I bought a version of this on ebay
http://tinyurl.com/emq6c
Works ok, but certainly not as snug as the FDP. You can just squeeze in
the neck strap through the lug as well. Doesn't block any functions
except the battery compartment. The tripod socket will be offset though.
D
Godfrey
From: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/03/02 Thu AM 01:37:28 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Why is 35mm film sometimes called 135?
Many folks suppose that WWII thing, Bill, but the information I have
seen on it says differently. That 600 series film size was
From: cbwaters [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/03/02 Thu AM 04:01:49 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Helemt Cam Mounting Ideas?
Is there some reason duct tape isn't your adhesion method of choice? I
can't see any reason it isn't the best tool
Did anybody else see the
I fond my D viewfinder to be of way beter quality than my Z1
viewfinder (which has this anoying distortion if you don't look
exactly in the middle).
On 2/28/06, Juan Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My standard is the istD/Ds viewfinders though, which are good but
already quite small themselves.
I've used the Optio 60 very little (I only borrowed it for a few shots).
I't's not the best camera for low-light shooting, since even its slowest
speed in night mode doesn't truly allow night shots, and even AF cannot cope
with low light levels (not that other PS are so much better than the 60
SVi @ 50 ISO, 35mm, F3.6
http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/SVi_50_35mm_F3.6.jpg
SVi @ 200 ISO, 135mm, F4.7
http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/SVi_200_135mm_F4.7.jpg
Compared to those pictures taken with the 60 on same occasion, you can spot
lower CA and lowe noise.
About using the camera
Which manufacturers does this?
Giving a complete list of specs 6 months before the camera is introduced?
Would very nice for the other manufacturers to know, wouldn't it?
No one does this. Not even Canon.
Now, I perfectly understand why you have a need to know and that it is
important to you.
But
I haven't been there in twenty years. The store I'm talking about was
on 34th and Broadway, right at the south end of Herald Square.
Paul
On Mar 1, 2006, at 11:35 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
It's been many years since the Olden Camera I knew existed. It was a
wonderful place to go and chew the
You guys are gonna make me want to dig the 67 out of the closet. Gotta
go do some weightlifting to get ready for that :-)
Paul
On Mar 2, 2006, at 12:08 AM, William Robb wrote:
p.s. come on, you knew he would be back one day.
Greetings, Brother Aaron.
Brother William.
You missed the first rule of eBaying. Once you have bought something do
not look at those items again for at least a year. grin
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
Idiot Proof == Expert Proof
---
William Robb wrote:
p.s. come on, you knew he would be back one day.
Greetings, Brother Aaron.
Brother William.
I'm still here.:-)
Dave
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Yeeha! Add a Tri-X mode and it would be perfect. And let's not overlook
compatibility with manual focus lenses.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Juan Buhler
A digital version of the ZX-M. That would be so great, and a really
distinct product. It would
On 2 Mar 2006 at 0:31, Adam Maas wrote:
Full Frame 35mm is simply more demanding on lenses, and requires more
expensive and higher quality glass than subframe APS-C for good performance.
Not entirely, on a pixel for pixel count basis an high density APS-C sized
sensor also requires a lens of
Oh well, another fine theory ...
Especially since I started with a rangefinder before going to an SLR,
and although I still prefer a rangefinder on occasion, I don't actually
consider it more natural. Just, as you say, different.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I started with an SLR before trying
On Mar 2, 2006, at 1:15 AM, Kenneth Waller wrote:
How many tomes have to taken a picture of someone only to find out
they've
blinked or had a funny look on their face, or something has
unexpectedly
found its way into the frame (see above).
And how does a rangefinder change the outcome?
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 2 Mar 2006 at 0:31, Adam Maas wrote:
Full Frame 35mm is simply more demanding on lenses, and requires more
expensive and higher quality glass than subframe APS-C for good performance.
