Alistair Lax wrote:
A couple of months ago I mentioned my LX focus problem, where the top and
bottom of the screen were out of focus in opposite directions. It proved
surprisingly difficult to deal with, although the cause and solution turned
out to be simple in concept and may be of
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
A few years ago Keppler did a comparison between a Pentax 50 (don't recall
which one) and a Leica Summicron, long considered the standard for 50mm
lenses. I also did a comparo of my 50's with my Summicron. It's hard to
tell them apart until prints get past 16X
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
And there are times DSLR owners/users don't want a DSLR. There are quite a
few people on this list who often use a small PS.
Me, for instance -- well, I will again when Pentax CO returns my Optio.
(I sent it in for service; it came back with a brand-new problem so it
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Hi, I don't want to start a flame war, or get anyone's undies in knot. I'm
just curious to know how many people are not shooting raw, and why that may
be. Please, no flames or judgemental comment. We all know raw has
advantages, and in some circumstances can be a better
Unca Mikey wrote:
(among other things)
As near as I can tell from pictures and the manual, the ZX-7 is the
only Pentax SLR that allows Av mode using either the aperture ring on
the lens or a selector on the body.
No.
The PZ-1 also does. Which suggests that the PZ-1p would too.
There may be
Unca Mikey wrote:
A quick question, something I am curious about -- I've read a lot here
about the compatibility of older lenses on newer bodies, but what
about the other way?
Specifically, on film bodies without a thumbwheel (MZ-S, ZX-5n, etc),
how do you change the aperture when the lens
Powell Hargrave wrote:
Does anyone actually shoot TIFF with the D? Would not seem to be a good
option as it is not as good as RAW and only slightly if any better that
Jpeg and 10 times the file size.
I never have. Only JPEGs and Raw files.
Dave Kennedy wrote:
For those of us who are running Elements with ACR or RSE, is there any
real value in the Real World Camera Raw book for Photoshop?
Yes.
Although one for Photoshop Elements would be nice ...
I went through my copy of the book with a pencil and annotated In
Elements and
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
To each their own.
(snipped remainder)
I think this applies to everybody's comments about mice, trackpads,
etc., in this thread.
It's all preferences and comfort, right?
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Somehow I knew about Aaron's shooting situation early on. Maybe from
reading an earlier message, or from reading a message in this thread that
others may have missed. Regardless, even after Aaron made his situation
clear to all (perhaps even reiterating it), messages
Patrice LACOUTURE (GMail) wrote:
luispaulodesa a écrit :
Hiya. My DS just arrived yesterday.
Welcome to the crowd!
One thing I miss is certainly all the dials available on the body,
instead of through lcd menus, but looks like I'll have to deal with
that. Maybe I am just an old fart, but
On 4/5/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, there's really no coal bin at Casa Belinkoff, but there is a very dark
corner in the basement. I went down there with Taylor with the idea of
trying the pop-up flash on the istDS. I set compensation to -2.0, and took
a few shots. The
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Assuming the same optical formula, is the only difference between the F and
FA lenses the power zoom feature, or are there more differences? Any that
really matter wrt use on the D cameras?
Shel
Well, at least some of the FA lenses aren't power-zoom lenses.
Gonz wrote:
frank theriault wrote:
On 4/1/06, Igor Roshchin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
BTW, probably not that many people know that Empire State Building
withstood a B-25 bomber hitting it and being stuck in the building
at the 79th floor in 1945.
snip
Actually I've known that
Malcolm Smith wrote:
Jostein wrote:
http://www.oksne.net/paw/20060403-0139.html
Beautiful.
Malcolm
I totally agree.
ERNR
Unca Mikey wrote:
On Wednesday morning, a little after 9 am CST, I ordered those three
books from LensWork.
I came home from my lunchtime walkies today to find that the books
waiting in my mailbox, here in Texas, delivered USPS Priority Mail.
I'm impressed!
*UncaMikey
Tom C wrote:
I haven't ever really thought about it as ugly or beautiful until
now. I'd probably land on the positive side of it's aesthetics.
It's hard to imagine Paris w/o it though. Like London w/o Big Ben,
Seattle w/o the Space Needle, SF w/o the Pyramid, St. Louis w/o the
arch, NYC
Adam Maas wrote:
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
So I used Dave Brooks' *ist D last summer a bunch of times. Since
then, I've used a DS and now own a DS2. I noticed a couple of things
and thought I'd ask the list about them.
