I have built a shutter speed tester like this one:
http://davidrichert.com/sound_card_shutter_tester.htm
I first found it on an German site, but can´t find that site anymore. I
have built mine with 3 phototransistors, so i can check the curtain
travel speed as well. Cost less than 10EUR. I
Butsh wrote:
Time to play devil's advocate. If this is true will we allow users of these
Samsung clones to enter the monthly PUG?
Interesting Question, Butch.
When I do a shot with my *ist D, I may be using a Tokina, Sigma or Tamron
lens (if not a Pentax).
The image will be recorded on a sensor
frank theriault wrote:
Toronto is still a pretty safe place. There were 78 murders in 2005.
For a city of some 2.5 million people, that's low by any standard.
That number is a bit higher than average, but not shockingly
so; indeed, it's not the record.
The problem is that 52 of them
Jens,
Please define a Pentax lens. Can a Pentax-rebadged Tamron be considered more
Pentax than a genuine Pentax just rebadged as a Schneider-Kreuznach? I don't
think so.
It is evident that Pentax and Samsung SLR's are the same stuff, hence I
think we can just welcome Samsung users here,
And what about a Pentax lens rebadged as a Schneider-Kreuznach?
John
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 08:32:42 -, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Butsh wrote:
Time to play devil's advocate. If this is true will we allow users of
these
Samsung clones to enter the monthly PUG?
Interesting
My guess is that the vast majority of tribute flowers that spring up around
London are for deaths caused by road traffic accidents. These deaths are
just as tragic, just as senseless, and the victims just as innocent as those
caused by guns, yet somehow they don't generate the same level of public
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 09:08:27 -, Dario Bonazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jens,
Please define a Pentax lens. Can a Pentax-rebadged Tamron be considered
more Pentax than a genuine Pentax just rebadged as a
Schneider-Kreuznach? I don't think so.
It is evident that Pentax and Samsung SLR's
Dario, I agree.
But do you welcome all Samsung users?
Even the ones using a Samsung mobile phone, a Samsung made Rollei w.
Schneider lenses etc.
When the German camera industy got in trouble after WW2, many companies
chose to sell their good name, in order to get at least some money out
before
At the moment, I think that Pentax compacts (and all those using Pentax
lenses: Benq, Casio, HP) and Pentax+Samsung DSLR's are fine.
The plain rule should be: It must include something Pentax
That can be just the name (like it happens with Pentax rebadged compacts
made by Premier) or hardware
- Original Message -
From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.photoline.ru/photo/1138474583
I've done a couple of attempts at this river valley myself, and it's
not an easy one. :-)
I think the square format suits the place well. IMO, the crop becomes
a little tight to
The LCD preview is interesting.
I suppose this camera does not have a prisma at the place of the mirror
(like the Olympus E-10 and E-20 SLRs). So, I guess the DOF button opens the
mirror and fires the shutter as well!!!!!!
It seems to be aimed at users, that are familiar with PS cameras
On 29 Jan 2006 at 10:03, Niko Koskela wrote:
I have built a shutter speed tester like this one:
http://davidrichert.com/sound_card_shutter_tester.htm
Can´t help with measuring the DSLR shutter testing, which was the
original topic...
The set-up above could be used to roughly test a DSLR
Happy new year to all our Chinese listers, I've just put up a quick gallery of
the some of the local celebrations held in my suburb. I guess it's a view of
Australia that many who haven't visited this part of the world recently may be
a little surprised at but Sydney has a significant
That's fine with me.
Regards
Jens Bladt
http://www.jensbladt.dk
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Dario Bonazza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 29. januar 2006 11:19
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: *ist DL2
At the moment, I think that Pentax compacts (and all those using Pentax
On Jan 29, 2006, at 12:23 AM, David Mann wrote:
On Jan 29, 2006, at 3:45 AM, Bob Shell wrote:
I find television very educating. Every time somebody turns on the
set, I go into the other room and read a book. - Groucho Marx
Words to live by.
Yep, I live by the words of Marx and Lennon.
I'm late on commenting on this one. The reason is that I am way behind with
the list.