Not entirely, on a pixel for pixel count basis an high density APS-C sized
On Mar 1, 2006, at 9:45 PM, Peter Loveday wrote:
I wonder though with a 28mm sensor, if we're moving it by 5mm in
each direction to achieve stabilization, how many 35mm have good
coverage on a 38mm wide rectangle? I can't imagine any DA lenses
doing it (well, the 40 might), and certainly
Since Aaron so generously called the 645 a ladies' camera, I was wondering how
many of us would qualify for a Sisterhood? :-)
Jostein
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
To quote Irving Berlin,
there were never such devoted sisters
Count me in.
Peter
- Original Message -
From: Jostein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 1:24 PM
Subject: Is there a Sisterhood?
Since Aaron so generously called the 645 a
Wimp.
Dave
On 3/2/06, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They are great for certain purposes like close in with people, they are easy
to
use and generally quiet and unobtrusive, but I wouldn't go out shooting close-
ups of polar bears in nature with one. :-)
Rob Studdert
I wouldn't think you'd want to admit to it.
-Brother Aaron
-Original Message-
From: Jostein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Is there a Sisterhood?
Date: Thu Mar 2, 2006 8:24 am
Size: 270 bytes
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Since Aaron so generously called the 645 a ladies' camera, I was
I'm not Rob, and I've never owned a pentax 6x7. However, I have shot a few
6x7 rolls in my day, using slide film, and there is no comparison between
the results from a 6x7 negative and that from the current lineup of Pentax
DSLR's. The big negative wins hands down wrt tonality and detail and
Jostein. You owe me a new keyboard. I've got coffee all over it because of
your post. Well said Jostein.
Count me out of both the Brotherhood and the Sisterhood. Most likely I will
never aspire as a member of any of those hoods. I'm a happy member of the
Childhood with my APS sized gear. On
Good thing Marnie's on vacation or you'd be labeled a sexist pig ...
wouldn't that be a drag ;-))
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Jostein
Since Aaron so generously called the 645 a ladies' camera, I was
wondering how many of us would qualify for a Sisterhood? :-)
A couple of years ago I was watching a fellow shoot a portrait for cover
for a local magazine. He was using a 'blad, and shot three rolls of what
was essentially the same pose, changed the setup, and shot another three
rolls of that scene. I talked with him a bit and asked why he shot so many
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Good thing Marnie's on vacation or you'd be labeled a sexist pig ...
wouldn't that be a drag ;-))
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Jostein
Since Aaron so generously called the 645 a ladies' camera, I was
wondering how many of us would qualify for a
On 3/2/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The rangefinder doesn't change the outcome but it does allow the
photographer to be aware of what he's caught on film, and that knowledge
can make the difference between a keeper or a tosser ;-))
Shel
I'm too tired to think of it but, there
- Original Message -
From: Tim Øsleby
Subject: RE: Is there a Sisterhood?
Thanks for bringing the brotherhood into perspective ;-)
There's the Brotherhood, then there are a few people using girlyboy cameras
who want to be recognized as the Sisterhood. None of us in the
Transparency is, admittedly, a vague term. To me it means that there's an
unconstrained way of seeing. The Leica lends itself better to shooting
with both eyes open than an SLR (right eye in the finder, left eye
observing the surrounding scene), and being able to see outside the frame
is also
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Re: OT: Photographic enablement but not Pentax.
A couple of years ago I was watching a fellow shoot a portrait for cover
for a local magazine. He was using a 'blad, and shot three rolls of what
was essentially the same pose,
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
A couple of years ago I was watching a fellow shoot a portrait for cover
for a local magazine. He was using a 'blad, and shot three rolls of what
was essentially the same pose, changed the setup, and shot another three
rolls of that scene. I talked with him a bit and
Yeah, it's frustrating, but there seems to be a positive outcome on the
horizon. Fingers crossed.
I think we all used to know someone who could help us out, provide good
service, who was knowledgeable, etc ... Those people are more and more
becoming vague memories.
Shel
[Original Message]
What about those who shoot large format?
If we follow this logic anything less than 8x10 falls into the
Nancy boy category.
What am I thinking? Logic on the PDML?
Dave
On 3/2/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
Wrom: TFJMVRESKPNKM
Subject: RE: Is there a
On 3/2/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I learned to not look through the viewfinder by shooting portraits on sheet
film.
