the bent wheel is too centered to me, but I like the idea of showing
the bad one next to the good one
russell
On 9/1/06, Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi!
http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=14973
Do you think this image works? Both yes and no are acceptable answers.
If you
maybe next we can see a picture of that apron
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
LOL!! yeah, I definately wouldn't want to be her right now!
Hi Bill, I don't think that we have met, so.. it's nice to meet you
really nice shot Shel!
russell
On 9/1/06, Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Better to be governor than DA at Boulder.
Bill
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
On 1/9/06, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed:
You're missing the fact that you can get much better autofocus
performance with a motor in the lens. This is extremely valuable for
any type of action photography, be it birds or baseball. I will at
least buy that 50/135/2.8 if it's
On 1/9/06, John Francis, discombobulated, unleashed:
If a lens with an Ultra Sonic Motor is called a USM lens,
then a Supersonic Motor Controlled lens would be ... ?
SSM, or possibly SMD. I'm betting SSM.
Good joke though.
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places,
...because the K10D will let you shoot both simultaneously. :)
Truth or fiction ?
Yeah truth. Not bad for a plastic camera.
On 2/9/06, David Savage, discombobulated, unleashed:
Dude. They're all plastic nowadays.
Keep smokin' it dude :-))
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) |
And here's a brief explanation of how the USM works for those who are
a bit vague on the technology (like me ;-):
http://www.canon.com/technology/canon_tech/explanation/usm.html
Dave
On 9/2/06, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Paul is right. Make sure you understand what type of motor a USM is.
STD?
Supersonic Transmission Devise
Dave g
On 9/2/06, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/9/06, John Francis, discombobulated, unleashed:
If a lens with an Ultra Sonic Motor is called a USM lens,
then a Supersonic Motor Controlled lens would be ... ?
SSM, or possibly SMD. I'm betting SSM.
Good. Just to clarify. The back must cover the full 4x5 frame; not a
small portion of it. So as not to be picky, let's say it must cover at
least 90% of the frame.
Any larger back, say 10x8, would of course also count.
And by selling, we mean a single back on sale to the public. Not the
http://static.flickr.com/84/231261291_5aa034932c_o.jpg
this actually was at the sushi bar table...
--
home http://roman.blakout.net/
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
In my younger days I once made a turntable base from solid concrete to
reduce rumble. Perhaps you could do the same sort of thing by embedding a
tripod screw in a block of concrete, and using a wedge to tilt it at the
right angle.
John
On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 01:18:30 +0100, Doug Franklin
Roman wrote:
http://static.flickr.com/84/231261291_5aa034932c_o.jpg
this actually was at the sushi bar table...
I'll guess: frozen flower blossom, in lieu of ice.
keith whaley
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Bob W wrote:
Thanks Bob, I've signed up.
--
Cheers,
Bob
See all of you generic Bobs there!
Sounds like an interview with Big George Foreman about his kid's names! grin
Question: why the odd From address immediately below?
keith whaley
--
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
keith_w wrote:
Roman wrote:
http://static.flickr.com/84/231261291_5aa034932c_o.jpg
this actually was at the sushi bar table...
I'll guess: frozen flower blossom, in lieu of ice.
keith whaley
Looks like Borage.
Don
--
Dr E D F Williams
www.kolumbus.fi/mimosa/
What might the Sv program on the exposure mode wheel be?
http://www.digitalcamera.jp/html/HotNews/image/2006-05/20/GX2-5.jpg
http://www.gatago.com/de/rec/fotografie/17902721.html
Sorry if this has been discussed earlier...
Regards
Jens Bladt
http://www.jensbladt.dk
+45 56 63 77 11
+45 23 43 85
In 2005 I did concert shots with a F-70-210mm, K-2.5/135+ 1.7 converter, K
2.8/105mm.
This year I used my FA 2.8 80-200mm.
This klens is fast and easy to use - easy to focus manually (bright view
finder due to F.2.8).
2005: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/838747/ and
Sensitivity priority.
Dario
- Original Message -
From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Saturday, September 02, 2006 12:42 PM
Subject: RE: K10D
What might the Sv program on the exposure mode wheel be?
