without totally destroying
> the subtly of the sky. It's a compromise and I guess a bad one.I have a
> version where the building is much more vivid but the sky goes much
> lighter and less interesting.
>
> John Forbes wrote:
>> Peter,
>>
>> I didn't comm
Peter,
I didn't comment on the other two because I normally only comment on
pictures I like.
The reason I didn't particularly like the other two, or this, is that they
seem very flat on my monitor, rather like a poor scan of a faded print.
I'm not saying my monitor is superbly well-calibra
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 11:01:02 -, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > "John Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > > Just thought I'd share this one - a quick snap I took
>> > > a few hours ago at the Computer History Museum.
>> > >
>> > > http://panix.com/~johnf/temp/BillAndJo
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 20:39:40 -, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of Cotty
>> Sent: 15 November 2006 20:30
>> To: pentax list
>> Subject: Re: Using a Super Tak w/ istDS- A challange to the list?
>>
>
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 21:03:56 -, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 15/11/06, Christian, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>> What colour is the sky in your world?
>
> Any colour I want it to be.
Cotty loves grey.
John
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 17:53:18 -, John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Personally I think there are a lot of unrealistic expectations
> about lenses for a DSLR being smaller and lighter than lenses
> for a 35mm film camera.
>
> There will, of course, be some cases where the smaller sensor
On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 13:58:45 -, Don Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
. I'd really like to see some inside pictures.
Give the lizard your camera.
John
> D
>
> Bob Shell wrote:
>> You beat me to it. I was about to say that any house that pug ugly
>> deserves to be attacked.
>>
>
> I would probably word it like "The strong lines work together and against
> one another making this a
> powerful image".
>
> If that's not it, I'm sure John Forbes can find the problem. ;-)
>
> Tom C.
Paul got there first. Fast and steady wins the
On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 19:54:19 -, P. J. Alling
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not even worthy of a response.
Nonetheless, it seems to have elicited one. :-)
John
>
> John Forbes wrote:
>> On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 20:20:26 -, Lon Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
ctors including internal cost-cutting
> measures?
>
>
>
> Tom C.
>
>
>> From: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
>> Subject: Re: Bad news
>> Date: W
Frank, don't spoil things for Tom by bringing in facts. Tom is an
artist. He wants emotion.
John
On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 19:38:05 -, frank theriault
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/8/06, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> How devoid of facts was the Bloomberg article?
>
> "first half n
I agree with you in principle, but there are exceptions.
Sorry you had to waste bandwidth.
John
On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:38:36 -, John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 10:30:41AM -0000, John Forbes wrote:
>> I am sorry to be the bearer of bad tidi
On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 11:35:04 -, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> ...
> JF> If Pentax keeps going like this, we'll have to go back to discussing
> JF> pictures.
>
> Just do not understand why this is _bad_ news? Explaine me silly,
> please.
Well, it's bad news for those on the list wh
I am sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101&sid=aj9runQF0f_4&refer=japan
http://tinyurl.com/wpvss
If Pentax keeps going like this, we'll have to go back to discussing
pictures.
John
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.oper
Very nice indeed.
John
On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 23:56:29 -, Bruce Dayton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I rather like this photo. Maybe it is the gathering in the middle
> that catches my attention. When viewing the B&W vs Color version, I
> really like the color version for the cows and foregr
On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 14:23:58 -, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Markus Maurer"
> Subject: AW: AW: Another Pentax Story
>
>
>> Hi Godfrey
>> Work indeed meens something else for me as well as I would never say
>> that an
>> 8 year old boy is s
On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 15:25:02 -, David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On 11/5/06, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Anyway, this is something I'd like to explore more as I do believe that
>> digital does, in many instances and for many photographers, alter the
>> look
>> and
On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 21:17:28 -, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Please stop with your grammer lessons.
Quite right. Start with the spelling lessons. Grammar can follow.
> Blame Bill Gates.
Anybody but the real culprit.
My ms-outlook/word program
> Is automatically changing
On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 22:20:38 -, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Christian"
> Subject: Re: Pentax's Tatamiya Interview Part II, #1
>
>
>
>>> That an actual iris activator, or a simulated iris activator?
>>>
>>
>> Is that an iris actuator or ar
My expectation (hope) is that on long lenses, USM will be significantly
faster. On short lenses I don't need or expect much difference.
I really don't see the point of USM on short lenses (because they focus
fast enough), and I don't see the point on long lenses if it doesn't yield
a speed
Yes, not bad. :-)
John
On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 06:41:11 -, John Coyle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Beautiful shot Tom.
