Rick
Of course I had to take a gander over to KEH to see this, which is
sooo dangerous to my wallet, ahem. I should clarify that I did not
look at any Manual focus models as I'm a modern kind of guy that way.
It really is good to see the Pentax PZ-1 holding it's value so well, but
help
Hi Gang
As someone who has already went to Canon digital, and has been hunting
for good Canon film bodies to supplement my kit there on Ebay, I can
tell you the competition is hot and heavy for used Canon film bodies.
The EOS 1 (xx) series cameras are totally hot items to have to bid on
and
Yahoo is being weirdI just got this message back from them that I sent
to the list on the Dec 25th. I wondered about not seeing it, but I know
that several on the list replied. So you guys got it but not me until now!
Anyone else having this problem?
- Original Message -
From: Dave
I own the Epson 2400 and when I was having difficulties with the film
curling too much I took a piece of glass and laid it on top the the negative
which was directly on the scanning glass. If I recall correctly the epson
software would not work with this as it was dependant on the holder to
I'd still be concerned that even if the prongs were made to line up via an
adaptor that the voltages and impedances might not match. I'd need a heck
of a guaranty that this adapter was going to match that as well.
Considering the value of a DSLR I would be very hesitant. A flash I might
risk,
The assumption is that with a 24 x 36mm sensor, that the same quality could
be achieved as the current film medium. That would unfortuanately result in
the same lens focal length problems as the current APS sized sensor in 35mm
sized DSLR's.
I've wondered though if the sensor sized/focal length
An affordable digital back makes more sense to me since they could include
in their market all the existing cameras already sold. If they could
produce one significantly cheaper then polaroid does it would upset the
medium format world. I don't even think a LCD preview screen would be
necessary
IMO, the home edition is easily worth $30.00. I've only been using it a
couple of days, so I'm still learning. Doing one image at a time, it's no
speed demon, but I'm not terribly interested in speed any way and the
results look fine to me. I've uploaded a 100% istD crop of one of the
Nah, not the lastI still don't have oneI have the FA f1.7
50mmif you feel really bad about it...I've been really good and
Christmas is a great time to share the joy :)
- Original Message -
From: Francis Alviar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax Discuss List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I suppose the biggest thing you should take into consideration is that
when
people look at your picture, they're not looking at your darn camera.
No-one
will give a stuff about the camera that took the picture except the
photographer.
I assume you were not counting the people on this list
Well actually the labs have already dealt with this to a point. You can
simply take in your CF Memory card to the lab and they will download and
print the pictures from it. However there is of course no negative,
although you can get them to put the pics on cd, but of course for a non
computer
Yep, the now old and currently being clearanced Epson 785EPX for less then a
$100 has a slot to insert an adaptor with a CF card. There is even a small
monitor to view the pictures your working with also available for like $40
that plugs in the back of the printer. For a cheap printer it does a
I like your reasoning. If film works for you keep using it. If you need
digital go for it. If you really want it and can afford it, go for it. If
you can
spend your money better on something else you want or need go for that. I
am
seriously considering getting a good digital point and shoot
On my 19 display at 1600 x 1200, a 10 pixel
font requires a magnifying glass. Some jerks specify six and eight
pixel fonts. I assume they don't want my custom and move on.
I've tried running my monitor on that setting as it is much better for
photoediting, but wind up having to go back to
I've found that this works extremely well printing from photoshop with the
epsons on color prints as well. It seems the 2 programs fight with each
other if you don't.
- Original Message -
From: Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: PDML [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2003 4:58
Well just as a comparison to scanned images, a 16 bit tiff from a 2800 dpi
scanner creates from 50 to 60 meg files, 8 bit is like 23 to 30 meg. I'm
not sure off the top of my head what the *istD is generating. I'm also
wondering about the quality of the *istD's 12 bit format that supposedly is
Um, in general I think it's ok to use a flash that's convering a wider angle
then the lens, it's the other way around that would cause a visible defect
such as vignetting
- Original Message -
From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 9:16 PM
If I remember correctly from the StarkistD's specs the raw file format can
be saved in the 12 bit mode. I'm familiar with 8 and 16, but not 12. I
know 8 gives you 24ppg and 16 gives you 48ppg with some functions in
photoshop disabled. Anyone that can enlighten me as to what you wind up
with for
Nope, and now everyone buying a digital camera is entering the same rat
race. All the stability of our 35mm will not apply there for sure!
- Original Message -
From: Tanya Mayer Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 6:01 PM
Subject: Re:
I'd be interested in the lens, but not the body. Any chance he would
separate them? And where might all this be shipped from?
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: PDML [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 4:23 PM
Subject: FS: ZX-7, Tamron 28~200
-- 1) How many have totally given up shooting film and have moved
-- completely to digital (That means no film and film cameras in your
-- equipment cabinet)?
