Scott Loveless wrote:
Since joining the list in February, I've experienced
enablement in the worst way.
I don't know, enablement can be very useful!
I have acquired no less than
one body, three primes, one zoom, a camera bag, everything
necessary to process black and white film, a film
mike wilson wrote:
Olympic games in London 2012.
OPDML, anyone?
Time to move :-(
Malcolm
mike wilson wrote:
Olympic games in London 2012.
OPDML, anyone?
Time to move :-(
Malcolm
I think the virus spreads as far as Manchester.
It's good for sport here, right now. For the future? What concerns me is
that resources will not be used well. There was an opportunity
frank theriault wrote:
I think that the rest of the world learned from Montreal '76.
I doubt that debacle will ever be repeated. In fact, IIRC,
the Olympic Commitee now makes sure that a proper funding
plan will be in place for each bid, to avoid such problems.
I hope you're right, but
Steve Jolly wrote:
IIRC they're building one enormous athletics stadium that
will stay after the event, but many of the other events will
be re-using existing facilities (eg Wimbledon, Wembley,
Lords, the Dome) or held in stadia that will be dismantled
afterwards and shipped off to
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I was thinking about this little survey earlier, and how
few of the replies indicated that the digital cameras were
their favorites. I've not counted replies and made any
effort to organize or tally the results, but, just from
reading, it seems, even amongst
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
So, what's your favorite Pentax - even if it's one that you
don't use or use very much.
LX.
Malcolm
mike wilson wrote:
On an industrial estate in town (east coast of England) next
to the sea, is a tripe factory. Luckily, the prevailing
winds are westerly. When they change, business drops off in
the town centre. We used to have a brewery on the west side
of town. Boiling hops is not
mike wilson wrote:
Any chance of sending some rain down south?
Would sir like the three inches in two hours storm (a la
Sunday evening) or the full monsoon?
Hmm! Tricky one.
I'd rather like to gradually phase a monsoon in, with an option on a big
storm. Might be able to take some
mike wilson wrote:
You must be living in a different country to me. Are you on
chalk? We have a clay substrate here and it takes much
longer for the rainwater to disperse, if it's not causing
flash floods.
I can guide this back on topic to photography at this point, because in the
last
Steve Desjardins wrote:
We talk a lot about the art and process and digital and film, etc. I
still think the greatest impact of photography is that it can
extend a moment in time for us fragile and mortal beings.
Nice shot and story.
I very strongly agree with that; it's the images we
William Robb wrote:
Either pay full price or steal the product?
Surely there must be other acceptable options.
World politics perfectly described in two lines.
M
Graywolf wrote:
Now just what does it take to equal the Anti-Digital
Intentional Photography Camera*?
*My Crown Graphic 45, for those who don't know. I added the
Intentional Photography (from another thread) because it
does one shot at a time GRIN.
Kodak Holosuite Plus. So good, you
mike wilson wrote:
Not necessarily. On the route of this plethora of upgrades
the company finds that it has to relocate its manufacturing
(which it has already removed most of the human element from)
to outer Mongolia or some other place where labour is cheap
and unprotected, in order
Christian wrote:
Point taken that DSLRs are disposable And no I don't
expect to be using
my current DSLR in 30 to 40 years. I expect to be using
whatever is mostly
current at that time.
Well, you have to laugh. Do you all remember the excitement not that long
ago about the introduction
William Robb wrote:
Minilabs are doomed anyway.
Print counts from digital won't keep them open, and while I
am seeing a blip
at the moment, I am sure that is all it is.
As much as i would like it to be otherwise
The bulk of the people I mix with are camera owners and make no pretence of
Richard Chu wrote:
I told her to go ahead and send me that label but I would
only send the package after I receive the money order. She
emailed me the label for a Nigerian address and also arranged
FEDEX to pick up the package from my house. I wasn't at home
when FEDEX came and told
Anthony Farr wrote:
But when the *istD appeared without mechanical linkage there
was a great wailing and gnashing of teeth, because this was
not a budget camera to be dismissed as a newbies' camera.
