Shel Belinkoff wrote:
What's a Guide Number and how does it work?
Shel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guide_number
/Henri
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Sep 25, 2005, at 9:14 AM, mike wilson wrote:
There comes a point in resolution when scanning film that all
you're doing is resolving more emulsion defects too. At 2820ppi, I
can see the grain clearly in ASA 100 film. Most of the benefit
from 3000 ppi
Shoot film? Ofcourse, it's all I shoot.
Mostly B/W.
/Henri
Igor Roshchin wrote:
Hi, everybody!
I haven't been submitting that many pictures to PUG myself,
but I thought I'd share my idea about the themes.
Sorry if this idea is a bit stereotypical (or even extremely so):
Latin phrases. Personally I'd suggest to chose from the following:
ad hoc
et
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
.. but I'm drawing a blank. How many megabytes are there in a gigabyte?
(The world before morning coffee is very dark, indeed)
Shel
1024
/Henri
Mark Roberts wrote:
Digital isn't going to kill film any more than the automobile killed the
horse and buggy. Plenty of people prefer horses. You can still buy and
keep horses. Some people do.
For fun, not for transportation as before.
This will happen with film too. People will use it for
Badri A wrote:
..and shooting Fuji Sensia..
Any other suggestions/advice would be much appreciated!
Thanks
Badri
I recently shot a roll of Sensia again.
Man, I hate that film. It's grainy and unsharp. Colors can be okey
sometimes, but more often not.
Too bland when it comes to landskape.
Kevin Waterson wrote:
This one time, at band camp, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi:
I have for sale, the following lens:
Pentax FA77mm f1.8 Limited.
Question: Is this manual or auto focus?
Question: Is this SMC?
Question: Will SWMBO free up the purse strings as recent
pancho hasselbach wrote:
Tim,
this bokeh really looks enchanted, suits perfectly the title. Nice
framing!
Maybe the TC is also involved in producing it?
Which version of the lens do you have? I haven't tried mine yet for
bokeh on reflections, I have got the second version.
pancho
Heh,
mike wilson wrote:
From: David Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/06/22 Wed AM 09:05:10 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Enablement One-Scan Dual IV
On Jun 22, 2005, at 6:27 PM, mike wilson wrote:
Unless you have MF to deal with, in which case the Multi is the way
to go.
Don Sanderson wrote:
Finally replaced the Prime Film 1800 (POS) Scanner.
Here's a scan of a frame of Kodak BW Pro (C41 BW):
http://www.donsauction.com/pdml/Water.htm
Scanned as BW Neg with no correction for the color mask.
Levels adjusted in PS-CS, no sharpening.
Original scan is 4384x2892,
I haven't seen this anywhere else, but someone found this on the swedish
pentax site.
It looks like another entry level model, targeted even lower than the DS.
http://www.pentax.se/index.asp?url=http://www.pentax.se/default.asp?cat_id=491
6.1mpix, 2.8 frames/sec, 2.5 lcd, SD, PentaMIRROR,
Henri Toivonen wrote:
I haven't seen this anywhere else, but someone found this on the
swedish pentax site.
It looks like another entry level model, targeted even lower than the DS.
http://www.pentax.se/index.asp?url=http://www.pentax.se/default.asp?cat_id=491
6.1mpix, 2.8 frames/sec, 2.5
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote on 01.06.05 13:19:
I think that's what Henri (the OP) suggested. I think his surname is
Finnish :-)
http://www.mail-archive.com/pentax-discuss@pdml.net/msg253937.html
I think Paul knows better as he comes from polypeptide.SE ;-)
Steve Jolly wrote:
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
I don't think the s had pentamirror, but I may be wrong.
The DS has a pentaprism. However, according to the technical specs
linked from that webpage*, so does the *istDL...
S
*assuming my attempts to interpret Swedish don't mislead me -
Michael Bergstrom wrote:
Eriksson Paulus wrote on 01.06.05 13:16:
It means penta prism viewfinder.
Thanks Paul!!! So aparrently this is not pentamirror as some
suggested :-)
--
Balance is the ultimate good...
Best Regards
Sylwek
Excepet that in the 'Tekniska
Mark Cassino wrote:
Hi Scott -
I'll be interested to hear how the 35mm version of Classic Pan works
out for you - I have only used the 120 version.