I am kind of indecisive myself. There is something with this picture. I
like the lines. They work well together. And, there are some interesting
things to look at.
But the fine lines works _against_ the main
It appears the sensor in my *istDS is tilted by about 1 degree. May not
sound like much but actually is a whole lot with industry and
architecture.
Has anyone else had this problem with a Pentax DSLR?
Ralf
--
Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany
private homepage:
Now I have read the rest of the thread. As I read your replies I you have
not captured a man reading on street, but the whole street.
So now I think the photo is pretty good, but the title is slightly
misleading. I did not like it as an image of a man reading simply because he
did not grab my
- Original Message - From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.photoline.ru/photo/1138474583
Ooh.
*Very* nice.
Hello List
Have anybody tried this?
I am considering buying a 645 in stead of buying a second body (Exakta 66)
for my new (and excellent) Schneider Kreuznach Xenorar 2.8/80mm. Will
anything work (aperture stop down, metering etc.)?
Regards
Jens
Jens Bladt
http://www.jensbladt.dk
I haven't seen any evidence of misalignment on either of my D cameras.
What makes you think your sensor is misaligned? I would think that an
accurate test is very difficult to perform in that it requires precise
alignment of a camera and target.
On Jan 29, 2006, at 8:37 AM, Ralf R. Radermacher
Does anyone else get some flashy ads for TV superimposed over the photo?
Shel
[Original Message]
From: E.R.N. Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Date: 1/29/2006 5:57:17 AM
Subject: Re: PESO - From Norway 2004
- Original Message - From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL
On Jan 29, 2006, at 8:55 AM, Jens Bladt wrote:
Have anybody tried this?
Adapters are available, and it works.
I am considering buying a 645 in stead of buying a second body
(Exakta 66)
for my new (and excellent) Schneider Kreuznach Xenorar 2.8/80mm. Will
anything work (aperture stop
On Jan 29, 2006, at 8:59 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
I haven't seen any evidence of misalignment on either of my D
cameras. What makes you think your sensor is misaligned? I would
think that an accurate test is very difficult to perform in that it
requires precise alignment of a camera and
No popups from here.
With the popup-blocker turned off I notice that the browser tries to
fetch something from an ad server, so I suspect it's blocked by my
ISP.
Jostein
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Sunday, January
William...
Jack
--- David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Something like this?
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/text-calibrating-shutters.html
Dave
On 1/29/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Jack Davis
Subject: Digital Shutter Speed Tester
Thanks, Bob.
I do have one adapter (had it for years) but I never really examined it to
figure out how it works.
What you are saying is that metering works, but all shooting and metering is
in stoped down mode.
So the adapter just holds the lens on the body :-)
I't probably a better idea to buy a
On 1/29/06, Bob Shell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 29, 2006, at 12:23 AM, David Mann wrote:
On Jan 29, 2006, at 3:45 AM, Bob Shell wrote:
I find television very educating. Every time somebody turns on the
set, I go into the other room and read a book. - Groucho Marx
Words to live
I guess I shouldn't be surprised. How would one test for a tilted
sensor?
Paul
On Jan 29, 2006, at 9:07 AM, Bob Shell wrote:
On Jan 29, 2006, at 8:59 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
I haven't seen any evidence of misalignment on either of my D
cameras. What makes you think your sensor is
The effin' ads are making it through my pop-up blocker and setting a couple
of cookies!
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Jostein
No popups from here.
With the popup-blocker turned off I notice that the browser tries to
fetch something from an ad server, so I suspect it's blocked by my
On 1/28/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Last time I looked Chrysler was racking up big profits.
Don't you mean Daimler-Chrysler?
-frank
vbg
--
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Would think evaluating the exposure would be somewhat monitor dependent
and to a large extent, subjective.
Recently sent a lens to Pentax for repair due to the aperture sticking
at the f/11 setting. Suspicions were verified by shooting a roll of
film while going through all f-stops. f/16 and
Niko,
I've forwarded this to my brother. He may even understand it. LOL
May be a place for a general use, fairly inexpensive, way of checking
digital shutter speeds.