ISO -- I thought the maximum ISO on the D was 1600. Was it raised
with
Rick Womer wrote:
Compared to my PZ-1, PZ-1p, and (especially) Super
Programs, the istD shutter noise is a whisper.
And as to the LX ... much as I love my LX ...
Kenneth Waller wrote:
This will probably leave some people on the list cross.
not another one of those excruciating pun threads
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 27 Mar 2006 at 23:11, Cotty wrote:
When I was in training (nearly 30 years ago :-( we used many terms and
acronyms but it is pointless me repeating them here as they would mean
nothing to someone not involved in film production. I have never been in
the telephone
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Mar 28, 2006, at 11:54 AM, Jostein wrote:
Finally, did you ever read On Being a Photographer?
Shel, I'm sorry I have deleted your recent reference to that book.
Do you have an ISBN?
Don't know what the ISBN is, but you can order it (and its sister
Bob W wrote:
Bob W wrote:
This is completely OT, but I feel obliged to pass it on.
At work we sell services which include a web site that we
develop and
host for our clients. I have been helping put together a bid for a
prospective new client, a very large and rich
Godfrey DiGiorgi quoted and posted, among other things:
The one sad thing about the digital PS market is there is no
replacement for a Yashica T4 or Oly XA.
There is and there isn't. The problem is that small, high resolution
sensors are not particularly sensitive and responsiveness
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
Come on, we all know that reality is that which, when you stop believing in it,
does not go away.
Oh, Mark ... !
Bob W wrote:
Constant repitition doesn't make something true.
Mark! One more!
Mark Roberts wrote:
I well remember some of my various realizations that other people see
things in some fundamentally different ways. But true flamebait
lurksin that territory so I won't go there!
Mark, modesty had better not forbid the inclusion of this one.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
What do you do with annoying children? Maybe you wanted a boy and got a
girl? Perhaps you're at your wits end and don't know what to do with the
little troublemaker ...
http://home.earthlink.net/~shel-pix/reseller.html
Shel
It can be soo tempting ...
I
Cesar wrote:
Mark Roberts wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This didn't reach the reserve. Maybe it will be offered again?
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=7599625208rd=1sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AITrd=1
http://tinyurl.com/zjdyh
Ooooh! Lizard skin!
C'mon Cesar,
Paul Stenquist wrote:
On Mar 25, 2006, at 7:52 PM, Kevin Waterson wrote:
As mentioned, I dont deny the artistic merits of digital technology.
b
But you did in your earlier post. You said, If you want to shoot
film, fine. I will certainly shoot with my screwmount Leica again and
probably
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
http://home.earthlink.net/~shel-pix/famportrait.html
Just a little something snapped with the ol' Sony
Shel
I like it!
Paul Stenquist wrote:
Ken didn't mean flat as in lacking contrast. He meant that he finds
that analog prints have more of a three dimensional look. I don't see
that, but he may well have a more discriminating eye.
Gotta be the lenses.
Y'know, the good Pentax glass that *can* be used on a
Fred wrote: (quoting somebody else)
Ever since late last year (when you changed servers IIRC?) the ANSI
character set has not been displaying properly on the list (examples ©
copyright, ¢ cents, ° degree) They used to work, how come they don't
anymore?
Not Doug but your examples
Leon Altoff wrote:
(trimmed out the details)
So what lengths do you go to to clean your camera when you take it
places a good camera shouldn't go?
If I must go places a good camera shouldn't go, I take the WR-90 and
rinse it off in the kitchen sink when done.
:D
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Where shouldn't a good camera go? What do you do if you want better
quality photos than can be had with the WR-90?
I then conclude that where I'm going is a suitable environment for a
good camera.
In fact the only places I've taken the WR-90 that I wouldn't take any
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I was slowly driving to a friend's house up in the Berkeley Hills. A
woman, seemingly impaired in some way, drove into my lane and crashed
head-on into me. She wasn't wearing her seat belt, and was driven to the
hospital by an ambulance. She's badly bruised as her head
mike wilson wrote:
From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/03/18 Sat PM 11:09:31 GMT
To: pentax list pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Big Bald Bill
On 18/3/06, Illinois Bill, discombobulated, unleashed:
Now what you really wanted to see, the before, during and after
shots!
frank theriault wrote:
Whatever the cause, cool shot!!
Mark, may I suggest ... ?