>
> John Coyle
> Praxis Data Solutions (www.epraxisdata.com)
> Brisbane, Australia
> - Original Message -
> From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday,
On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 03:13:33 -, Joseph Tainter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ken, thanks very much again. We are in your debt.
>
> "Q: 'K10D can utilize the built-in SSM lenses, i.e., DA* lenses. Does
> this mean faster AF speed?'
> "A: 'I do not believe Pentax¹s AF has been slow even on the
On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 21:49:11 -, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The best protection for cyclists is to learn how to cycle properly in
> traffic. This means behaving like the driver of a vehicle, obeying the
> traffic laws, changing lanes properly, positioning yourself on the
> road properly
On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 22:26:38 -, John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 09:12:22PM -, Bob W wrote:
>> Your wise neurosurgeon might care to reflect on this:
>> (http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/effectiveness.pdf)
>>
>> "... the average distance cycled per person
On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 22:55:02 -, graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, wearing a helmet is a way to avoid paranoia. Anything that makes you
> feel safer, actually increases your real world risks. Any competent
> survival instructor will tell you the safest thing to do in a real
> survival s
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 12:36:48 -, Scott Loveless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On 10/31/06, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Ann - others who may be interested:L
>>
>> Have you ever read "The Silent Miaow?" The entire book was translated
>> from
>> a manuscript written by a cat.
I agree. It's the best of a good gallery, in my view.
John
On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 16:36:23 -, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> " River's End " by Harald Rust
>
> http://pug.komkon.org/06nov/klaloc.html
>
> Quite lovely. Taken near the Kalaloch Lodge, or futher north (south)?
> Sun,
> si
On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 13:03:49 -, frank theriault
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/1/06, graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I have only rode bicycles for a short while, less than sixty years, but
>> I have never fallen off and landed on my head. Most of my contemporaries
>> managed to ge
Absolutely superb picture, Paul.
John
On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 09:57:15 -, Kostas Kavoussanakis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Oct 2006, Paul Stenquist wrote:
>
>> 135 Kodak TMZ 3200: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=800895
>
> Extemely interesting picture, but I have to co
m for you.
> jco
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> John Forbes
> Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 3:45 AM
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re: Designing a Sensor
>
> On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 04:02:45 -000
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> John Forbes
> Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 6:55 PM
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re: The JCO survey - I should start lurking more often.
>
> On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 20:
On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 02:16:34 -, Paul Stenquist
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't know. but given a choice, I'd rather have a range of 100 to
> 1600 than 200 to 3200.
Me too. In fact, I'd rather 50 - 800.
JOhn
Paul
> On Oct 31, 2006, at 9:12 PM, Joseph Tainter wrote:
>
>> How does
On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 04:02:45 -, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> My guess would be the sensor "base" speed is the speed
> At which no extra light ( slower sensor speed ) will improve
> The image quality any signifigant amount. No sense in
> Going slower if it doesn't improve anyt
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 20:20:26 -, Lon Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A flagship is a flagship, and if there's a K1D in the future, it should
> be as
> complete as the LX was in its day.
Quite right. As complete, not more. I don't recall that the LX mounted
screw-thread lenses with
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 23:42:11 -, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 31/10/06, Joseph Tainter, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>>
>> P.S. And meanwhile, we can all switch to spending a year or two
>> speculating about the noise levels in the 12 mp CMOS sensor of the K1D.
>
>
> ROTFLMAO
Unfortu
Excellent Ken,
thanks very much.
John
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 16:40:36 -, K.Takeshita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On 10/31/06 11:30 AM, "Sylwester Pietrzyk", <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Ken, it has just come!!! Post time is 4:33 AM, it arrived to me
>> around 5 PM :-))) Many thanks for t
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 13:07:12 -, frank theriault
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/31/06, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> "Every time I see an adult on a bicycle", said H G Wells, "I no longer
>> despair for the human race"
>>
>> Cast your despair to the four winds, and enjoy:
>> http
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 09:51:20 -, J and K Messervy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> That's what I plan to do, however I need to convince my wife that the
> funds
> need to be spent. :-/
The perennial problem.
John
> - Original Message -----
> From: "John F
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 09:34:54 -, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 31/10/06, David Savage, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>> On 10/31/06, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> On 30/10/06, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed:
>>>
>>> >A corollary to the corollary
>>>
>>> Less talk about
100GB is nothing. Buy a few external hard drives, and duplicate all your
pics on more than one drive.