BTW - this is the official Classic Pan website -
http://www.classicpan.de/
Thanks for the comments on the photos - I have gobs that I have to
DagT wrote:
My reaction is the opposite. I find it interesting how different
photographers interpret the same object. A really interesting
competition would be to see 20 good photographers compete with
pictures of the same boring object such as an ordinary chair.
So I´m usually happy to
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
anyone know what this guy fits on???
http://users.rcn.com/annsan/mysterypolarizer.jpg
it has no threads - just the outside gear notches
that
you see here.
diameter is roughly 2 1/8
and say doesn't anyone have second hand 58mm pol
for me?
ann
Cokin A
Have one of
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
A little while back I asked a question that
sounded really stupid because
I had no way to attach filters to the digicam I
had then...
Now I can but do they work the same way? that
is have the same effect?
A red filter on my darkside PRO 1 and camera set
to BW acheive the
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
How about the $45 Pentax-F 35-70/3.5-4.5 Macro?
];-)
Godfrey
I got mine for free.
/Henri
Tim Øsleby wrote:
I just looked the words up in my Oxford Advanced dictionary.
-Discombobulated, found nothing.
-Unleashed, something about letting a dog loose of its chains. Am I that
wild? Something like a rhino in a China Store :-)
Must be my Scottish blood (about one pint).
Don Sanderson wrote:
I just gave Neat Image a quick try with the default settings
and Auto Profile.
Good thing I was prepared, I am amazed! ;-)
Don
It's much better once you learn how to use all the settings and tweak it
right.
Really great program, that.
/Henri
frank theriault wrote:
On 5/14/05, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When I asked if it was for sale, the owner said $30. At that price,
who can resist?
I dunno when I'll shoot some film in it, but for $30 ...
Godfrey
feeling strangely archaic with this in my hand
$30 for a
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
So, it looks like the contents of my digital and film kits is now decided. It amazed me that the M75-150 was so good, comparatively speaking. But I'll take it.
I was just thinking about selling mine. Maybe I won't then, since I'm
thinking about getting a DS.
/Henri
William Robb wrote:
This brings up the interesting concept that the photo finisher should
what the inside of your house looks like, and should automatically
know what colour things are, given no references regarding it.
Her exposure is off by a couple of buttons (too light), but there is
Sylwiusz wrote:
on 6.05.2005 14:13, Pål Jensen at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sure, the eyepiece is of plastic but isn't that true for all slr's made today?
Eypiece in MZ-S is made of coated glass - I've checked this by knocking at
that with metal screwdriver - produced sound couldn't come
Which one is better as a carryround normal zoom for my SFX:
F35-70/3.5-4.5
FA28-70/4.0 AL
/Henri
http://stans-photography.info/BriefComments.html#28-70%20mm%20f/4.0%20FA%20AL
David Zaninovic wrote:
Which film can resist heat the best ? How long could you leave it in the car
at 50C before it is not usable any more ? I don't see
anything in the spec for Fuji Reala about this. I am thinking about leaving
one camera permanently in the car, you never know when
you will
Shaun Canning wrote:
We are about to embark on a 3 week holiday in tropical Far North Queensland
with wife and 8 month old son. Wife does not want me to
take *ist D etc. What do I do? Do I:
1. Leave camera at home,
2. Leave wife and son at home,
3. Take son and leave wife,
4. Justify buying a
Something that is dying/already dead is consumer color negative film.
I work at a smallish minilab and development is down like, 70%.
A couple of years ago, a good day we got in 30 rolls. A good day today
is like over 5 rolls.
I'm not sure how long we will be able to stay in business, because
Man, am I the only one to think that this is *really sad*?
It's not easy to get people to understand the consequences either.
/Henri
Mark Roberts wrote:
Henri Toivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Something that is dying/already dead is consumer color negative film.
I work at a smallish minilab
I receieved that 105/2.8 that I thought I got dirt cheap today.
The aperture blades are stuck at the smallest aperture, they won't nudge
when I push the lever.
Fun. Crap. Just like it wasn't enough that I had a harddrive failure
yesterday, ofcourse the one with all of my pictures. Thank god I
Alan Chan wrote:
--- Henri Toivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But is there a slim chance that this is something I can fix myself? Or
should I just send the crap back where it came from?
From what you described, either something was broken or attempted repair was made.
What lens is it btw
I fixed the lens, the MX that I got with it was in better shape than my
old one (except for some minor flaws) and everything seems okey now.