Pentax had sent a message that it would not maintain full
backwards and forwards
Here we go again!!
-Original Message-
From: Peter Reid [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 09 April 2005 08:38
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: pentax-discuss-d Digest V05 #748
unsubscribe
{Vast amount snipped}
Malcolm
Tom C wrote:
For example here people access the net a lot from work.
Ooooh, We would NEVER EVER do that in the US! Yes to all
three (when people are shopping on the web). I've never sold
on e-bay, but as a buyer I tend to like auctions that end in
mid-evening. I like Buy it Now
William Robb wrote:
Sheep and the British have a long, sordid history.
It started with the Welsh, spread into Scotland, and then south.
Best you not ask any more questions
Triumph in marketing.
Rebranded and exported as mobile leisure centres.
Malcolm
Powell Hargrave wrote:
Great stuff Cotty.
How did you balance the exposure and what was the shutter speed?
Must give it a try if I can find some thing that moves around here.
Powell
Saturday afternoon. A lad with a football and a dad with a
camera
:-)
frank theriault wrote:
Of my mechanical Pentaxes, the MX is relatively quiet. My
LX, in comparision is like an elephant in high heels walking
down a deserted hallway with no carpet (that is to say, LOUD).
My Leica CL is pretty damned quiet, much more so that any SLR. But,
my quiet
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh, yes, in comparison with an M-series, the LX is on the loud side.
But a K1000 is REALLY REALLY loud. I'm sure it's worse than the LX.
All the ZX bodies I've encountered have the hamster sneeze
that the *istD also has.
I compared my MX to Ken Archer's ME Super
Cotty wrote:
British summers are generally cooler than summers one would experience
(say) in Australia or the United States, but a car in direct
sunshine with no breeze an temps in the 90s (30s C) is quite
possible here in the UK. If I am working, leaving the vehicle
in the sun (currently
Cotty wrote:
Sure, except I'd need about a dozen little fridges ;-) I
keep three dozen spare tapes and several cases of equipment,
10 inch monitor, etc etc. One of the rear seats had to go to
make room - still not enough in the back. The heat does weird
things to the tapes...
Right!
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Bill, Your comment worries me since I'm considering a D. The
implication of your statement seems to be that the D has been
around long enough to have some samples that are worn out.
Is that really what you meant, that the D, and, I suppose,
other cameras of its
William Robb wrote:
The problem with the LX is that it had a lot of internal
modifications made during it's twenty year run. If Frank's camera
needs parts from an early model run, they may very well not be
available.
Noted. I feel a serial number check coming on.
Malcolm
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
When the hot weather arrives, go to the corner drug store
or Wal-Mart
and buy some of those foam rubber covers for keeping your beer can
cold on the beach. They cost $1.00 each, they can hold viewfinders
(or lenses
frank theriault wrote:
Word back from the repair shop is that it can't be repaired.
Needs parts that are unavailable.
I'm really sorry to hear that Frank and I hope you have another fully
functional LX shortly. Are the parts for the LX finally drying up all across
the globe now? :-(
This
Paul Ewins wrote:
I learned the hard way that early 6x7s can't be repaired. The
one on the right is the early version (mk 1?) with the
checker spool release while the left hand one is the later
style, still without MLU.
My early one (non-MLU) was bought at a time when most people were
It's not often that my two hobbies of Pentax photography and amateur radio
collide, but I think this is something very interesting:
www.gentles.info/KAP
It might interest some of you.
Malcolm
Fred Widall wrote:
The discussion regarding who would buy the new D645 made me
wonder how much you folk spend on your career/hobby/addiction.
I consider photography my main hobby, but being on the fugual
side of miserly, I calculate that my total expenditure for
equipment over the past
Cotty wrote:
A few years ago I bought one for 650 GBP from a US eBayer and
sold it 12
months later for 750 GBP to a UK eBayer. It was really mint
and cased, in
original box.