Given Pentax's proven PR capabilities, I suspect they will be named
Whizzy Motor Driven lenses and will end up at the bottom of the
Mariana Trench in a friendly fire incident.
David Savage wrote:
STD?
Supersonic Transmission Devise
Dave g
On 9/2/06, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The X is hopefully for Flash. A much missed feature since the PZ-1p.
The speed may by accident be set wrong on my D, since I alway use M mode
for flash photography - in combination with TTL or studio flash (flash
meter). So I miss a fixed 150 sec. speed setting. WHy this may be a mode, I
can't
Dario Bonazza wrote:
Sensitivity priority.
Dario, can you explain the difference between such sensitivity
priority mode and the auto ISO that can be used in the *ist DS?
Thanks,
Carlos
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
- Original Message -
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I would also by a 400 with USM if it's
offered, and I can afford it.
I really hope for a 400/4. It is about the longest and fastest lens that can
be hand-held. With the 1,5X multiplication with the DSLR bodies, and perhaps
On 03/09/06, Carlos Royo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dario, can you explain the difference between such sensitivity
priority mode and the auto ISO that can be used in the *ist DS?
Not Dario, but auto ISO is just that Sv on the mode dial alludes to
the possibility of control of the cameras ISO
It strikes me as one more thing that will need to be repaired
someday...probably when parts are no longer available.
When we talk about USM, as Canon term it, it is an Ultrasonic Motor, and not
like a conventional motor.
USM is not Canon's creation and there are many companies making
Cotty wrote:
On 1/9/06, John Francis, discombobulated, unleashed:
If a lens with an Ultra Sonic Motor is called a USM lens,
then a Supersonic Motor Controlled lens would be ... ?
SSM, or possibly SMD. I'm betting SSM.
Good joke though.
Sonolta already uses SSM to denote their (3)
I think a sensitivity priority mode is stupid IMO.
If the Sv thing is that you choose sensitivity and the camera does the
rest than it is stupid:
take a D, put the ISO to a specific value (not auto) and put it into
program mode: you have the exact same thing... ok you're stuck to an
ISO. but what
I have used Canon USM lenses for
several years now and the focus is fast and almost completely silent.
Certainly, outside on a street with the odd car, you will not hear it
all. When I use my wife's *ist Ds, it startles me by comparison.
My original point, though, is that it sort of
Jens,
Nice series, either way.
The last set with the f2.8 looks a bit more professional.
I don't know if it is because it was faster/easier, or if your skills
have improved.
Regards, Bob S.
On 9/2/06, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In 2005 I did concert shots with a F-70-210mm, K-2.5/135+
My fervent hope is that the FA lenses that have been discontinued in
the last 2-3 years, such as the FA80-200mm f2.8 FA200mm f4 macro,
are going through a re-design to take advantage of the new (to Pentax)
USM technology.
I'll be very disappointed, if we don't see DFA versions appear in the
next
On 9/02/06 9:01 AM, Toralf Lund, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Noise is a different matter, as there is bound to be *some* sound from
the screws and gears.
No, no, and no :-).
It is really silent as no gears involved.
Coty posted an excellent link and you should read it.
Ken
--
PDML
On 9/02/06 8:40 AM, Toralf Lund, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Both of which can come in packages that are identical to a traditional
DC motor, and could as far as I can tell be used in an in-body motor AF
system - which would cancel out the need for the traditional feedback loop.
The version I
On 02/09/06, Toralf Lund [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Seems to me this all makes it similar in functionality to a traditional
step(per) motor. Technically it is even more closely related to a
piezoelectric motor, although I don't believe it's exactly the same thing.
Both of which can come in
On the low-end, AFD was replaceed by the micro-motor drive, which is
faster with small, light lenses but not powerful enough for anything
heavy. It's essentially a small high-speed motor.
It's essentially a normal DC motor with an ironless core, isn't it? (Or
am I referring to
Thibouille wrote:
I think a sensitivity priority mode is stupid IMO.
If the Sv thing is that you choose sensitivity and the camera does the
rest than it is stupid:
The big difference in practice is that, in sensitivity priority you
can instantly change ISO setting *in 1/3 or 1/2 stop increments*
K.Takeshita wrote:
On 9/02/06 9:01 AM, Toralf Lund, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Noise is a different matter, as there is bound to be *some* sound from
the screws and gears.