By not having the camera between the photographer and subject, it is
possible to catch some wonderful expressions. Peole seem more relaxed when
they are talking
This is true. I tried that technique with the LX and the ME-Super, using a
long cord to activate the camera. I think the cord I have is six or nine
feet long, and using it allowed me to walk around a bit, talk with the lady
I was photographing, and get her to be a little more animated and
I had the Barbie Cam, but I think we all realized it was a gag.
-Brother Aaron
p.s. for the uninitiated, the Legendary Barbie Cam was a pink and silver
digital camera with a large flower embossed around the lens. It was my first
digital camera, circa 2000, and was my only digital camera until
A bigger negative was needed. Hi might have been able to use a
medium-format rangefinder, like the Mamiya 7II, but the 'blad had a greater
number of lens options available for it. Plus he had some kind of lighting
setup that worked off of the camera somehow - maybe radio controlled - I
don't
David Savage wrote:
What about those who shoot large format?
There be Giants.
If we follow this logic anything less than 8x10 falls into the
Nancy boy category.
What am I thinking? Logic on the PDML?
Only if you don't know the L is for List.
Come on, who can hand-hold a 4x5?
Besides, Pentax don't make one.
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: Is there a Sisterhood?
Date: Thu Mar 2, 2006 9:49 am
Size: 638 bytes
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
What about those who shoot large format?
If
I bought my first SLR there in January of 2002. Still exists, though
it's actually at 32nd and Broadway.
As of 2002, they distributed flyers with at least some of their used
inventory listed on it, which is how I found them.
-Mat
On 3/2/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I haven't been
Hello,
Thanks for the information. Off list a SF1n strap was recommended. I
think I first hunt for a SF1n strap and/or get one of those china made
universal straps.
Toine
This, I hope, was implied:
=VBG=
Dave
On 3/2/06, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about those who shoot large format?
If we follow this logic anything less than 8x10 falls into the
Nancy boy category.
What am I thinking? Logic on the PDML?
Dave
On 3/2/06,
Anyone who uses a Speedgraphic?
Dave (the smart arse) S. :-)
On 3/2/06, Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Come on, who can hand-hold a 4x5?
Besides, Pentax don't make one.
-Aaron
-Original Message-
Wrom: MNNSKVFVWRKJVZCMHVIBGDADRZFSQHYUCDDJ
Subj: Re: Is there a
http://www.bostick-sullivan.com/Hobo/welcome.htm
(Funny comment, though - LOL)
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Aaron Reynolds
Come on, who can hand-hold a 4x5?
Besides, Pentax don't make one.
Hi Rick
not surprising I like your photos of Zurich ;-)
The last one of Grossmünster you showed was a view from the Lindenhof
(lime)...
I made a Panorama from the same point of view some weeks ago.
Here is a a photo from the chessplayers at the Lindenhof:
How in the world I manage to pick out the wrong sender amazes me. I did
get lucky, however, and appreciate your confirming my own results in
comparing my Mamiya 6 vs Canon 6.3mp results of 'prox a year ago.
I've, also, had the 'experience' of seeing the Mamiya 7II work of a pro
friend and I can't
On Mar 2, 2006, at 10:10 AM, Jack Davis wrote:
Scanning of MF is a bit more of an issue and the files can be somewhat
cumbersome in PS.
Hell yes. I had to buy a new computer when I bought the Sprintscan --
the poor ol' thing didn't know what had hit it.
-Aaron
On Mar 2, 2006, at 10:08 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
http://www.bostick-sullivan.com/Hobo/welcome.htm
All right, all right, you got me there. BUT the FPS on that thing is
brutal and you're limited to a burst of two! At least the P67 has a
burst of 10 and shoots about 0.85 FPS.
-Aaron
From: Jostein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/03/02 Thu PM 01:24:33 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Is there a Sisterhood?
Since Aaron so generously called the 645 a ladies' camera, I was wondering how
many of us would qualify for a Sisterhood? :-)
Jostein
You want to be
On Mar 2, 2006, at 10:14 AM, Aaron Reynolds wrote:
Hell yes. I had to buy a new computer when I bought the Sprintscan --
the poor ol' thing didn't know what had hit it.