John
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 08:15:04 -, J and K Messervy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I give up, I've tried repeatedly to burn image folders to dvd with zero
> success. I have a dvd burne
Definitely separately.
I went in person to Pentax HQ in UK with a damaged *ist D and a damaged
12-24. I explained the problems and received a receipt for the equipment
listing the faults with both items.
I then received a quote for the repair, and paid it (in advance - that's
how Pentax op
Thanks to both of you. If you want to live and learn, read the PDML.
It's like a free and dumbed-up version of National Geographic.
Good pics, too, Mike.
John
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 06:03:49 +0100, Daniel J. Matyola
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mike:
>
> Nice photos.
>
> Thank you very much
The only intelligent thing to do is to wait and see. Uninformed
speculation by the nitwits on DPReview is not a good basis to lose sleep
over. And who is going to die because the the camera is late?
John
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 19:16:30 +0100, Joseph Tainter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jose
No, John, it's what the manufacturers are doing, by supplying different
markets at very different prices.
John
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 09:01:00 +0100, mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>>
>> From: "John Celio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>>
>> This is what the gray market is doing to the camera
It's on DPReview, which is infallible.
John
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 09:44:15 +0100, David Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Oct 27, 2006, at 3:29 PM, Adam Maas wrote:
>
>> What? More hearsay from people asking Camera salesmen, who are
>> notoriously not in the know.
>
> It's on an internet foru
Five wives? He's breaking the rules.
John
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 01:19:27 +0100, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Excellent. Wish I had a picture like that of my family.
>
> Godfrey
>
> On Oct 26, 2006, at 4:13 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
>
>> http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.
John,
I bought my first *ist D from Canada, then paid shipping, import duty and
VAT on arrival in the UK. Note that
the VAT was paid on the shipping cost as well.
It was still a third cheaper than buying in the UK. Local margins are, I
believe, similar to those in other parts of the world.
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 20:46:34 +0100, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of John Forbes
>> Sent: 26 October 2006 13:03
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 16:50:30 +0100, Joseph Tainter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...now we should return to discussing either jco or the swiss navy.
JCO and the Swiss Navy. Both equally improbable. But both, apparently,
exist. The truth is indeed stranger than fiction.
John
--
Using Ope
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 16:02:55 +0100, Scott Loveless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Give Kostas a break. He's good people. ;)
Don't you mean Kosta?
John
>
> On 10/26/06, John Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> It's fairly easy to understand, Kostas
y or unfairly.
> You keep seeming to make implications
> That the other party must have been right
> Based on my other recent unrelated posts
> And that is NOT the case.
> jco
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Joh
ve no
>> Right to be continuing with this
>> Nonsense based on your incorrect
>> "hunches".
>>
>> JCO
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> Of
>> John Forbes
>> Sent:
"hunches".
>
> JCO
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> John Forbes
> Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 4:47 AM
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re: Dealing with eBay vendors. Was: Re: The JCO survey
>
It's fairly easy to understand, Kostas, and it isn't crap.
And Cotty isn't "folks", he's Cotty. As English presumably isn't your
first language, I am sure you will not mind me pointing out that a final
"s" usually denotes a plural. As "folk" is a collective noun, it is
impossible to address
I flew to New York by Pan-Am the day before the same flight was blown up
over Lockerbie.
On my return (the flight was almost empty), security had been beefed up:
"What's in that bag?"
"Cameras"
"Oh, that's fine."
Presumably I have an honest face, and the security woman thought I would
admi
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 11:38:07 +0100, J and K Messervy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> When my K10D finally arrives, I'm trying to decide which lens to get
> with
> it.
Which lens? Singular? You're on the wrong list. Come back when you have
at least twenty. :-)
But to answer your question,
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 09:09:00 +0100, mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>>
>> From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Date: 2006/10/26 Thu AM 08:50:02 GMT
>> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
>> Subject: Re: Dealing with e
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 09:42:35 +0100, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 25/10/06, John Celio, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Snowflake_300um_LTSEM,_13368.jpg
>>
>> Now, when do you think Pentax will come out with a macro lens that can
>> do
>> that?
>
> Tha
The irony is that everytime somebody asks people to stop adding to the
thread, they are themselves adding to it.
If you don't want others to post, take your own advice!
John
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 16:14:46 +0100, Peter Jordan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I know the words "Cotty " and "understa
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 09:04:00 +0100, mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>>
>> From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Date: 2006/10/26 Thu AM 01:15:02 GMT
>
>> But you are ever the contrarian,
>
> Is that similar to, but not
m. That is a major step forward.