Nope, not me! I've still got loads of film and SLR Camera equipment and
normally only shoot film.
-- 2) How many are in the process
So, if y'want to publish a photo from years before, and y'can't find the
subject, and a release is required, whadday do? Fake the release?
If you publish and get sued it's bad enough! If you fake the release, you
may well have committed fraud and wind up behing bars even!
I'm having a hard time swallowing the fact that film will be disappearing
any time soon. I'm also having a hard time understanding that even film PS
will disappear either. Throw away cameras that probably require the same
processing are also very hot items for the occasional family photoshoot.
I've never done a lot of sports photo work, but my first reaction is that
that sounds like kind of a slow lens for what might be low light conditions.
I've also always heard that rule of thumb is usually a max of 200mm for hand
held.
- Original Message -
From: Gary L. Murphy [EMAIL
never done a lot of sports photo work, but my first reaction is that
that sounds like kind of a slow lens for what might be low light
conditions.
I've also always heard that rule of thumb is usually a max of 200mm for
hand
held.
Dave Miers, say hello to IS.
Cheers,
Cotty
Is it possible that the publishers experience was with downloaded low
resolution jpeg images? The kind that you can usually click on and download
to your computer. These would be a no brainer not to use. But if you had
availibility to the original tiff file I really doubt they would know the
I'm liking the idea all of the sudden more and more that I get a new sensor
with each new roll of film. HAR!
- Original Message -
From: alex wetmore [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 1:55 PM
Subject: Re: Hot pixels
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 [EMAIL
I just tested my s404 PS and if I put it on 64 iso...I have one hot pixel
showing. If I put it on the highest sensitivity...400 iso...ughI got
all kinds8-10 second exposures. I'm wondering on the high sensitivity
about the relationship to digital noise and hot spots.
I ran the program
Congrats! That really is a great shot! What were these difficulties you
mentioned with the PZ-1 for this shot?
True story: The first night, I took the PZ-1 and found a number of
logistical
difficulties in using it for this shot. So I chose the WR-90 the next
night,
largely because of the Bulb
Herb
How do you get a 5000 pixel image on one side from the *istD? According to
the review in Dpreview the max resolution of the 6.1megpixel sensor is 3008
x 2008 which seems about right since my 4 megpixel PS puts out a 2400 x
1600 pixel image. I can believe you can get to the 5000 pixel mark
The Epson C80 and other printers makes nice prints from 4 or 6 color inks,
due to the small nozzle sizes. The problem is the cleaning cycles. We
have
central air heat, which drys things out, and at the moment the printer
cannot
spray a single drip of ink. My own fault; I should have
I also am very interested in this use of slave flash. I would have expected
the TTL functions to operate normally on the camera for not only the onboard
or external mounted flash but also for the slave flash. If you set the
slave for less then you expect to need 1/16 etc, then the on camera
Not really. You can get decent results from a dedicated film scanner
at around half the price of a *ist-D/D100/10D (or something quite close
to the price of a 300D), but the cheaper units are usually just flatbed
scanners with transparency adapters, which don't work as well.
You might
Bruce
Could you please explain this further. I had actually planned on the slave
providing most of the light and the popup or hotshoe mounted flash providing
the minority of the light. I'm afraid I'm still a bit lost here. I have
the PZ-1p and PZ-1 cameras at this point and have no wireless to
If memory serves me correct the D60 Canon had problems with shutter lag and
the next one in the series after that. I'm not that up on Canon equipment
however. My source was a photojournalist at a local newspaper in the town I
lived in.
Dave Miers
Which earlier Canons would this be? I've
Har! That does it! It's now a wanna be Pentax G.
Dave Miers
If it makes you feel better, they moved the lens release and took the
registration dit off the 18-35mm lens.
I don't like that so much.
William Robb
Hi All
The previous posts regarding LCD delay reminded me of one of my major
concerns wth Digital Cameras. Both digitals I've owned so far have a very
aggravating shutter delay. Timing your shot and getting the moment can be a
very aggravating problem. Anticipating the moment is difficult
Thanks everyone that replied to this post so quickly! They were very
positive answers since I had heard that the earlier Canons also suffered
from shutter lag. Now all that I have for an excuse is lack of full frame
sensor and most importantly MONEY! It would really be better for my wallet
if
Did you clean under the glass yet? My 2400 was dirty right from the start.
As I recall it's just a couple of screws to take it apart enough to clean
inside the glass.
Dave
- Original Message -
From: David Madsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 9:56
One really nice thing about digital photography as far as the educator
is concerned is that the camera records all the settings along with the
image. With a conventional film camera there's no way that anyone can
tell whether I was using an auto-exposure mode or doing things manually.
40 matches
Mail list logo