Thanks,
Jack
--- Niko Koskela [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have built a shutter speed tester like this one:
Level the camera on a tripod and take a test shot that contains
horizontal vertical lines check to see if the results are wonky?
Dave
On 1/29/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess I shouldn't be surprised. How would one test for a tilted
sensor?
Paul
On Jan 29, 2006, at 9:07
Shel,
I generally use Mozilla FireFox 1.5 as my browser of choice... I've
set pop-up blocking in it and it seems to work...
Next time, I'll probably refrain from posting links to this site...
Sorry.
--
Boris
This should clear things up a bit:
http://imdb.com/gallery/ss/0280665/PL19-33A.jpg?path=gallerypath_key=0280665seq=9
On 1/28/06, Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was watching the movie Femme Fatale with Rebecca Romjin and Antonio
Banderas. He is a photographer and lo and behold, he is using a
Using sensor reflection was something that occurred to me when first
thinking about possibilities.
Your good point about electronic shutter accuracy is one that has been
born out by those of us who have a bit of history checking shutter
speeds.
Jack
--- Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On
Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What makes you think your sensor is misaligned?
While everything is nice and level in the viewfinder the resulting
pictures aren't.
Ralf
--
Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany
private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de
manual
There another little shot here:
http://follow-me-now.de/html/body_femme_fatale.html
Looks like one of the Z-1 series with a FA28-70 f2.8 (because it
doesn't seem to have the tripod mount collar of the FA80-200 f2.8).
Dave having a camera geek moment Savage
On 1/29/06, Scott Loveless [EMAIL
Actually, Mercedes is pulling the company down in recent years. But,
yes, I mean DaimlerChrysler, a name which many here in Detroit
recognize as a very happy combination.
Paul
On Jan 29, 2006, at 9:34 AM, frank theriault wrote:
On 1/28/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Last time I
On Jan 29, 2006, at 9:21 AM, Jens Bladt wrote:
So the adapter just holds the lens on the body :-)
Yes, that's all it does. The better adapters hold it at the correct
distance from the film ;-)
I't probably a better idea to buy a 645 AND a couple of Pentax
lenses. Then
perhaps use
Of course the camera has to be more than leveled. The lens mount has to
be squared off exactly to the target.
On Jan 29, 2006, at 9:51 AM, David Savage wrote:
Level the camera on a tripod and take a test shot that contains
horizontal vertical lines check to see if the results are wonky?
Hmmm. Then the misalignment could be either in the sensor or the
viewfinder.
On Jan 29, 2006, at 10:39 AM, Ralf R. Radermacher wrote:
Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What makes you think your sensor is misaligned?
While everything is nice and level in the viewfinder the resulting
On Jan 29, 2006, at 11:33 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
Hmmm. Then the misalignment could be either in the sensor or the
viewfinder.
Best to say that the sensor is misaligned with the viewfinder, or
vice versa. Same difference either way.
Bob
It trys, but it requires a quick time plugin which isn't available on my
system. I had to save the picture to disk and view it in an external
viewer.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Does anyone else get some flashy ads for TV superimposed over the photo?
Shel
[Original Message]
From: E.R.N.
Sheesh! That's odd --- three people have commented on the site so far, and
each has had a different experience. Are you listening, Boris?
Shel
[Original Message]
From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Date: 1/29/2006 9:35:10 AM
Subject: Re: PESO - From Norway
I suppose there's a little software which includes the words automaticaly?
Can you give me a clue? I'm much interested !
2006/1/29, Bob Shell [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Jan 29, 2006, at 12:23 AM, David Mann wrote:
On Jan 29, 2006, at 3:45 AM, Bob Shell wrote:
I find television very educating.
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Re: PESO - From Norway 2004
Sheesh! That's odd --- three people have commented on the site so far,
and
each has had a different experience. Are you listening, Boris?
For the record, I went to that image using Netscape. It
I rather like this one, a slice of life sort of photo. Nice use of
narrow depth of field to point to the subject but everything else is in
enough focus to get a feel for the scene, works very well in BW.
frank theriault wrote:
Nothing Big or Important, just a slice of street life, I guess.
Who said they felt forced?