John
> jco
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> John Forbes
> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 10:29 AM
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re: Dealing with eBay vendo
parent about it. Shel has pointed out that he
definitely wasn't satisfied. Because you accept an offer to resolve a
dispute doesn't necessarily make you satisfied. It just means you have
ended the dispute.
You are being a little obtuse in ignoring this point.
John
>
>
aracteristically silly, one has left the list,
and the last has left the planet. No guesses as to the identity of that
one.
John
>
> Tom C.
>
>
>
>
> Original Message Follows
> From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Pentax-Discus
ay he did considering how that deal was
> Handled by both me (good) and him (bad).
>
>
> jco
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> John Forbes
> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 5:28 AM
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mai
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 07:24:40 +0100, graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Boy, there must be something out there lessoning me. I had a recent deal
> that I was not too happy about. Not the item, but the way the seller was
> acting. In the end it worked out, but I was up in the air about
> feedback
did. And that
> Pretty much will end the story and define who
> Is the guilty party.
> jco
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> John Forbes
> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 4:38 PM
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
(or yours)
> That he was unsatified when it was all done
> Because I offered to reverse it all for him
> If he wanted to and he didn't want to.
> jco
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> John Forbes
> Sent:
So let's see what was actually written.
John
On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 20:33:44 +0100, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> See my last post, it's a fucking lie.
> I used no such abusive language or manner
> With him on the ebay deal and went out
> Of my way to see he was treated fairly
> Th
On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 20:15:06 +0100, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John,
>
> We all know how JCO has responded to the thread regarding the aperture
> simulator. I'm not saying his response is/was correct.
>
> After the last several weeks, the list certainly did not *need*
> additional
> exam
In my view Shel was at fault by not leaving you a neg. I imagine you have
browbeaten a number of other dissatisfied sellers into behaving the same
way.
John
On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 20:29:43 +0100, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> No, he did share private emails by stating
> They w
But it obviously wasn't settled to Shel's satisfaction.
I assume that Shel accepted a compromise, being the least unsatisfactory
option open to him. Had he known what he was going to get, Shel would not
have contracted with JCO in the first place.
And he won't again! That shows how satisfie
On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 02:26:44 +0100, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> And what do you call someone who
> Comes to a MUTUAL agreement on
> A business matter and then goes
> On to tell hundreds of people
> I ripped him off? That's incredible.
> He refused a full refund I offered and acc
You've been complaining about the K10D, and it hasn't even been released
yet!
John
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 23:36:55 +0100, Joseph Tainter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Apparently it is available in the U.K. Awaiting mine from Adorama. No
> > word when it will hit these shores. I'm more excit
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 02:42:17 +0100, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> They didn't just drop FD support, they IMPROVED
> Their entire SLR system too via EOS lensmount. Pentax is dropping full
> K/M support WITHOUT any improvements to their
> Lensmount at all.
>
> How many times are we
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 05:07:27 +0100, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Putting a simple $5 part back into the current DSLRs
> Is not something impossible like FD or M42
> DSLRS which use totally different very old lens
> Mount. Why are you so sure its gone forever?
I suspect it may be
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 18:16:41 +0100, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Keep calling back until you get someone to listen.
>
> Never take a "NO" answer from someone that doesn't have the authority to
> say
> "YES".
Sound advice!
John
> Tom C.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Original Message Follows
>
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 19:34:27 +0100, Christian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> J. C. O'Connell wrote:
>> No commas I am careful with, it's the apostrophe I leave
>> Out on purpose like in don't cant etc.
>> jco
>
>
> HAR! You forgot the comma after "No"!
>
> "No, commas I am careful with, it's the
;t claim to be
> Perfect but you need to understand I am a touch typist
> And I type real fast. I leave out the "'" on purpose
> As its one of the keys I don't use often and I often
> Have to look to hit it correctly which I don't like to do.
> jco
>
The word you are looking for is "you're" (short for "you are"), not
"your". You keep making this error. It's time you learned to write your
own (and probably only) language.
Also, you mean "it's", not "its".
John
PS: Note the correct use of "your".
> - Original Message -
> From:
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 08:04:43 +0100, Roman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hjKijLOj9s
Regular as a British Rail train.
John
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/ma
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 12:13:51 +0100, Christian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hey let's see how long it takes for JCO to hijack this thread! :-)
I think he's starting to tire.
Or is that wishfull thinking?