750 GBP today is over 1500 bucks.
So the one I was offered a couple of years back, boxed as new for £400 or
Rob Studdert wrote:
OK we've now got quite a few DSLR owners on board with a bit
of use behind them, how about a quick informal usage survey?
For those DSLR users with 35mm gear who thought before buying
their DSLR that their 35mm film usage would:
Remain the same?
Be
Cotty announced:
Malcolm ?
Noted in diary. It's a far better timetable than mine at present, which is
involving dismantling part of the kitchen and attending to the joys and
various excuses of builders and gas fitters why they can't arrive/finish/get
parts or turn up at all (sound familiar Bill
Cotty wrote:
The author of Morse, Colin Dexter, is a sprightly old lad in
his 70s and lives in a plain house in north Oxford, just off
the ring road. Filmed him many times. If the reporter with me
is a woman, he *loves* flirting with them and is a juicy old
sod! But very nice with it,
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
It seems that Pentax may soon be coming out with a
replacement for the istD. How many istD owners would be
interested in trading in the D for the newer camera, and what
features or improvements would be needed in order to make that choice?
Not me. I waited a long
Paul Stenquist wrote:
BH is still bundling a new D with the DA 16-45 for $1599.
This used to be accompanied by a $200 rebate. I'm not sure if
that rebate is still in effect. BTW, I finally got my rebate
check from Pentax this week.
Took about six months and one letter of complaint.
I've
OK Paul,
The delay wasn't the vendor's fault. It was a Pentax rebate.
Based on other comments here, I would say that they are
usually very pokey when it comes to sending the rebate.
Fair enough, but voucher/rebate/whatever schemes just seem a bizarre way of
getting to the bottom line.
Hi Frantisek,
Tuesday, February 15, 2005, 10:19:12 AM, Malcolm wrote:
MS I note that Cameraworld in London are selling some at a fraction
MS that I bought one new for. It almost looks too good to be
true. With
MS that in mind, has anyone bought a refurbished digital camera? A
MS second
I note that Cameraworld in London are selling some at a fraction that I
bought one new for. It almost looks too good to be true. With that in mind,
has anyone bought a refurbished digital camera? A second body would be very
useful, but not if I am going to get a lemon.
Malcolm
David S wrote:
It doesn't matter how many megapixels you have. A crap
picture is still crap.
How true.
But is it better to have quality equipment and know how to use it to make
the best of it, whatever your location and light conditions or fire off with
a P S digital and fix it in
Jostein wrote:
If the body has been serviced by a competent person, any of
the time-series characteristics can have been upgraded, no
matter what the number of the bottom plate says. My LX, for
example, is an early 1980 model, but have ISO range up to
3200 after replacing the ISO wheel.
Collin R Brendemuehl wrote:
My wife does Creative Memories scrapbooking. Hobby home business.
She's got a long row of albums. Nicely done as well. And many of my
4x6 artsy stuff made the cut.
They fair better than mine. I doubt if the albums in this house are opened
more than once a year.
Lots of photo opportunities.
Malcolm
Bob W wrote:
not all of Europe. Here in the UK people of my generation and
older are like some kind of measuring-system axolotls, stuck
forever in a transitional phase.
We accept post weight in grams, but still buy (or at least ask) for meat by
the pound or fraction thereof. We buy petrol
Dave Brooks wrote:
One last question,i hope, foilks.:-)
Of the folks on this list, or friends of folks on this list:
1- How many have bought the camera and had to return it soon
after with a malfunction ie:
backfocus
problems,battery problems,to
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
{snip}
Are new coatings strong enough to withstand lots of cleaning?
Some demonstrations that have been reported seem to indicate
that such is the case, but do you want to underwrite the cost
of that experiment long term?
Does your lens even have a newer coating?