No, no, and no :-).
It is really silent as no gears involved.
I was referring to the gears of the Pentax AF
On 9/2/06, Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I really hope for a 400/4. It is about the longest and fastest lens that can
be hand-held. With the 1,5X multiplication with the DSLR bodies, and perhaps
an AF 1,4X converter, it would be a killer outfit!
400/4 with SSM would be neat. Can't see
Out of 13 lenses projected until 2006, 11 are DA lenses, even the
upcoming f/2.8 zooms. Right now I find it hard to believe we will see
any more DFA lenses at all.
Jostein
On 9/2/06, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My fervent hope is that the FA lenses that have been discontinued in
the
K.Takeshita wrote:
On 9/02/06 8:40 AM, Toralf Lund, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Both of which can come in packages that are identical to a traditional
DC motor, and could as far as I can tell be used in an in-body motor AF
system - which would cancel out the need for the traditional feedback
Seems to me this all makes it similar in functionality to a traditional
step(per) motor. Technically it is even more closely related to a
piezoelectric motor, although I don't believe it's exactly the same thing.
Both of which can come in packages that are identical to a traditional
DC
P. J. Alling wrote:
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Are we even sure the camera will be called the K10D?
Now that you ask, no, not really.
Oh yes we are!
--
Mark Roberts Photography Multimedia
www.robertstech.com
412-687-2835
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
Rick Womer wrote:
I've read Fraser's book, and have looked for the
answer to this, but there is something I'm not
getting:
When I use ACR, the program sets different values for
Exposure, Shadows, Brightness, Saturation, and
Contrast for every pic.
How can I get ACR to give me exactly what I
On 02/09/06, Thibouille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think a sensitivity priority mode is stupid IMO.
If the Sv thing is that you choose sensitivity and the camera does the
rest than it is stupid:
take a D, put the ISO to a specific value (not auto) and put it into
program mode: you have the
On 9/02/06 9:31 AM, Toralf Lund, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was referring to the gears of the Pentax AF setup...
Yeah, it's really noisy . :-)
Ken
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Toralf Lund wrote:
On the low-end, AFD was replaceed by the micro-motor drive, which is
faster with small, light lenses but not powerful enough for anything
heavy. It's essentially a small high-speed motor.
It's essentially a normal DC motor with an ironless core, isn't it? (Or
am I
David Savage wrote:
My fervent hope is that the FA lenses that have been discontinued in
the last 2-3 years, such as the FA80-200mm f2.8 FA200mm f4 macro,
are going through a re-design to take advantage of the new (to Pentax)
USM technology.
The DA*50-135/2.8 is probably the DSLR replacement
Jostein Øksne wrote:
On 9/2/06, Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I really hope for a 400/4. It is about the longest and fastest lens that can
be hand-held. With the 1,5X multiplication with the DSLR bodies, and perhaps
an AF 1,4X converter, it would be a killer outfit!
400/4 with SSM
I was referring to the gears of the Pentax AF setup...
Yeah, it's really noisy . :-)
Maybe the gears are noisy, but the motor itself is noisy, too...
- Toralf
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On 02/09/06, Jostein Øksne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/2/06, Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I really hope for a 400/4. It is about the longest and fastest lens that can
be hand-held. With the 1,5X multiplication with the DSLR bodies, and perhaps
an AF 1,4X converter, it would be a
If a lens with an Ultra Sonic Motor is called a USM lens,
then a Supersonic Motor Controlled lens would be ... ?
SSM, or possibly SMD. I'm betting SSM.
Good joke though.
Sonolta already uses SSM to denote their (3) USM lenses, so they'll
likely come up with something
But it IS driven by ultrasonic frequency AC.
My point is that an AC frequency can't be ultrasonic since electricity
isn't sound. The vibration in a piezoelectric setup, on the other hand,
in a way is.
- Toralf
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
Adam Maas mykroft at mykroft.com Sat Sep 2 08:49:28 EST 2006
400/4 with SSM would be neat. Can't see any good reason to make it
DFA, though. DA will make it smaller, cheaper and just as good.
