Regards
Sylwek
>>Do Pentax make ALL their own lenses
> All except the 100mm f/3.5 macro.
How about the current FA 28-200/3.8-5.6 AL [IF] - might it be a
Tamron, perhaps?
Fred
Hi,
I am gonna be putting my SMCT 85/1.8 (m42) up for auction in the next
day or so (now have the k-mount version and dont need 2 copies!) and
wanted to offer it to those on this list first if anyone is interested.
Looking for £220.
Contact me by email if you are interested.
Regards,
Antonio
Picture Window Pro software has a built in thingie that
reduces chromatic aberration.
It's not automatic; you have to play with settings, but I've seen
before/after comparisons and it seems to work well.
Joseph Tainter wrote:
Is this color fringing something we will just have to live with?
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> Forget what I said earlier. Just let the photo stand by
> itself. I said too much in my initial post, proving, or at
> least giving credence to, the idea that the viewer can be
> influenced by too much information.
>
> What difference does it make where the garden i
Thanks a lot. Quite clever!
Regards
Jens (NOT Sylvester)
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Dr. Heiko Hamann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 28. juni 2004 10:43
Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Emne: Re: First smc-DA14/2.8 impressions
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3845835.stm
BBC News repoprts that: "While your home is unlikely to be infested
with tiny spies, your Windows computer probably is."
Regards,
Antonio
on 28.06.04 10:43, Dr. Heiko Hamann at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> That's it. The 16-45 must work different (I never tried it): you have to
> use the AF first and can use the quick-shift afterwards. On the DA14
> quick-shift is available, always.
QSF on 16-45 works exactly in the same way as on DA
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3845835.stm
BBC News repoprts that: "While your home is unlikely to be infested
with tiny spies, your Windows computer probably is."
Regards,
Antonio
"Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Do Pentax make ALL their own lenses
All except the 100mm f/3.5 macro.
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com
Thanks to Frank and the rest.
Lukas is well again, I think I got the pictures when it was at its
worse.
Some more comments below.
På 23. jun. 2004 kl. 22.43 skrev frank theriault:
Last week's PAW is stunning! You have such a wonderful ability to see
interesting things in everyday objects! Th
That Guy wrote:
Ok Heiko, thanks. Perhaps I overestimated the capability of ED elements.
The following helped put things in perspective for me though:
...
The price for the above mentioned lens at Adorama?? $1,799.95... Yes, it's
Canon L glass, yes it's 14mm and it also has problems with CA.O
on 28.06.04 9:05, Jens Bladt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This is just too much CA, I think. It seems to be disrurbing allready for
> 4x6 prints?? That would not be acceptable IMO.
I don't think it will show up on 4x6 prints. But it could be visible on
15x21cm and larger prints. I've seen many ph
on 28.06.04 9:01, Jens Bladt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> What is this, please?
>
You can manually override AF any time (when it is not working) without
having to switch to MF on body.
--
Best Regards
Sylwek
Great colours!. Very nice shot!
all the best
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Paul Sorenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 28. juni 2004 06:19
Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Emne: PAW: Fall 2003
I guess the link is lost in cyberspa
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