Oh, and here's an e-mail I received from a client the other day -- he
was looking for previews of the work I was scanning
On Mar 2, 2006, at 12:42 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
Seen the new Panasonic? Basic interface seems to be based on a Minolta
CLE.
What's the name of it? I'll go check it out.
I did enjoy that Panasonic/Leica ZLR I looked at when I bought the
little ps thingy for baby pictures, but with a top ISO
And I still say real photographers use a Speed Graphic.
muttering in beard Buncha chump wanna bees...
GRIN!
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
Idiot Proof == Expert Proof
---
David Savage wrote:
What about those who
On Mar 2, 2006, at 12:24 AM, William Robb wrote:
My 6x7 turns 20 next year. We could meet for a beer in Wawa
That sounds like a party. I'll let you know if we get out that way.
Do you have any long glass?
By the way, are there any PDMLers (even non-Brothers) in Washington
D.C.?
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
On Mar 2, 2006, at 12:42 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
Seen the new Panasonic? Basic interface seems to be based on a Minolta
CLE.
What's the name of it? I'll go check it out.
I did enjoy that Panasonic/Leica ZLR I looked at when I bought the
little ps thingy for baby
I'd ask special circumstances be sought by the prosecution. LOL
Laptop will be out of date by the time it finishes chewing on 600mb!!
Jack
--- Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 2, 2006, at 10:14 AM, Aaron Reynolds wrote:
Hell yes. I had to buy a new computer when I bought
On Mar 2, 2006, at 10:39 AM, Jack Davis wrote:
Laptop will be out of date by the time it finishes chewing on 600mb!!
It took him an hour to look at 8 files. Which means he needs more RAM.
-Aaron
On Mar 2, 2006, at 10:33 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
It's the DMC-L1, there's a brief hands-on preview up on DPReview.
Basic interface is a Shutter speed dial (with shutter in the middle)
and aperture ring. Has purely mechanical metering pattern, AF mode and
drive mode selectors, as well as a
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mawz/106648822/
From the short lived EOS 3, 28-105 USM II, (not)Agfa Silvetone 100 in
Rodianl 1:50.
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
On Mar 2, 2006, at 10:33 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
It's the DMC-L1, there's a brief hands-on preview up on DPReview.
Basic interface is a Shutter speed dial (with shutter in the middle)
and aperture ring. Has purely mechanical metering pattern, AF mode and
drive mode
On Mar 2, 2006, at 10:53 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
300mm f2.8 (600mm equivalent in 35mm)
And what, pray tell, does this little beastie cost?
-Aaron
I guess we'll agree to disagree.
For me the biggest disadvantage of a range finder is you don't see what
you ultimately get until you get the processed film back.
YMMV
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: OT: Photographic
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
On Mar 2, 2006, at 10:53 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
300mm f2.8 (600mm equivalent in 35mm)
And what, pray tell, does this little beastie cost?
-Aaron
No idea. But the Oly version is $1299CDN for the body, so I'd expect the
Panasonic to come in around the same (The two
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
On Mar 2, 2006, at 10:53 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
300mm f2.8 (600mm equivalent in 35mm)
And what, pray tell, does this little beastie cost?
-Aaron
Oops, the lens?
$7000USD.
Gah. But a 600 f2.8?
-Adam
The Epson RD-1 is your friend then.
-Adam
Kenneth Waller wrote:
I guess we'll agree to disagree.
For me the biggest disadvantage of a range finder is you don't see
what you ultimately get until you get the processed film back.
YMMV
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message - From: Shel
On Mar 2, 2006, at 10:59 AM, Kenneth Waller wrote:
For me the biggest disadvantage of a range finder is you don't see
what you ultimately get until you get the processed film back.
How is that different from an SLR, where you don't see the what you get
through the viewfinder AND you don't
On Thu, 2 Mar 2006, Adam Maas wrote:
Kenneth Waller wrote:
I guess we'll agree to disagree.
For me the biggest disadvantage of a range finder is you don't see what
you ultimately get until you get the processed film back.
The Epson RD-1 is your friend then.
Cropping wide with room for
Wow!
The lighting, subject pose are really well done.