Paul Stenquist wrote:
I used my 6x7 extensively for a couple of years. I shot a lot
of magazine pics and stock with it. It had become my main
system. It was much better for me than 35mm because I could
get very good scans with a cheapo Epson 3200. Whereas with
35mm I would really have
Don Sanderson wrote:
If he has a low rating it's probably A.
If he has a high rating it's probably B.
As a seller I always *pretend* it's C. :-(
B
I agree with your comment on C
Malcolm
Don Sanderson wrote:
Most sellers are OK, but there definitely are some major A-Holes too!
There are some real nice people out there but I have had a *problem* buyer
this week. Here's the story; I sold an item very cheaply with a faulty
display (which I mentioned in HUGE print in the listing).
Cotty wrote:
Help me out here people. Anyone think sniping is rude ? If so, why?
No, not rude at all. If you are going to snipe something, it's obvious that
you are certain (even if no bids present) that this item will attract
interest - possibly a great deal. Bidding early with your limit is
Cotty wrote:
That a Pentax 67 she's wielding in the top pic?
There was an article in one of the magazines that came with a Sunday
newspaper a week ago (Telegraph?) and it was most certainly a well used and
battered 67 she was using in that.
Malcolm
Mark Roberts wrote:
PENTAX for your precious moments
PENTAX as one of the leading companies in the field of flexible
endoscopy offers an extraordinary wide product range
Ouch! ;-)
Ouch is right!
Good light!
I dunno... what kind of flash attachment would you use?
A gold LX -
Cotty wrote:
Har, my wife went to a local venue with a big display but I
was too tired, and watched it from the back 'yard' anyway -
it was only a quarter mile away over the fields. It was okay
but I was cooking at the same time and to be honest I don't
have a great visual interest in
My copy arrived on the mat today starting with page 31 and the pages often
repeat themselves. A whole batch? Anyone else?
Malcolm
Cotty wrote:
On 6/11/04, Malcolm Smith, discombobulated, unleashed:
My copy arrived on the mat today starting with page 31 and the pages
often repeat themselves. A whole batch? Anyone else?
Malcolm
I cancelled my subscription a while ago.
Being paper they're always late for news
Boris Liberman wrote:
Just some minutes ago I got my dirty hands on *istD of my own. Wow!
Hurray! I cannot believe it.
Excellent! I remember mine was brilliant fun.
Malcolm
Sid Barras describes how to become a multi-millionaire by breeding pitt
bulls:
Here's the rub: when my in-laws found out we had gotten a
dog, they were happy-- until Grandma found out it was a pitt
bull. Immediately, she told us we had to get rid of the dog.
Or else she would never come
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/mailboxes/catbox.html
Very good, first class in fact.
Malcolm
I came across the first book and bought it some weeks ago, the second is a
recent purchase and has helped both myself and answered a few questions some
friends had regarding eBay. Of course such books are only as relevant as the
day they go to print, but they give the general idea of what and how
Caveman wrote:
http://www.webaperture.com/gallery/photos/50301
There's a set of at least four of these! Witch into tree is good.
Malcolm
William Robb wrote:
Be afraid.
http://www.smart.com/
I am pretty sure I could carry one in the back of my truck.
Car? Nah!! This is the self-propelled spare wheel option for a 560SEL. Any
time you see one, there will be a big Merc with the boot open with a flat
tyre nearby.
Malcolm
When I think of the word 'classic' in connection with cameras, I immediately
think of anything M42 or perhaps K2s other early bayonette fitting
equipment. I was quite surprised in the 16.10.04 edition of Amateur
Photographer for an advert (pg5 for those interested) promoting their own
classified
Keith Whaley wrote:
Words don't have much meaning any more, do they? It falls in
line with an increasing lack of respect by those in the first
1/3 of their allotted life span.
Superlatives have long since attained mediocrity status.
Little or no need for the word anymore, in fact!
When
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
If Pentax were to produce one last new film cameras, what
would you want it to be?
An updated LX, using the same type of materials.