David J Brooks wrote:
I told my wife, no camera equipment for 2006. So far i have ordered
the D200, bought the Sigma 10-20 and am this close to getting the
Tamron 90 macro for the Nikon mounts
Damn i hate this list.
lol
This list is making you buy all that non-Pentax stuff?
How? I'm
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
I don't care what OS my phone runs as long as it works without
annoying me...
Godfrey
Same here!!
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Late this morning the big brown UPS van pulled up in front of Casa
Belinkoff, and off jumped Carl, the regular delivery guy on this route,
carrying a package from KEH which contained a LN- istDS with 5245 exposures
showing on the clock. I had planned to get a new DS2 from
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Enjoy your new camera.
Read the book Real World Camera Raw with Photoshop CS2 by Bruce
Fraser. It will teach you about RAW workflow better than any series
of PDML discussions.
Yes --
but if you order RWCR instead of purchasing it from a local shop, while
you
Cotty wrote:
On 17/3/06, Tom C, discombobulated, unleashed:
He's not stupid, but he has a predisposition to making blanket statements
and often trivializes aspects of a topic that he knows little about or does
not care to write about.
(re Kenny boy)
So you reckon he'd fit right in
white papers.
Take a look here --
http://www.adobe.com/digitalimag/ps_pro_primers.html
Jack
--- E.R.N. Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jack Davis wrote:
If I do (wife lets me) go for the 10mp..or?, I'll definitely obtain
the
suggested book.
I'm losing track
Mark Roberts wrote:
Adam Maas wrote:
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Do obtain a copy of Real World Camera Raw ... by Bruce Fraser.
Recommendation seconded. Best RAW workflow book, by a large margin.
Recommendation thirded :)
All in favour --
Aye!
Christian wrote:
Derby Chang wrote:
I'm sorry to cause potential mental harm to my beloved PDMLers. But I
really laughed out loud when I read this. A few blank frames of 4x5
Fuji RVP custom made for Kenny vs D200 shots
KENNY WARNING - do not click on this link if you have any form of
Jack Davis wrote:
If I do (wife lets me) go for the 10mp..or?, I'll definitely obtain the
suggested book.
I'm losing track of the whole story here. Do you already have a camera
capable of recording Raw?
If so, why wait before buying the book?
If not, never mind ...
ERNR
Mark Stringer wrote:
ACDSee Pro - Any comments for Pentax DSLR usage?
I have ACDSee 7, hard drive failed and have used my limit on
licenses. I'm sure they would give me another but I haven't tried.
I'm still looking for the all in one like Adobe Lightroom enhanced
with more Photoshop
Thibouille wrote:
Drunk Klingon ? ;)
Redundancy?
Mat Maessen wrote:
What distro are you using? If you're using one of the redhat-based
distros, the yum tool may be able to help you with the dependencies.
IIRC, cinepaint is in at least one of the third-party software
repositories for Fedora Core. Once you get it set up, you can run yum
install
Mark Roberts wrote:
Mark Roberts wrote:
I've been very conflicted with regards to the Adobe DNG universal RAW
format. I've always liked a lot about it and after reading Bruce
Fraser's Camera RAW for the Real World I *really* like it
BTW folks: The full, official title of the book is
Mat Maessen wrote:
On 3/8/06, E.R.N. Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I miss the days when this was an English-language list ...
So, what do you think of the MTF numbers of the FA50/1.4 versus the
FA43/1.9 LTD? ;-)
-Mat
:D
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Yesterday Taylor arrived at Casa Belinkoff. He's a 7 month old black male
cat who was rescued from an abandoned feral litter. He readily took to his
new home, exploring the place and making himself comfortable. I put
together a little gallery for a couple of friends, my
mike wilson wrote:
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Yesterday Taylor arrived at Casa Belinkoff. He's a 7 month old black
male
cat
That's not Taylor. That's Samson, who, with his sister Delilah, gave
me much pleasure for 19years. 'Lilah (a fluffy version of Sam) lasted
for 21. I'm always seeing
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting Doug Brewer [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Pancho Hasselbach wrote:
Hi folks,
I know about the running-eekbay-auctions thing, nevertheless I wanted to
share this one with you:
http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=7595673156
Pancho
Cesar
John Francis wrote:
among other things --
Have you ever tried to tell somebody
that the PASS THIS ON TO EVERYONE IN YOUR ADDRESS BOOK!! email they
sent you is, in fact, a load of absolute rubbish?
Strangely enough, yes -- I've done that three times to one particular sender.