Tom C.
From: Dario Bonazza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Pentax Wants Your Digital Pix (follow up)
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 17:39:56 +0100
I did that and agreed with Marco within half an hour from
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Sheesh! That's odd --- three people have commented on the site so far, and
each has had a different experience. Are you listening, Boris?
Y used Mozilla 1.7.12 to open the photo. It showed well, with no pop up
ads (Mozilla and Firefox do a good job blocking pop ups).
It's a mess on Yahoo!
Jack
--- William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Re: PESO - From Norway 2004
Sheesh! That's odd --- three people have commented on the site so
far,
and
each has had a different experience. Are you
Hi!
Sheesh! That's odd --- three people have commented on the site so far, and
each has had a different experience. Are you listening, Boris?
Obviously my choice of a web site to post the picture wasn't the most
successful one... I've uploaded it to the site which will become my
standard
Well I realized that you were kidding later.
frank theriault wrote:
On 1/28/06, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You should read the history of the colony, all food production was owned
common, all food distribution was by need, everyone explored or searched
for gold, no one produced
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Re: PESO - From Norway 2004
Sheesh! That's odd --- three people have commented on the site so
far, and
each has had a different experience. Are you listening, Boris?
For the record, I went to that image
If they slap a Pentax Lens on it sure. Hell we even let some Canon
users participate despite their unnatural predilections
Butch Black wrote:
Pentax *istDL2
Pentax has announced a minor upgrade to the *istDL - but only for
users in
Asia and Canada. The *istDL2 offers a couple of extra
Read what I said again.
(I didn't say it was good).
Adam Maas wrote:
That's not saying much. Unless you want to guarantee your site is down.
FP is the bane of webhosting companies everywhere.
-Adam
P. J. Alling wrote:
My opinion of front page was that it worked better as web site manager.
In practice it may be useful or may not be, but it seems more like
advertising hype than anything else to me, a featureless feature.
Jens Bladt wrote:
The LCD preview is interesting.
I suppose this camera does not have a prisma at the place of the mirror
(like the Olympus E-10 and E-20 SLRs).
- Original Message -
From: Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 1:34 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax sighting
I thought thats what it was until he did the computer thing. Then I had
my doubts. Is that really what it was? Interesting.
Yep.
- Original Message -
From: Dario Bonazza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
And you can also spot a silver MZ5 (or the like) when Antonio shoots
Rebecca
coming out of a car, if I remember well (I saw the movie years ago). That
movie was officially sponsored by Pentax.
Actually, if I'm not mistaken,
- Original Message -
From: John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You watch movies starring Rebecca Romjin-Stamos (or Antonio Banderas)
and you notice the *props*?
Ok, I'll admit, I have the DVD. And I've seen it - no make that STUDIED
IT - numerous times (for obvious reasons!). :-)
As others have observed, PUG submissions are significantly
down as compared to previous years. While I'm sure that
a lot of this is because of the upsurge in PAW/PESO/...,
I really don't feel this is the time to make it harder to
submit to the PUG.
It's my belief that the restrictive rules
Quoting Carlos Royo [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The picture is fine, but it seems a bit yellowish in my monitor.
With clouds like in Boris' shot, it is not uncommon that the light takes on a
very warm hue in summer, even at 10 or 11 a.m., which was the time when this
was shot, iirc.
I have some shots
Reality is the reference. So both could be misaligned with reality, yet
aligned with each other. Or all three can disagree, which is the worst
case because you have to align both the sensor and the viewfinder.
Bob Shell wrote:
On Jan 29, 2006, at 11:33 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
Hmmm.
Quoting John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
As others have observed, PUG submissions are significantly
down as compared to previous years. While I'm sure that
a lot of this is because of the upsurge in PAW/PESO/...,
I really don't feel this is the time to make it harder to
submit to the PUG.
You have to test for both a tilted sensor and a tilted viewfinder.
first find out if your viewfinder is tilted. You have to use a
reference. Since the ultimate reference is reality, and you have to be
able to trust your tripod and the relationship of the tripod to the
camera, I would
A good suggestion. I'm for it.