Thing is, I wouldn't buy one. Whilst I am a regular user of two LXs, what is
in it for me to buy a new film camera? The LX does all I
Pat White wrote:
The MZ-S already has three of those four things. Twenty-five
years ago, the LX was a great camera, but better cameras have
been made since then. Would you want a brand-new 1980
Mercedes or Corvette (never mind the collector value)?
Actually, yes. I have a specialist
mike wilson wrote:
If that's what I think (Land Rover?) then it is a better
example than the other two mentioned. There is nothing as
good in most ways as a LR for the job it does. Same for the
LX. For both of them, minor tweaks would improve them but
everyone wants different tweaks.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Auggie Wren's Christmas Story
By Paul Auster
Ah yes! Thanks for reminding me of this Shel, I am sure I have your full
posting on a Zip disc.
Malcolm
Bob W wrote:
Hi Bob,
Comments interspaced:
There is one thing I have wanted to do for a while, which I
read in a
photographic magazine (but it takes a lot of doing). In the
magazine
example, it was a tree in a field,
I know of a similar series - perhaps the same one. It is
Jostein wrote:
Hi Jostein,
Comments interspaced:
Considering we are bombarded every day by images from television,
computer
screens, papers and magazines and advertising hoardings, it's
amazing we
have the capacity to be stopped in our tracks from time to
time by a
particular
Jens Bladt wrote:
I can't access ebay. Anyone else have this problem?
No problem here. My wife would prefer that I had your situation though.
Malcolm
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
If one were to look at all the photos I've posted here you'd
see a broad range of subjects, many light hearted and perhaps
funny (to me, anyway).
The homeless photos are decidedly in a minority. What is
interesting, however, is that so many remember only the
Bob W wrote:
it's a bit of a stretch to generalise from discussion about
one particular photograph to the whole subject of
professional photojournalism.
Guilty as charged Bob, but with as many posts as the PDML gets per day,
there are too many specifics to hit. Treat it as an observation.
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
In this venue, film will provide that durable history.
Because negatives endure.
Take lots of pictures. Record everything and everyone.
And document it. Journal it.
Peserve it. Creative Memories-it.
Make it an important part of life.
Because it is. More than
Just watched this programme where they were judging pictures for a calendar
sent in by the viewers on various nature themes. They showed a slide sent in
depicting a larvae on a twig, with a long Latin name, which looked just like
a bit of red striped toothpaste. Which is exactly what it turned out
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
You know, I've been lambasted here many times for presenting
such photos, and have always wondered about how it is that so
many people here fall all over themselves when it comes to
complimenting sunsets and waterfalls and insects of pretty
colors and odd shaped
William Robb wrote:
What I find amazing is that all these well educated multi degree'd
people end up working minumum wage jobs when if they had chosen more
wisely they could be making $25.00/hr. or more working in a trade,
with less stress.
I have several co-workers in my store with 2 and
mike.wilson wrote:
Can anyone spot in the page a question that asks you
precisiely what you bought? You are given five generic
options on the previous page. This seems to alter only
questions 7 9.
http://comserv.prodregister.com/pentax/tfe01.shtml
I note it goes into a secure screen
Frantisek wrote:
MS What a question to pose with a Hitchhikers thread going on!
MS Particularly when there are so many come back lines from the
MS 'Restaurant at the end of the universe' scenes (book 2 -
for those who prefer the written word).
You surely mean the 4-legged steak
Tom C wrote:
Some things you may not know about William:
excellent photos and commentary snipped
Quite made my evening that has!
Night night all.
Malcolm
Frantisek wrote:
Yes, but is it _ethical_ to clean the fungus ;-) ?
What a question to pose with a Hitchhikers thread going on! Particularly
when there are so many come back lines from the 'Restaurant at the end of
the universe' scenes (book 2 - for those who prefer the written word).
Malcolm
William Robb wrote:
Hypothetically, if you can afford to flush the money you spend on the
lens and it's cleaning down the toilet, then it is worthwhile.