Jostein
Actually, the size constraints on a 400 are all in the glass diameter
(for a given
On 9/02/06 10:19 AM, K.Takeshita, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Exactly. After certain size (say 200mm or so), there is no reason to make it
a DA.
Still some hope for FF wishers :-).
Actually, I am curious about the size of the coming DFAs.
DA's image circle is a bit larger than that required for
Yaa, Bill!
Great to see you on the list agin.
--
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
Idiot Proof == Expert Proof
---
Bill Owens wrote:
Guess I'm the oddball here. I'm perfectly happy with my *istD and have no
plans to
On 03/09/06, Toralf Lund [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But it IS driven by ultrasonic frequency AC.
My point is that an AC frequency can't be ultrasonic since electricity
isn't sound. The vibration in a piezoelectric setup, on the other hand,
in a way is.
USM units are driven my an AC current but
http://roman.blakout.net/?blog=20060901203620
joggle hilby string toy (I guess its called this, but correct me if
I'm wrong)
I especially love old pavement in duotones. Comments are in Estonian,
but photos speak for themself and use [related] link at the end of each
essay to see all sets of
Rob, your comment makes a lot of sense, but then you need a SAv and/or STv
priority, where you can set Sensitivity via a wheel and either Aperture or
Shutter speed via the other one, with the camera adjusting the other
shooting parameter accordingly.
Not sure the Sv proprity does that. I'm
On 03/09/06, K.Takeshita [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, I am curious about the size of the coming DFAs.
DA's image circle is a bit larger than that required for APS-H in order to
cover the sensor movement (SR).
If DFAs ever take into account the future FF, they have to cover larger
image
At 09:38 PM 2/09/2006, Jostein wrote:
On 9/2/06, Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I really hope for a 400/4. It is about the longest and fastest lens
that can
be hand-held. With the 1,5X multiplication with the DSLR bodies, and
perhaps
an AF 1,4X converter, it would be a killer
I looked through my list archives, and I found a reference to a field
in the EXIF data coming out of the *istD that will tell you how many
shots the camera has taken. Is there a similar field in the EXIF data
on the DS/DS2? Or some other way to find out the total exposure count
for the camera?
Well the correct way is to put in a concrete pit lined with 4 inches of
cork, and a 4x4x8 foot block of concrete inside it to hold the tripod
head. GRIN! Got the idea from how they used to mount diesel generator
in power plants back in 30's.
--
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
On Sep 1, 2006, at 1:18 PM, Boris Liberman wrote:
http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=14973
Do you think this image works? Both yes and no are acceptable answers.
If you are so inclined I'd love to hear why you think either way.
I like the concept. It needs some development ... a more
On 9/02/06 10:49 AM, Adam Maas, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So there is
good reason for this terminology.
And Canon's marketing machine probably is at work here. Ultrasonic sounds
good. The next term they might use would be turbo :-).
Ken
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On Sep 2, 2006, at 3:49 AM, Jens Bladt wrote:
In 2005 I did concert shots with a F-70-210mm, K-2.5/135+ 1.7
converter, K
2.8/105mm.
This year I used my FA 2.8 80-200mm.
This klens is fast and easy to use - easy to focus manually (bright
view
finder due to F.2.8).
2005:
On 03/09/06, graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Supersonic means just above the human hearing range, ultrasonic means
far above it but below the range of radio waves. Usually that is
something like 15kc to 30kc for supersonic, and 30kc to 100kc for
ultrasonic waves. It is the frequency that is
On 03/09/06, Dario Bonazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rob, your comment makes a lot of sense, but then you need a SAv and/or STv
priority, where you can set Sensitivity via a wheel and either Aperture or
Shutter speed via the other one, with the camera adjusting the other
shooting parameter
Supersonic means just above the human hearing range, ultrasonic means
far above it but below the range of radio waves. Usually that is
something like 15kc to 30kc for supersonic, and 30kc to 100kc for
ultrasonic waves. It is the frequency that is important to the label,
not the media. Note
Good point indeed.
2006/9/2, Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Thibouille wrote:
I think a sensitivity priority mode is stupid IMO.
If the Sv thing is that you choose sensitivity and the camera does the
rest than it is stupid:
The big difference in practice is that, in sensitivity priority
Toralf Lund wrote:
But it IS driven by ultrasonic frequency AC.