Its the background that's an issue.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: OT PESO - Anita
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mawz/106648822/
From the short lived EOS 3, 28-105 USM II,
Anyone who has ever used a Graphic, Horseman, or LInhof knows how.
Just add a flash for indoor use. And look at the Hindenberg fire pics.
Lots of both 135 and 4x5. Use a 120mm to 135mm lens, TMax or TriiX 400 film,
and shoot 1/400 @ f16 on sunny days or 1/250 @ f8 on dimmer days.
It's not that
How is that different from an SLR, where you don't see the what you get
through the viewfinder AND you don't see it until you get the processed
film back?
I'm thinking of composition. I can generally get the exposure focus.
And of course with digital you get a pretty good idea of the
Thanks,
I agree on the background, didn't have much choice though (was shooting
in a corner at the studio while the main area was being used by another
photog).
-Adam
Kenneth Waller wrote:
Wow! The lighting, subject pose are really well done.
Its the background that's an issue.
The there's always the 8x10 Hobo.
Collin
At 10:07 AM 3/2/2006, you wrote:
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 10:00:00 -0500
From: Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Is there a Sisterhood?
Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I was on the way home last night. Clear skies, the bright crescent moon was
setting over the mountains, earthshine clearly illuminating the remainder.
I stopped at a pull-off and set up the *ist D with 500mm Tokina on the
tripod. Used the IF remote shutter release to avoid the shakes. Images
Sounds good so far!
Tom C.
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Some more new camera speculation
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 23:14:10 -0600
- Original Message - From: Tom C
Subject: RE: Some more new camera
I just don't want to get all that sticky glue on the exterior of the
camcorder. :-)
BTW, duct tape is NOT good for everthing. Since I'm one of those men that's
plagued by a hairy back, I suggested my wife do a sort of wax job on me with
duct tape. It hurt like hell yet removed minimal hair.
I did that once. Grabbed my K-1000 and went for a
hike... had been out a while when I noticed the rewind
knob wasn't turning when I advanced the film. I
assumed it hadn't loaded properly, so I opened the
back. There wasn't any film in it at all!
--- Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was on the
Toine asked:
Has anyone successfully mounted a third party grip strap on a istD
with BG1 grip connected? Something similar like the FDP grip strap for
the Z1(p).
I've got a Hakuba Grip-PH attached to my istD with or without the BG1 grip
connected depending on how I'm using the body. This is
I dealt with them on my Zenitar fish-eye. Something had happened during the
online purchase and I was charged twice. I immediately called them up and
was assured I would receive a check for the difference. The lens arrived
perfectly as described and the check arrived within the week.
Based
I was rather miffed by their slow handling, it took them 4-5 days to
send me an invoice, and my lens shipped a week after the auction ended.
Bertil
There are precisely two of us on the list who admit to shooting with
the lowly *ist (film body, for those of you who need clarification).
Got any special names for us, Brother Bill?
:P
On 3/2/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Tim Øsleby
Subject:
Yeah, you're D-less.
Tom C.
From: Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Is there a Sisterhood?
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 11:42:16 -0500
There are precisely two of us on the list who admit to shooting with
the lowly *ist
Dave
On Mar 2, 2006, at 12:24 AM, William Robb
wrote:
My 6x7 turns 20 next year. We could meet for a beer in Wawa
I'll have to ask Chris Brogden how old mine is.:-) Thunder Bay would be more or
less 1/2
way. I know
places.:-)
That sounds
First thing i changed on the istD when i got it was the file squence thing.
Then the CF
card thing.:-)
Dave
--- Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was on the way home last night. Clear skies, the
bright crescent moon was
setting over the
The 300 is nice, I rented it a few times in '04.
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: Brotherhood party
Date: Thu Mar 2, 2006 11:54 am
Size: 578 bytes
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Dave
On Mar 2, 2006, at 12:24 AM,
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just the 90 and 200. I keep thinking I need the 300.:-)
Dave B
I have the 300. :-) Bought it brand new with case off ebay. Want to guess
what it cost?
Tom C.