Paul
On Jan 29, 2006, at 3:41 PM, Jostein wrote:
Quoting John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
As others have observed, PUG submissions are significantly
down as compared to previous years. While I'm sure that
a lot of this is because of the upsurge in PAW/PESO/...,
Hello All,
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Re: PESO - From Norway 2004
Sheesh! That's odd --- three people have commented on the site so far,
and
each has had a different experience. Are you listening, Boris?
For the record, I went to that image using
Since I only submitted to the very first PUG, back in 1997, I think I don't
have good reasons for contradicting anyone here.
Regular submitters (and woud-be submitters as well) should better speak loud
now.
Dario
- Original Message -
From: John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
On 29 Jan 2006 at 15:34, John Francis wrote:
As others have observed, PUG submissions are significantly
down as compared to previous years. While I'm sure that
a lot of this is because of the upsurge in PAW/PESO/...,
I really don't feel this is the time to make it harder to
submit to the
That's true. My PESO pics are twice the size of PUG submissions.
Perhaps it's time to update the size requirements??
On Jan 29, 2006, at 5:25 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
On 29 Jan 2006 at 15:34, John Francis wrote:
As others have observed, PUG submissions are significantly
down as compared to
On 29 Jan 2006 at 14:49, Gonz wrote:
You have to test for both a tilted sensor and a tilted viewfinder.
first find out if your viewfinder is tilted. You have to use a
reference. Since the ultimate reference is reality, and you have to be
able to trust your tripod and the relationship of
John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As others have observed, PUG submissions are significantly
down as compared to previous years. While I'm sure that
a lot of this is because of the upsurge in PAW/PESO/...,
I really don't feel this is the time to make it harder to
submit to the PUG.
I [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[messed-up nonsense]
Odd. Looked OK when I sent it, first time. Here's the corrected version:
From my own experience, a short reminder on this list by the time the
deadline for submissions approaches might be a good idea.
I for one would have uploaded a few more
I pretty much agree, even though I don't post to the PUG. Some time ago
the requirement for using only Pentax gear was relaxed to the point where
we are today: as long as there's a Pentax lens or body, the pic qualifies
for the PUG. Considering the variety of cameras used on the list these
days
On 29/1/06, P. J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed:
If they slap a Pentax Lens on it sure. Hell we even let some Canon
users participate despite their unnatural predilections
And some of us don't give a rats ass :-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
.. seen in the current issue of Popular Photography. Surprised the heck
outta me!
The cover date of the issue is February, 2006. Here's a pic of the cover:
https://www.neodata.com/hfmus/phot/images/phot_cover_206x271.jpg
Shel
Good points all. I would suggest that we just specify a dimension for
the long side, so as not to discourage the submission of square pics. I
would also think that we could easily go all the way to 900 points
without placing undue stress on either the web connections or the
server space. The
You mean something to automatically find quotes from people? I just
Google on the name. If you Google on Groucho Marx you'll find tons
of quotes attributed to him.
Bob
Well, Art is Art, isn't it? Still, on the other hand, water is
water! And East is East and West is West and if you
On 29 Jan 2006 at 14:07, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Rob, in another message, suggested that the allowable size of the
submissions be increased. I'm pretty much for that as well, providing that
the increase is to a dimension that can fit on a certain sized monitor (say
17) without having to scroll
On 29 Jan 2006 at 14:16, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
.. seen in the current issue of Popular Photography. Surprised the heck
outta me!
The cover date of the issue is February, 2006. Here's a pic of the cover:
https://www.neodata.com/hfmus/phot/images/phot_cover_206x271.jpg
Is that a Minolta
Though I have forgotten the PUG submission every time so far,
I'll throw my 2 pennies in anyway. ;-)
I do agree with relaxing the size restriction, there are many
times I've wished a shot was larger so I could see more detail.
I can't however bring myself to agree that the _Pentax_ Users
Group
I've got a SuperProgram that I admit has been in my bag for a long while
since I've had my DS around. Anyways, I decided to use it last night.