My point is that an AC frequency can't be ultrasonic since electricity
isn't sound. The vibration in a piezoelectric setup, on the other hand,
in a way is.
- Toralf
Then there are no USM motors by your definition, which
On Sep 2, 2006, at 7:51 AM, graywolf wrote:
Supersonic means just above the human hearing range, ultrasonic means
far above it but below the range of radio waves. Usually that is
something like 15kc to 30kc for supersonic, and 30kc to 100kc for
ultrasonic waves. It is the frequency that is
--- Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Is anyone else not worked up over this?
I'm not worked up about it either.
If it will work on existing Pentax bodies, I think
it's a nice feature (but not important). If these
lenses will initially autofocus ONLY on the K10D, I
think it is a stupid choice
I've been reading this thread without giving it my fullest attention. I've
looked through the archives trying to find the beginning and where the
possibility of a USM lens setup is planned for the K10D. Can someone
provide the reference, or a pointer, to where Pentax or some reliable
source
Then tell me, guys,
Why are the medium format optics so much larger for corresponding
focal lengths and max apertures?
Jostein
On 9/2/06, K.Takeshita [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Adam Maas mykroft at mykroft.com Sat Sep 2 08:49:28 EST 2006
400/4 with SSM would be neat. Can't see any good reason
USM illustrated here:
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=CanonAdvantageTopicDtlActi
d=2648
Jens Bladt
http://www.jensbladt.dk
+45 56 63 77 11
+45 23 43 85 77
Skype: jensbladt248
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af
K.Takeshita
I agree with everything you said. While increased speed, hopefully
precision, are are desirable, the reduction in sound is a huge plus.
I've taken pictures using AF at events that are relatively quite and
the sound of the lens focusing even made me jump ;-)
Dave
On 9/2/06, Douglas Newman
Sorry Boris. There is something with the composition.
I'm not really sure what the problem is, but I find myself wonder how it
would have been if the wheels was a tiny bit further apart. My eye walks
back and forth between that and the chain protection thing.
Second thought. The composition is
On 03/09/06, Jostein Øksne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then tell me, guys,
Why are the medium format optics so much larger for corresponding
focal lengths and max apertures?
The long lenses aren't, I had a 400/4 for my 67, it didn't taper much
as the back end used the external bayonet but the
And an explanation of how it works:
http://www.canon.com/technology/canon_tech/explanation/usm.html
On 9/2/06, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
USM illustrated here:
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=CanonAdvantageTopicDtlActid=2648
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
I am now the proud owner of the A 35-105, A 70-210, and DA 16-45. All bought
used, KEH and Adorama. Still looking around for a few more.
Now they just need a camera. :-)
Why the older lenses? Well, even when Pentax does come out with some new
telephotos, it may be a while before I feel I can
There is a new magazine in the UK called Photography Monthly which
just reviewed macro lenses. They rate the Pentax DFA 100mm (84/100)
well above the Canon 60mm EFS and more suprisingly the Canon 180mm L
and the Nikon 200mm F4 both of which cost over £1000!! (all in the low
70's)
The top lens was
In a message dated 9/1/2006 1:18:49 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Traveler in London
- Zocalo Coffeehouse
645 Bancroft @ Dutton, San Leandro, CA
www.zocalo.com
August 13 to September 17, 2006
Closing party - Saturday, September 9, 7-9 PM
My solo show will
Point about front element taken, but the front element is not THE
single factor in deciding the weight of a lens.
I have five lenses for the 645 system, and all of them are heavier,
and bulkier, than their K counterparts.
Jostein
On 9/2/06, Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On
Well, yes, but on the other hand it occurs to me that we are talking
about advertising speak as if it had some intrinsic meaning. Kind of
foolish isn't it?
--
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
Idiot Proof == Expert Proof
Welcome back Marnie (well...your sort of back ;-).
It is indeed an exciting time to be a Pentax user.
Dave
On 9/3/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am now the proud owner of the A 35-105, A 70-210, and DA 16-45. All bought
used, KEH and Adorama. Still looking around for a few
Hi Bill!
Great to have you back!
Jostein
On 9/2/06, Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Guess I'm the oddball here. I'm perfectly happy with my *istD and have no
plans to replace it.