John
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
--
PDML
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:38:58 +0100, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think that's common sense... however as the buyer, twice I've had the
> seller refund the money to me, and then the item has shown up. In one
> case
> I shipped the item back because it ended up being not as expected. In
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 19:32:28 +0100, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Don't you understand that this is a key turning point for pentax?
> They always had a backward compatiblity support when it was
> Easy and cost effective to do so and it still is. They have
> Now flip-flopped and ar
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 23:42:33 +0100, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mini PDML get together in London (UK) THIS SUNDAY October 15th.
>
> Time: 2 - 2.15pm
> Location: Outside Camden Town Tube Station
> Beacon: Cotty - 6'5" with blue cap on
> Occasion: Godfrey's UK Tour
> Highlights: Camden Market
One lesson here is always to insure for the full value - bid price plus
shipping and taxes.
John
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 18:20:46 +0100, Joseph Tainter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I hope the USPS doesnt give me the runaround saying that they fulfilled
> their duty and I cannot claim insurance.
Without the aperture simulator, they might lose half a dozen body sales.
With it, they might lose thousands of lens sales.
It's a no brainer, except, it seems, for the truly brainless.
John
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 16:14:00 +0100, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Couple hundred doll
On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 21:05:37 +0100, Cory Papenfuss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> I would save _much_ more than $100 in unbought lenses. (Which I'm not
>> going to buy anyway, Pentax, in case you are listening) So it's worth
>> much more than that to me. Count me in.
>>
> Well-said. I a
>
>>> Just because we're relatively quite about it doesn't mean that were
>>> happy about it not being there. Especially since it seems to be a
>>> purely marketing decision.
>>>
>>> John Forbes wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 17:58:38 +0100, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I want the feature very much and I am
> Sure there are millions of lens owners that do to.
Really?
Rubbish!
John
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss
Don't apologise to JC O'Connell.
He is a boring little nitwit who comes onto the list every six months or
so to wind himself into a frenzy over the lack of full support for very
old lenses.
After abusing anyone who disagrees with him (sample: "Gimme a friggin
break with your "you don?t own
On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 23:20:41 +0100, mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Perry Pellechia wrote:
>
>> My point is that a decades ago people were saying digital cameras
>> would never replace film. I do not think most people feel this way
>> today. Read this story about the first digital im
On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 09:01:46 +0100, Doug Franklin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jan van Wijk wrote:
>
>> If you had a RawShooter Pro license, the 'upgrade'
>> to Lightroom is free AFAIK ...
>
> That'd be OK if I didn't positively *hate* Lightroom. The beta anyway.
> Sucks dogs' balls for what I
aftsmanship, artistic madness, and a little dose of magic
> ;-)
>
> I like madness ;-)
>
>
>
> Tim
> Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> John
> Forbes
>
So what camera would you say is "state of the art"?
John
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 18:22:07 +0100, Tim Øsleby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes I did.
> This video proofs or more suggests that it is fast with non USM lenses
> too.
> My only concern now is the IQ. If my expectations about IQ are fulfi
On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 21:56:48 +0100, John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 04:01:08PM -0400, frank theriault wrote:
>> On 10/3/06, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Keith's wrong about us both being wrong. Keith and Christian are both
>> > wrong, so obviously
On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:47:50 +0100, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/10/06, mike wilson, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>> You and the Neanderthal in the same room would come to blows.
>
> Clarkson? He makes me laugh. I've never met him. My wife thinks he's a
> dork.
Don't argue with the
On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:33:02 +0100, mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Cotty wrote:
>
>> On 2/10/06, Simon King, discombobulated, unleashed:
>>
>>
>>> I was away for a week so just read the news...
>>> Congratulations and the best of luck. Any chance of any "Top Gear"
>>> stuff
>>> (give
hine (Norton was driving me nuts on my old computer):
>
> <http://www.avast.com/eng/avast_4_home.html>
>
> Dave
>
> On 10/2/06, John Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I recommended AVG to a friend, and it appears they have gone pay-only.
>> I've always use
I recommended AVG to a friend, and it appears they have gone pay-only.
I've always used a free version. Does anyone know if it is still possible
to get a free version, or do they have any other recommendations?
TIA
John
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2
You're a clever man to be able to predict what prices will be in January
2006.
John
On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 01:09:27 +0100, Kevin Waterson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Been away for a while touring Australia, still doing it in fact.
> Work, not play :/
> anywho...
>
> From: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECT
101 - 200 of 1875 matches
Mail list logo