She never
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
different techniques, and are not best
for all types of shooting. But for some types of photography, they excel.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: E.R.N. Reed
I wonder whether the people who consider the rangefinder more
natural started on rangefinders before moving to SLRs?
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
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
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.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First thing i changed on the istD when i got it was the file squence thing.
Then the CF
card thing.:-)
First thing I changed was the firmware, but I've changed those other two
items as well.
Tom C wrote:
From: Cesar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
I asked some list members for inputs since I was thinking about
rangefinders. Though, to be frank, I was interested in a Leica. I
had heard so much about them.
You can't be Frank. Frank has a hard time
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Cesar wrote:
http://groups.msn.com/MyRugbyPictures/misc.msnw?
action=ShowPhotoPhotoID=42
This is a 1950 Leica IIIf with a 1950 Ernst Leitz Wetzlar Summitar
f=5cm 1:2.
1950 ... a black dial IIIf. Very sweet old camera. Enjoy it!
I bought a pair of these cameras, a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There's no reason to believe the Nikon would be lower noise. In fact, there's
reason to suspect it would be higher noise. I don't recall anyone here ever
saying they didn't want anything more than the D. Not only do you whine, you
grow your own grapes.
It's true of
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: Tom C
Subject: Re: Some more new camera speculation
I'm sure it will be a nice camera.
I guess in the end, I am reacting to the categorization of a negative
opinion as whining. Just because it's an opinion that's at odds with
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
I would be overjoyed if there was a new Pentax DSLR that basically had
the same control set as the MZ-5n.
Ditto
I'd suggest making it black and chrome and calling it the Spotmatic D.
err ...
(Myself, I'd rather have an all-black version.
Ditto
Maybe shiny
Kenneth Waller wrote:
Not to be argumentative -
They definitely have a different feel to an SLR,
Agreed
you can see outside the taking frame,
but it's what in the frame that I'm interested in
there is no blanking of the finder as the shot is
made
I don't see how this is a concern,
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 1 Mar 2006 at 11:21, Rob Studdert wrote:
I really hate..
..sending stuff to the list that was meant to be private :-(
Seems to have happened to most of us at one time or another.
(sent to the list on purpose)
graywolf wrote:
For you folks who wind up with both cameras you can get a SD to CFII
adapter and standardize on SD cards.
If you already have several CF cards ... ?
Cory Papenfuss wrote:
Just a WAG on my part (nor do I give a sh*t), but:
Will it be a *ist D2?
Doubt it... too easily confused with D[LS]2 of the 6MP generations.
From a camera company that sold an Optio 550 and an Optio S50 within a
couple years of each other? I doubt that would
DagT wrote:
My guess is: *istDx
There'd be precedent for going with *istDn. Not that I think they should
do that.
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Feb 24, 2006, at 10:47 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
Well, it would be nice to have a name that's pronouncable so you can
tell people what your camera is called when they ask. That's always
been the biggest problem with the *ist name.
Try Pentax or Canon. Only the
Sorry for not responding to this thread earlier -- but ---
Congratulations, Ryan!
Rick Womer wrote:
Folks,
I've been on the digital fence for some time, and
had pretty much decided to buy the ist D successor
when it becomes available.
I'm getting itchy, though, since it doesn't look as
though the new body will be here by summer.
In May and June, a niece is getting
graywolf wrote:
In fact Occam's razor slices it to pieces.
Did anyone miss me? Been busy with other things sigh, but had to
come back and see what's happening. Seems that the ban on religion has
been lifted?
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
Idiot
Don Sanderson wrote:
Did y'all miss me?
Didn't think so ;-)
Caught a little cold a couple of weeks ago,
turned into the Flu, then to full Pneumonia.
Yuck Phooey! ;-(
Oh, dear!
I'm very glad you're better now.
Boris Liberman wrote:
Hi!
I stopped in at Starbuck's this afternoon and took a few pics while I
drank some burnt-bean coffee. (I'm not wild about their brew, but the
local store is full of photo ops.). Plenty of people in the store as
it was 12 degrees F outside. Of the two pics I shot, I
Cotty shared:
http://www.cottysnaps.com/snaps/landscapes/images/pic41.html
Just want to add a Me, too! to the well-written compliments of Jens
and Steady.