Bill
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ryan
The telephotos are not. Only when you get into focal lengths that will
not cover 6x7 (or whatever), do the lenses get smaller for a smaller
formats.
--
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
Idiot Proof == Expert Proof
---
On 9/2/06, Jostein Øksne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then tell me, guys,
Why are the medium format optics so much larger for corresponding
focal lengths and max apertures?
Because it looks more professional to have a big lens mounted on a big camera.
Dave
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Congrats, 3 of the best zooms I've ever used! ;-)
Don
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 02, 2006 11:14 AM
To: pdml@pdml.net
Subject: OT: Becoming Pentaxian Again
I am now the proud owner
Well, Russell, here it is: http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/apron.html
LOL I'd just taken it from the laundry when I read your message, so it
was a simple thing to grab a little snap for you.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Russell Kerstetter
maybe next we can see a picture of that
Can someone provide the reference, or a pointer, to where Pentax or some
reliable source mentions that such lenses will be available? Or is
this whole USM thing just more speculation?
Shel
-
Shel, as posters have indicated, the discussion goes back to the late
90s (at least). The
Keppler always has an interesting take on the industry. He's been
around long enough to put things into perspective.
He's authored this article on the battle for the 10% of the DSLR
market not owned by the big two.
You're missing the fact that you can get much better autofocus
performance with a motor in the lens.
Paul
-
I'm not questioning this, Paul, but could you provide more details about
what you mean by better?
Thanks,
Joe
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am now the proud owner of the A 35-105, A 70-210, and DA 16-45. All bought
used, KEH and Adorama. Still looking around for a few more.
Oooh. Three *nice* lenses there!
--
Mark Roberts Photography Multimedia
www.robertstech.com
412-687-2835
--
PDML
David Savage wrote:
On 9/2/06, Jostein Øksne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then tell me, guys,
Why are the medium format optics so much larger for corresponding
focal lengths and max apertures?
Because it looks more professional to have a big lens mounted on a big camera.
Har!
(Beat me to it...)
Ahhh just more speculation. Thanks! However, it would be nice if the
K10D supported current AF technology and could be adaptable to newer,
USM-type lenses in the future, giving the camera both backwards and
forwards lens compatibility.
There's a K100D in a store not far from me. I may
Marnie -
Welcome back the fold.
Just a little advice if you're trying to save a little cash. After
you get the new Pentax camera body, don't try out the DA 50-200 zoom.
See you later, gs
http://georgesphotos.net
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
Bill Owens wrote:
Minimally distracting. I should have also said it's a beautiful shot and I
wish I could do as well.
Bill
(1) Bill, you can -- and have :)
(2) Shel, it is a beautiful shot - and...
(3) count me in as one who doesn't want to see you in an
apron :)
(4) my windows don't get
Toralf Lund wrote:
But it IS driven by ultrasonic frequency AC.
My point is that an AC frequency can't be ultrasonic since electricity
isn't sound. The vibration in a piezoelectric setup, on the other hand,
in a way is.
- Toralf
Then there are no USM motors by your
Bob W wrote:
Actually, a theme like juxtaposition requires little or no effort.
Unless you shoot a clear sky, the sea or a snowfield, pretty much
every photo on the planet has something juxtaposed with something
else.
Here's my mum juxtaposed with my dad. Gee, they're juxtaposed
In a message dated 9/2/2006 10:14:34 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just a little advice if you're trying to save a little cash. After
you get the new Pentax camera body, don't try out the DA 50-200 zoom.
See you later, gs
===
LOL.
Marnie :-)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss
On Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Doug Franklin wrote:
ryan brooks wrote:
You absolutely need a drive at that magnification and shutter speed.
May be, but as I said in another post, I've gotten sharp results with
the same rig, just replacing the *ist D and 2 sec mirror prefire with
the LX and its mirror
On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, Jens Bladt wrote:
The X is hopefully for Flash. A much missed feature since the PZ-1p.
The speed may by accident be set wrong on my D, since I alway use M mode
for flash photography - in combination with TTL or studio flash (flash
meter).
What kind of wrong? Slower than
1 - 100 of 240 matches
Mail list logo