Well it wouldn't be a bog standard lens* I would consider in this condition.
My experiance has been that as soon as I take a gamble like
J. C. O'Connell wrote:
I always believe to is best to buy rare items whenever you
can if the price is right and upgrade later when you get the
chance. You never know, it might clean up and if it doesn't
its only temporary until something better comes along. If
nothing better ever comes
William Robb wrote:
Thats the only LX finder I don't have.
You are missing one?? *stunned*.
Malcolm
Graywolf wrote:
I would say, that depends. It depends on whether you are a
user or a collector. It is kind of hard to use a lens you
don't have, anticipating the acquisition is half the fun of
collecting.
For my own query, I would say I would only want a lens that can be used, so
it boils
mike wilson wrote:
For me, there would be a number of factors:
1. How rare is it?
2. How bad is the fungus?
3. How much does it cost?
4. How much will the repair cost?
5. Will the repair be successful?
6. How badly do I want it?
With fungus, given its penchant for cross fertilisation,
Bob W wrote:
Yes. I had a Leica lens with fungus which I sent away for
inspection by some Geordie lab technician - Mike Wilson, I
think his name is g.
He shook his head, tut-tutted a little, and said something
beginning I'm afraid it's bad news, Sir
LOL!
I dropped the lens in the
John Whittingham wrote:
Had a 85mm f2 'M' with light fungus, looked like spiders web.
Cleaned by camerarepairer (eBay ID) for £25, excellent
service never had any problems since, he also did an
excellent job on a Refconverter A that was badly infected.
I'm looking at sending a 75mm 2.8
Graywolf wrote:
Many of us here on the list sound a lot like those folks who screamed
because their car no
longer came with a starting crank.
I still do, but it was only a few years ago. I'm still getting used to wind
up windows. Isn't technology great :-)
Malcolm
Pål Jensen wrote:
How are you
supposed to build up a customer base of DSLRs if it's almost
impossible to buy them? As for advertising them
REPLY:
I wasn't aware there are problems getting hold of an *istD.
The next installment is right around the corner and Pentax
surely
frank theriault wrote:
You talking to me?
I don't see anyone else here, so you must be talking to me! vbg
Time for you to cover your mirrors again Frank g.
Malcolm
Bob W wrote:
I took it in 1979. One of the things that amazes me about
it now is
that there were no cars parked on the street. Nowadays it would
probably be solid. I took it in a ship-building town called
Barrow-in-Furness, which was economically on its last legs
back then.
I
Paul Stenquist wrote:
Because I have to travel for some shoots at the expense of
the studio that books them. The travel expenses can be more
than a couple thousand dollars. Some of the clients specify
digital, so I can't really count on a film backup. Plus, I
don't want to have to be 50
William Robb wrote:
They can't leave a long timeline between models like they used to.
That just won't cut it in the marketplace anymore. The istD is a year
on the shelves now, I don't think they can leave it there by itself
for more than another few months.
Pentax have never frustrated me
frank theriault wrote:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2663940
Very nice.
I hope you told the Nikon boys that a boat and a 50mm lens would afford a
good shot from underneath :-)
Malcolm
frank theriault wrote:
Pentax: 'Nuff said:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2665132
LOL!
Canons to the left of him,
Nikons to the right of him.
Malcolm
Peter J. Alling wrote:
Northern Hemisphere, Southern New England, USA Average Daily
Temperature for the past few days 80° F. (Quite hot
actually), unfortunately no.
Ah, rats! Mind you, I don't work well in those sort of temperatures. I hope
it is a simple fix.
Malcolm
mike wilson wrote:
No sense of adventure, Malcolm. 8-)
Well, obviously my concern is for the camera equipment in such conditions
(ahem, cough splutter).
My eldest son was invited on a school camping trip last term; when I asked
him if he wanted to go, he gave me a look of horror normally
1201 - 1300 of 1859 matches
Mail list logo