Turned it on, shot some pictures. Now here's my problem: I can't switch
it back to the locked position. It seems like the grey button you press
as you
On 2006-01-30, at 00:23, Rob Studdert wrote:
Is that a Minolta on the cover? :-)
Rather Sonolta or Minony ;-)
--
Best regards
Sylwek
On 29/1/06, Anthony Farr, discombobulated, unleashed:
http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/13716989.htm
I sure hope the weather is better for the next photography weekend.
regards,
Anthony Farr
Nothing to worry about, Graywolf had a bit of a gippy tummy, that's all.
Cheers,
Cotty
On 28/1/06, John Francis, discombobulated, unleashed:
You watch movies starring Rebecca Romjin-Stamos (or Antonio Banderas)
and you notice the *props*?
I've heard them called many things but never that.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
When I started using Pentax gear and I discovered the
PDML, I liked to look at the PUG because there I could
see what other's did with an equipment similar to mine
(so, it was my fault, not the equiment's fault ;-) ).
This way I could resist better the temptation of the
Dark Side.
One of my main
On 29/1/06, John Francis, discombobulated, unleashed:
It's my belief that the restrictive rules (only Pentax gear
for the PUG, but anything goes for a PAW)
When and where was this ever stipulated, and by whom?
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
On 30 Jan 2006 at 0:00, Jaume Lahuerta wrote:
But this is just an interpretaion of the gallery
utility. The second one (to be commented ant
critizised) can be achieved in many other places, but
the first one (to discover what can be done with
Pentax equipment) is not that easy to find.
I
Looks like I'm the only dissenting voice, and I haven't contribute to
the PUG for quite a while. However...
This is a Pentax list, yes? Why would anyone want to display pics, in
the PUG or as a link from an email posted to the list, that were shot
using equipment other than Pentax?
If I post a
We had an obedience trial this weekend.
This fella did really well for his boss.
http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/pictures/dawgpictures/turboribbons.html
Technical (such as there is any)
istD, FA50/1.4
1/60th at f6.3
Lighting by Metz.
William Robb
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Does anyone else get some flashy ads for TV superimposed over the photo?
Shel
yes.
keith
Then should we stop discussing Canon, Sony, Nikon, and other cameras? What
about Sigma, Tokina, Tamron, and other lenses?
I agreed with John because the door for using off-brand equipment had
already been opened. If a Ricoh could be used with a Pentax lens, and a
Pentax with a Sigma lens, then
I'm tempted to look at it again now that you mention the collar. But
the lens seemed too large to be the 28-70, which is only 104mm long.
David Savage wrote:
There another little shot here:
http://follow-me-now.de/html/body_femme_fatale.html
Looks like one of the Z-1 series with a FA28-70
I agree with Cotters.
But larger file sizes would be good. Bandwidth costs very little these
days, and I for one would be willing to contribute to the cost.
Also a reminder for the incompetent and disorganised - like me - would be
helpful.
John
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:16:45 -,
Ken is it totally off or do you think something could be
done to give it some appeal?
Thanks,
Gautam
On 1/28/06, Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, but this has no appeal for me.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: Gautam Sarup [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: PESO: no
Not much I guess.
Cheers,
Gautam
On 1/28/06, Don Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wonder how much real ivory is amongst all that
fake stuff?
Don
Kenneth Waller wrote:
Sorry, but this has no appeal for me.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message - From: Gautam Sarup [EMAIL
I do that and it works just fine. Stop down metering of course,
in both, manual and aperture-priority AE.
later i added SMC 75mm and 150mm (each under $150 these days),
and found I am using them much more often.
best,
mishka
On 1/29/06, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello List
Have
All,
The recent what is your most-used lens thread got me thinking, so I took
an equipment inventory and thought about where my photography is and where
it is going. Turns out I have a few (too many) FA* lenses that I
accumulated over the last 7 or 8 years. In particular, I have the 80-200
and
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Re: PUG (No longer Re: *istD2)
Then should we stop discussing Canon, Sony, Nikon, and other cameras?
What
about Sigma, Tokina, Tamron, and other lenses?
This is the PDML, not the PUG.
I agreed with John because the door for
1 - 100 of 150 matches
Mail list logo