I talked to the seller, and he agreed to give me a small refund because
of the non-working condition of the stuff when I got them.
So, in the end, I got a
Yeah it was stupid computer week here too.
Last night the computer just rebooted, and when it got back up, poof, F:
was missing.
Windows said it wasn't formatted.
Ofcourse that was where I had all my pics, none were backupped.
Thank god a program called 'GetDataBack' saved my ass, and I got all
Don Sanderson wrote:
All the way from Sweden in only 10 days.
This is a wonderful lens, thanks to all who recommended it!
Easy to handle, very sharp and *beautiful* bokeh!
I only had a few minutes to play with but it's already become
a favorite.
The flaws in the coating are very minor, I don't
Don Sanderson wrote:
It's a shame it's broken Henri.
It doesn't look as though it would be more difficult than
any other Pentax prime to take this one apart and fix it.
It would certainly be worth the effort, it's a very nice
lens.
Don
The problem so far has been to get it open up back. The
I just (1 minute ago) won an online auction, Pentax MX and a K105/2.8
stuck on it for the neat sum of 1358SEK + shipping.
That makes about $200 incl. shipping.
I'm planning on selling one of the MX'es I have, and maybe one of the
135's. I hope I did a good deal. I've read many people praise
Richard Chu wrote:
I just want to share a recent experience with everyone
so that you folks are aware of this type of fraud.
This type of fraud is very common. Be very cautious with any kind of
shipment to Africa, especially Nigeria.
Also, don't trust emails if you can't verify it's origin. The
Got today a SMC-M 50/2, that I got pretty cheap. 50 SEK, thats about $7.
Man is it small! Should take it out for some testing some day here. It
looks pretty cute though on the MX.
Also, I got 2 rolls of Kodak EIR infrared slide film. The only problem
was, that they had been stored in the fridge
Jens Bladt wrote:
FWIW here's the K 2.8/105mm compared to two zooms @ different f-stops.
http://gallery37564.fotopic.net/p13529850.html
Don't click on the thumbnail. Click on the Full Size button.
Regards
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
What would a reasonable
Don Sanderson wrote:
Can't BELIEVE I missed this playing with res tests!!
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=7503940914
Don :-(
Hehe, I have one of those. Paid 350SEK, that's about $50 incl. shipping.
/Henri
Saw those too. Lpfoto sometimes has some nice pentax lenses for nice
prices. Too bad I usually don't have the money to order anything. :-/
/Henri
I thought i would never get excited enough about getting new equipment
that i´d need to share it with anyone. Well, i was wrong... Today i
received
John Celio wrote:
So. I want to put together a list of all the digital lenses (both DA
and D-FA), cameras and accessories that Pentax is making right now, or
will have out in the near-ish future (35mm-based only). My plan is to
put together a proposal for my boss to see if I can convince him
Michael Heim wrote:
Hey John
Why have you stolen all the beautiful colors from your version of XP?
Everything's gray on your pictures. Are you such a fan of win 98/nt?
;-)
Michael
The XP colors are terrible, and all those bells and whistles eat up ram
like a pig.
The first thing I do on a
Cotty wrote:
http://www.pma-show.com/review/canon/001_EOS_digital_rebel_xt.html
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
That page has been removed.
/Henri
Cotty wrote:
On 17/2/05, Sylwester Pietrzyk, discombobulated, unleashed:
Anyway seems like a new Drebel will be killer DSLR...
Ahh, with the greatest of respect Sylwek - a killer DSLR? In what sense
of the word??
Cheers,
Cotty
At night, it will start to kill people. Don't forget, its
http://www.pma-show.com/pentax/004_DA_50-200mm_lens.html
/Henri
Bruce Dayton wrote:
Well, either the list is losing lots of messages or extremely quiet
today. I'm only getting a few per hour. Wonder what all I am
missing?
Well, atleast my news about the new Pentax lens.
http://www.pma-show.com/pentax/004_DA_50-200mm_lens.html
Haven't seen the message over
Fuji has apparently released a new film, called Velvia 100 (not to be
confused with 100F).
According to the press release it has finer grain than 50, at twice the
speed.
Next year Velvia 50 will be gone from the shelves.
/Henri
Henri Toivonen wrote:
Fuji has apparently released a new film, called Velvia 100 (not to be
confused with 100F).