Gang, you have to see this if you haven't yet:
http://www.tokina.co.jp/news/tokina2006.jpg
Joe
That's one of the reasons why brand loyalty is more or less a thing of the
past. IMO. Aren't a number of the PS digitals actually a Sanyo product?
Not that Tokina, can't make great lenses. We just shouldn't be referring to
it as Pentax glass.
Tom C.
From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL
This is way too much information.
BTW, duct tape is NOT good for everthing. Since I'm one of those men that's
plagued by a hairy back, I suggested my wife do a sort of wax job on me with
duct tape. It hurt like hell yet removed minimal hair.
Tom C.
From: cbwaters [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is a snap that I grabbed last week in Key West, FL, at thenightly sunset
celebration at Mallory Square. I was just trying tocapture the feeling of the
event.
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4178034
Comments, suggestions, and especially constructive criticism are welcome.
Dan M
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 08:55:34AM +, mike wilson wrote:
Coming soon, to an energy-guzzling country near you: horse-drawn vehicles.
That happened, some thirty-odd years ago, back in the UK.
A few the small brewers caught on to the fact (as one of the
London brewers knew full well) that the
Or perhaps Tokina is outsourcing optical design. In either case it matters not
to moi.
Paul
-- Original message --
From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gang, you have to see this if you haven't yet:
http://www.tokina.co.jp/news/tokina2006.jpg
Joe
Adam Maas wrote:
300mm f2.8 (600mm equivalent in 35mm)
And what, pray tell, does this little beastie cost?
-Aaron
Oops, the lens?
$7000USD.
Gah. But a 600 f2.8?
Non exactly. Compared to APS systems, you can think of the Zuiko 300 F2.8 as
a 600 F4 at best (which is not a bad thing
I haven't used my 67 for almost a year. I'm getting lazy now that Ihave the
*ist D! I think I will make an effort to get back into thehabit of using the
old bazooka.
On 3/2/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You guys are gonna make
me want to dig the 67 out of the closet. Gotta go do
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 09:15:54AM +, mike wilson wrote:
Unlike the BBC reporter who went down the men's downhill with one pole
and a video camera. Not sure if he's a hero or an idiot.
If that's the same video we saw in the USA it wasn't a reporter;
it was one of the alternates on a
On 3/1/06, Cesar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frank,
Is that all you have to say?
A bit disappointed :-)
Oh, I have much more to say (like congrats on your purchase, for one!
g) later. I've been so busy at work that I haven't been able to pay
much attention to the list lately, plus, my eyes
Adam Maas wrote:
300mm f2.8 (600mm equivalent in 35mm) and 150mm f2.0 (300mm equivalent).
Olympus has taken good advantage of the 2x crop factor.
Not exactly. Compared to APS systems, you can think of the Zuiko 300 F2.8 as
a 600 F4 at best (which is not a bad thing either).
That's because the
Hi all,
design ??? For me it seems more like they're outsourcing manufacturing...
BR, Margus
Joseph Tainter wrote:
Gang, you have to see this if you haven't yet:
http://www.tokina.co.jp/news/tokina2006.jpg
Joe
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 06:23:41AM -0800, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
A couple of years ago I was watching a fellow shoot a portrait for cover
for a local magazine. He was using a 'blad, and shot three rolls of what
was essentially the same pose, changed the setup, and shot another three
rolls of
On Mar 2, 2006, at 12:13 PM, Tom C wrote:
That's one of the reasons why brand loyalty is more or less a thing
of the past. IMO. Aren't a number of the PS digitals actually a
Sanyo product?
Not that Tokina, can't make great lenses. We just shouldn't be
referring to it as Pentax glass.
On 3/02/06 12:13 PM, Tom C, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's one of the reasons why brand loyalty is more or less a thing of the
past. IMO. Aren't a number of the PS digitals actually a Sanyo product?
Not that Tokina, can't make great lenses. We just shouldn't be referring to
it as Pentax
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 07:58:07AM -0500, Bob Shell wrote:
The important thing that gets lost in all this techno-babble is that
it WORKS. I can hand hold a 300mm at 1/15 second, without a monopod.
Bob
Ah. Practical experience. Don't you know that disqualifies you
from posting an
1 - 100 of 244 matches
Mail list logo