ERN
I have continued to give this a lot of thought, and though I guess I
probably won't be coming up with *a* Best Photo Ever, this is one of my
top picks:
http://grreed.home.texas.net/FamilyStuff/ERNR/deer.jpg
On Feb 18, 2006, at 4:44 AM, David Mann wrote:
I took this while on holiday on the West Coast in January 2000, a few
days after I took the rainbow shot from my last PAW.
http://www.bluemoon.net.nz/photo/printsdb/view.php?p=268t=1
Oh WOW!!!
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
On 2006-02-18, at 16:47, Jens Bladt wrote:
I don't understand.
At dpreview it says that the D and DS have veiwfinders with 95%
coverage and
0,95 magnification.
My *ist D user manual says so too.
What am I missing, please? Is Ken Rockwell talking about something
Indeed -- it is a great list.
I still remember that Rob S posted some LX screens for sale the very day
I found out I needed one. I think the whole transaction, from his
posting the FS to my having the screen in my possession, took about a
week. Definitely less than two.
(And later, when I
John Forbes wrote:
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 03:41:10 -, E.R.N. Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
John Forbes wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 23:58:24 -, E.R.N. Reed
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I only know of one religion whose followers behave like that.
I think I know a lot of the followers
John Forbes wrote:
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 09:09:00 -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
fra: Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This one time, at band camp, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That is actually irrelevant to the issue of whether God exists or
not.
This is a simple one.
If you believe
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
fra: E.R.N. Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]
John Forbes wrote:
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 09:09:00 -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But what then if you don't believe in a god, but also accepts that
you may be wrong. And you end up ingoring the matter because
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
fra: E.R.N. Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]
John Forbes wrote:
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 09:09:00 -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But what then if you don't believe in a god, but also accepts that
you may be wrong. And you end up ingoring the matter because
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Good enough takes many forms, and is, of course, at times, subjective. IMO
6mp is enough for magazines and most print work. It's not good enough for
some large, exhibition-sized prints.
But neither is 35mm, which is why medium- and large-format didn't go
away when 35mm
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: E.R.N. Reed Subject: Re: Religon,
Christ vs. the Other Guy
No.
Those who believe in a God can *answer* the question, not sidestep it.
Throughout human history, more rational people have believed in God,
or gods, than haven't. In all
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
fra: E.R.N. Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
.
Regarding your nonbelieving minority: According to the news today about 25% of
all Norwegians believes in God...
DagT
Oh -- minority of humans in modern times was phrased badly
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: E.R.N. Reed
Subject: Re: Religon, Christ vs. the Other Guy
Some just need evidence of something before we believe in it's
existence.
People are all looking at the same evidence. They're just coming to
different conclusions
Mishka wrote:
according to Britannica, there's roughly 1 billion of non-believers.
and, of course, the majority of people who have ever lived on earth
live right now,
OK, so although their numbers have increased drastically in modern
times, the non-believers are still a minority of the
I thought the original post was asking what's your best photo?
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: E.R.N. Reed
Subject: Re: Religion, Christ vs. the Other Guy
The known universe and everything we've seen in it. Specific enough
for you?
I'm an evolutionist.
My explanation and yours are not the same.
Finally. Agreement.
I
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Feb 17, 2006, at 7:24 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote:
But neither is 35mm, which is why medium- and large-format didn't
go away when 35mm became popular. Digital is another format, not a
replacement for all possible uses of everything else.
Yes.
No.
Digital is
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Pentax USA email address
I'd like to drop Pentax USA an email. Can't find an address on their
site.
Anyone got an address for them?
John Forbes wrote:
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 12:59:43 -, E.R.N. Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
John Forbes wrote:
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 03:41:10 -, E.R.N. Reed
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Forbes wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 23:58:24 -, E.R.N. Reed
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I
Juan Buhler wrote:
On 2/17/06, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I look at the world and the universe, and it's complexity, elegance, it's
many systems, chemical, organic, etc., that are all intertwined and
dependent and come to the conclusion there must be a maker. There may be no
more hard
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 17 Feb 2006 at 8:46, E.R.N. Reed wrote:
But neither is 35mm, which is why medium- and large-format didn't go
away when 35mm became popular.
Digital is another format, not a replacement for all possible uses of
everything else.
(Kind of agreeing with you, I think
Tom C wrote:
I actually can't distill down to a single favorite, probably because
the subjects are so different. Maybe five, but not one.
I can't either -- partly because I'm in the midst of a weeks-long
project to archive and organize all my digital images (I think I've got
about 25,000
1 - 100 of 777 matches
Mail list logo