According to the press release it has finer grain than 50, at twice
the speed.
Next year Velvia 50 will be gone from the shelves.
/Henri
Oops, forgot the url:
http
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
It's a shame that a whole generation of photographers will never know the
joy of emulsions like Ektar 25, Panatomic-X, RG25, Agfa APX-25, and other
similar emulsions.
Shel
That's what I'm feeling, as a newbie photographer. Started photographing
a bit more seriously
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Last night I tried scanning what I thought were some color negs, and the
results were awful. Upon examining the strips carefully I noticed that
there was no orange mask, so I thought that the film may have been slide
film. Tried scanning as transparency, and the results
Brian Walters wrote:
G'day all
I recently picked up a nice SE (Special Edition?) version of the ME on
Ebeagh. It's in great condition apart from an exposure meter anomaly
which I can live with for now.
As far as I was aware, the only differences between this version and
the standard ME were the
Mark Roberts wrote:
Graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sure they have. The guy that owns JC Photo often posts over on the analog
photography users group apug.com.
apug.com appears to be the Asia Pacific Utilities Group
:(
It's dot org.
/Henri
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Last night I found a roll of Kodak RG25 in the back of the fridge. It's
about three years out of date, iirc. What sort of results can be expected
from this film? Fogged? Color shift? Other things? Do I need to tell
the lab anything to adjust development?
Shel
Is it
Frantisek wrote:
Hi,
recently, I got access inhouse to a Nikon V ED, the 4000
dpi 35mm scanner. Although I prefer optical prints, I have to
submit mostly digital files by now. Which is not a problem as I
shoot digitally, but now I need to scan some of my older film.
Before, I would have
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After much though tonight,i think what happened was we didi not have developer,but fix,so
we
fixed,stopped,fixed then washed.
No developer means no images. Yes, if you just fixed twice you get a
clear roll.
Nothing can be done to save it now.
/Henri
Jens Bladt wrote:
I guess the Sweeds had lot of stuff made like this. The Sweedich Pentax
website they once had a watch with PENTAX written on it. I never bought one
though. I have a Pentax double key-ring - I use it to keep my Swiss Army
Knife.
Jens
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Don Sanderson wrote:
Thanks Mike,
I think I understand the process, what I'm trying to
figure out is how the scanner in the store does
what it does the way it does. ouch!
I have a negative scanner, this was a How does it
work? experiment gone awry. ;-)
Just thought scanning some 6x6 would be nice.
Andre Langevin wrote:
Thanks for the data on the optical quality of the Pentax 1,000mm F8
lens.
Would anyone know what one would one go for in mint condition with case?
RW
My guess is a buck for each mm (a general rule I've heard a few times)...
Andre
Wow, 28mm would make $28. Thats cheap!
Andre Langevin wrote:
And remember that wide-angles are reversed telephotos...
So they PAY me $1/mm to get a wideangle? *grin*
/Henri
Keith Whaley wrote:
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: Keith Whaley
Subject: Re: A couple of pictures
I've never seen more than one sun dog in one image! Very interesting!
I could of used a slightly wider lens than is on the 750. I was just
able to get both.
Furthermore, I
I found this at a swedish online auction, and now I proudly wear it on
my jacket.
http://www.bicekru.org/~eatfrog/pics/newpics/pentaxpin.jpg
Only thing that bothers me is that on a distance it really looks like
the gay pride rainbow, and I don't wan't to be sending out the wrong
signals just
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 16 Jan 2005 at 23:00, Frantisek wrote:
...but surely many people are helping it into the grave by saying it
is all over the internet. If you are so happy with digital, why the
need for voicing it so strongly? It's a tool, not religion.
I think you are mislead if you
William Robb wrote:
Digital is another step, a logical step, in that trend.
It's evolution.
William Robb
Then this is my prediction:
Soon everybody will use cameras that are integrated in our mobile
phones, with lousy quality and sharpness, and maybe about 6mpix. ;-)
Can't get any more convenient
Graywolf wrote:
Actually as far as I know I started using the term MXen about 15 years
ago on rec.photo.equipment.35mm to foil the Pseudo Engish Experts who
insisted that MX's was incorrect (it is not). It did not take long, a
couple of months, before I saw lots of people using 'Xen for all
David Mann wrote:
About two weeks earlier than expected, my new film scanner (Minolta
Multi Pro) arrived today.
The only real complaints I have so far
[snip]
- Dave
My scanner, a Minolta Scan Dual IV is just going on his way back to
Minolta. Broke down after 2 weeks of small use.
They say it'll
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are alternatives to the #625 battery.
Wein makes a replacement that is mercury free:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/product/96457/WE625/REG/437
Cheap and affordable too..
Cheers
Dave
You can also use Zink-Air batteries, for hearing aids.
Very cheap, don't last very
Luigi de Guzman wrote:
On Monday 03 January 2005 15:23, Jens Bladt wrote:
A friend of mine has a young daughter, who wanted to try her dads old
grammophone/record palyer.
After having put the record on the turntable she wanted to place the pick
up on the record and asked: Where does it start,
Oooh, aahh, uuuhhhrrrggghhh. I'm so frustrated I just want to scream.
A couple of hours ago I was scanning some slides, and then when I
pressed the eject button to change the slides mounted, the scanner
suddenly just made a quiet br sound and didn't push the
slide-holder out.
After that,
Collin R Brendemuehl wrote:
Unfortunately it's not a Pentax shot.
http://www.photocritique.net/g/s?00Z0Yn
The scan added some nice contrast to an otherwise dull, cloudy winter
scene.
The wife would like this one enlarged. I'll probably need to print @
a grade 3.
Collin
You impress at a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just curious. Digital still can't do Infra-Red, right?
One advantage film still seems to have.
Doe aka Marnie
Actually, it can. Different results with different cameras though.
http://www.bicekru.org/~eatfrog/pics/newpics/IR-3.jpg
you need a cooled sensor.
Henri Toivonen wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just curious. Digital still can't do Infra-Red, right?
One advantage film still seems to have.
Doe aka Marnie
Actually, it can. Different results with different cameras though.
http://www.bicekru.org/~eatfrog/pics/newpics/IR
Joakim Johansson wrote:
I agree with you, the price is a little bit high. But the prices in Sweden
are higher than elsewhere, I really dont know why!
/Joakim
Sweden never was Pentax-country. Still isn't. That we have already
found out at fotosidan, right? ;-)
There aren't very many
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004, Don Sanderson wrote:
So, $15.50 for EX- with original metal hood,
VMC skylight, Vivitar 2x and all 4 original
caps isn't too bad? big grin
Please stop this conversation, I need to work, rather than dream of
going about with my K135/2.5
Hi again,
while I was reading on about Efke's slow films I stumbled again upon a
film that I read some good stuff about a while ago.
The name of the film was Gigabitfilm and supposedly a techpan-like film
with extreme resolution and minimal grain.
I found a place in Germany (fotoimpex.de) that
I'm a bit curious about these films, they are VERY cheap to order from
Germany and I have read some comments that they are incredibly sharp
with minimal grain. So I'm considering to buy a 10pack and try it out.
Though I read somewhere something about limited red sensitivity and that
you get a
Graywolf wrote:
They are the same as the old Adox films. The are rather old fashioned,
but if you like the old stule look, as many of us do, they are great.
The 25 has finer grain than Panatomic did. The 100 has nothing special
to recomend it over other 100 speed films but many of us used the
I just ordered the Minolta Scan Dual IV yesterday, it wasn't very
expensive and I have heard good things baout it.
/Henri
Thibs wrote:
What about a Microtek ArtixScan 1800f. It is a film scanner but only
1800dpi.
Or what about a Canon Canoscan 5200F (it is 2400x4800 dpi) ?
mike wilson wrote:
Henri Toivonen wrote:
mike wilson wrote:
Fred Widall wrote:
Actually Frank and myself live at (approx) 43.5 N, 80.5 W
so we're actually closer to the Equator than the North Pole. A couple
of hours drive north of here on the way to a place called Tobermory,
there's a road sign
mike wilson wrote:
Fred Widall wrote:
Actually Frank and myself live at (approx) 43.5 N, 80.5 W
so we're actually closer to the Equator than the North Pole. A couple
of hours drive north of here on the way to a place called Tobermory,
there's a road sign marking the 45th parallel.
We do get lots
Thibs wrote:
I got this lens from Ebay and quiclky put it on another purchase (also
from Ebay) which were Ricoh bellow bellow+tubes+reverse adaptor 49mm
(at 30euros total, not a bad price).
I notice that after staying a couple hours reversed on the bellow, the
front thing (not piece of glass,
Fred wrote:
A photo slightly less rarely
Could we ~please~ not change from PAW ?
If everyone does his/her own thing, it will make it more difficult
for those of us who manage their list mail with filtering.
Thanks for your consideration.
Fred
Agreed, I filter PAW etc. straight to the
Paul Stenquist wrote:
On Nov 21, 2004, at 4:23 PM, Henri Toivonen wrote:
Agreed, I filter PAW etc. straight to the trash.
Really? You don't want to see anyone's work? How odd.
Not through mail. PDML is just too active for me to read and look
through everything.
So I get my picture-fix elsewhere
Harri Haavisto wrote:
Have good photos, though season in Finland is now very poor for
photography (dark day round and no snow).
Harri
You shouldn't complain down there in Tampere, I'm living on the Swedish
side of the border of Tornio, in Lappland! ;-)
Here the sun goes down right about now, at
Peter Belak wrote:
Would you say the description (opt. MINT-) was OK?
Absolutely not.
/Henri
Tom C wrote:
I walked outside and noticed a weird sky Sunday evening, checked to
see if a geomagnetic storm was in progress, and started shooting.
Space weather sites categorized it as extreme.
Here's a few quick picks. All were TIF's taken with the *ist D at ISO
400 and the FA 43/f1.9.
I went out with my SFX and the MX, loaded the SFX with my consumer grade
Tokina 70-210 and my consumer grade 2x Vivitar teleconverter.
I don't expect sharp pictures, I'll be happy as long as there's
SOMETHING on that roll.
Sheesh, I freezed my butt off out there, it was -2 and the time here is
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
I know you asked about lenses other than K-mount, but ...
I may give the M75-150 a go for a portrait. It's reasonably sharp and a good range,
with optimum sharpness definitely from 80-120mm.
Sincerely,
C. Brendemuehl
I got me one for portraits, it has a nice feel and
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: Don Sanderson
Subject: RE: Samples from today's shoot with the FA 80-320
I'll second that.
I expect that by the time he gets on with it, the only person still
reading will be some troll in Lapland.
William Robb
Something wrong with
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: RE: BW developers and Tri-x ??
If you read what Bob said, and what I said earlier: there is no faster
shutter speed on some cameras. The Leica is limited to 1/1000
second, and
numerous Leica shooters prefer not to go
Tom Reese wrote:
Patrick asked:
Let's say I want to under/overexpose a shot by 1/3 of a stop on an MZ-S how
do you you do it ?
You can get precise exposure adjustments by adjusting the ISO speed. For
example, to give it just a little more light, adjust the ISO to 90 for ISO
100 slide film. Setting
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
The Canonet G-III QL17 would be comparable to the SMC Pentax-M 40/2.8 but also sports
a faster 40/1.7 lens. The Canonet 28 is either Auto or Aperture Preferred. No manual
mode. And probably not as good as (but I've not compared shots) as the G-III or the
Pentax.
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
The Big Brother G-III QL17 is better, but harder to find, and more
expensive.
But definitely not uncommon. I find them regularly in thrift shops and have owned
several over the years.
Collin
I should've added, over here.
I have searched for one since i'd
So I wanted something a bit shorter than the 135, but longer than the 50
for my portrait shots.
I checked the prices for 85's and 100's and they were really expensive
(I'm poor!).
But last week I stumbled upon this little zoom which range fits me
perfectly. The comments on Stans page said it
Sarbu Alexandru wrote:
Hi there...
Here I am again, quite sad this time...
I don't know why, but I *had* to look my *new* ME
Super to the wrong person. Of course, she thought the
camera is *empty* so she stick a finger inside. Now
there is a huge fingerprint, right on the mirror :sad
grin:
Can it
Jon M wrote:
I've noticed that people tend to post
Enabled:whatever when they aquire new equipment.
That doesn't really match the definition of enabled
I have in my head, is there some PDML-specific
significance of this word?
It means that someone has bought a new toy. :-)
/Henri
frank theriault wrote:
On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:59:32 +0200, Henri Toivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
frank theriault wrote:
IIRC, they were Japanese solid bodies; Did the more expensive ones
have a neck-through-body design (a la B.C Rich)?
I have a BC Rich under my bed, very nice
1 - 100 of 190 matches
Mail list logo
