Incident light meters work well too.
On 2/9/2011 9:40 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote:
Dammit! I knew I was forgetting something last time I left the
camera shop! Been meaning to get one of those for a while.
I've clearly got a lot to learn, and appreciate all the help
everyone's giving me.
The problem with an incident light meter is that the measurement should,
though it doesn't have to be, depending on conditions, be made from the
/subject/ location.
On 2/9/2011 10:18 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
On Feb 9, 2011, at 10:05 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote:
Thanks for the explanation,
Pentax has a newly scanned, (the old scans pretty much killed all of the
example photos, the new ones are much better), K1000 manual on line in PDF.
http://www.pentaximaging.com/files/manual/K1000%20Instruction%20Manual.pdf
On 2/11/2011 4:05 AM, Thibouille wrote:
Hey that's funny, John.
I
The problem with an incident light meter is that the measurement
should,
though it doesn't have to be, depending on conditions, be made from the
/subject/ location.
in my experience that's rarely necessary - you can usually find some light
right where you are which is the same as that
On 3/6/2011 2:36 PM, Bob W wrote:
The problem with an incident light meter is that the measurement
should,
though it doesn't have to be, depending on conditions, be made from the
/subject/ location.
in my experience that's rarely necessary - you can usually find some light
right where you are
On 04/03/2011 14:13, Bob Sullivan wrote:
Thanks Mike,
I wonder why the Kx and DL2 are so light.
Regards, Bob S.
The temptation to say aperture simulator is almost overwhelming.
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:03 AM, mike wilsonm.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote:
On 04/03/2011 00:22, Bob Sullivan
mike wilson wrote:
On 04/03/2011 14:13, Bob Sullivan wrote:
Thanks Mike,
I wonder why the Kx and DL2 are so light.
Regards, Bob S.
The temptation to say aperture simulator is almost overwhelming.
steady on...!
ann
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
Thanks Mike,
I wonder why the Kx and DL2 are so light.
Regards, Bob S.
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:03 AM, mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote:
On 04/03/2011 00:22, Bob Sullivan wrote:
Well Mike, now I've got to check. I judged by feel as I still have a
roll in the LX.
The *ist DS is
I wonder why the Kx and DL2 are so light.
Regards, Bob S.
Penta-mirror instead of a proper prism?
kris
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
On Mar 4, 2011, at 8:18 AM, Krisjanis Linkevics wrote:
Penta-mirror instead of a proper prism?
K-x doesn't have a prism? What about K-r?
--
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA USA
eew...@bellsouth.net
--
PDML
The K-x and DL cameras lack a Pentaprism, getting rid of the glass would
account for it
On 3/4/2011 8:13 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote:
Thanks Mike,
I wonder why the Kx and DL2 are so light.
Regards, Bob S.
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:03 AM, mike wilsonm.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote:
On 04/03/2011
Like the K-x it's all done with mirrors...
On 3/4/2011 10:07 AM, Eric Weir wrote:
On Mar 4, 2011, at 8:18 AM, Krisjanis Linkevics wrote:
Penta-mirror instead of a proper prism?
K-x doesn't have a prism? What about K-r?
On 02/03/2011 04:30, Bob Sullivan wrote:
Jens,
The LX will be incredibly small and light in your hands.
I was going to take issue with you over this but, checking numbers, I
find that _my_ (sorry, Bob) two DSLRs are in the minority in being
lighter than the LX, with one being significantly
Well Mike, now I've got to check. I judged by feel as I still have a
roll in the LX.
The *ist DS is relatively light but not the K-10, K-20, K-7 or K-5.
Regards, Bob S.
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 3:17 PM, mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote:
On 02/03/2011 04:30, Bob Sullivan wrote:
Jens,
On 04/03/2011 00:22, Bob Sullivan wrote:
Well Mike, now I've got to check. I judged by feel as I still have a
roll in the LX.
The *ist DS is relatively light but not the K-10, K-20, K-7 or K-5.
Regards, Bob S.
LX = 565g (inc FA1)
DS = 605g
K7/5 = 670g
K10 = 793g
K20 = 900g
Kx = 515g
DL2 =
Well...
You get the film developed. Use a pro lab or similar.
Then get the film scanned. Use a the good old Nikon Coolscan - mine is a
Coolscan 4000 ED. Not bad at all.
Or use a lab of great reputation.
Then edit your images in Photoshop or any equivalent image editor (GIMP).
This is what I
Jens,
The LX will be incredibly small and light in your hands.
Move fast, be decisive, capture the moment..
Regards, Bob S.
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Jens p...@planfoto.dk wrote:
Well...
You get the film developed. Use a pro lab or similar.
Then get the film scanned. Use a the good old
February 2011 7:56 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
I just happened to notice last night, after I sent this message, that
the Plus-X wasn't C-41 process film. I think the shop where I bought it
will process it, though.
I still don't have a dark
Hey that's funny, John.
I didn't know KM and K1000 was 'Full frame' metering instead of CWA,
as I assumed.
Interesting :) Learnt something.
--
Thibault Massart aka Thibouille/Thibs
--
Photo: K-7, Sigma 28/1.8 macro, FA50/1.4, DA40Ltd, K30/2.8, DA16-45,
DA50-135, DA50-200,
Walter, about those metering and mid gray things.
A simple but very effective thing our teacher asked us:
Take a pic of a white object (like sheets of paper), a gray object and
a black object.
To stay simple, the three objects will have about the same color (gray
of course).
This is simple and
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Collin Brendemuehl
coll...@brendemuehl.net wrote:
-Original Message-
From: David J Brooks [mailto:pentko...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2011 01:57 PM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On Thu
The exercise they had us do was to mount three 8x10 cards together -
white+gray+black.
Then we had to photograph the three cards using reflected-light metering
on the white, bracketing -2, -1, 0, +1, +2; ... on the gray, bracketing;
... on the black, bracketing.
All shots had to be produced
From: Walter Gilbert
Thanks, David/Collin/Paul.
I think I understand, now.
I was thinking that since the snow was so glaringly bright that it would
throw the meter off irrespective of the actual subject -- assuming the
subject isn't the snow itself.
But, as I understand you all now, as
Thanks for the tips, John!
I'll give those a try this evening and see what I come up with.
-- Walt
On 2/10/2011 9:31 AM, John Sessoms wrote:
From: Walter Gilbert
Thanks, David/Collin/Paul.
I think I understand, now.
I was thinking that since the snow was so glaringly bright that
The palm of your hand is also reasonably close to 18% as well.
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:31 AM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote:
From: Walter Gilbert
Thanks, David/Collin/Paul.
I think I understand, now.
I was thinking that since the snow was so glaringly bright that it would
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 1:02 PM, David Parsons parsons.da...@gmail.com wrote:
The palm of your hand is also reasonably close to 18% as well.
Frank and i cannot use this method. We wear gloves most of the year.
Dave
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:31 AM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote:
-Original Message-
From: David J Brooks [mailto:pentko...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2011 01:57 PM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 1:02 PM, David Parsons parsons.da...@gmail.com wrote:
The palm
From: David Parsons
The palm of your hand is also reasonably close to 18% as well.
Unless you have really dark hair. ;-D
-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3433 - Release Date: 02/09/11
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail
Honky hands, like mine, will generally put you one stop under. But that works.
I can do the math for one stop:-).
Paul
On Feb 10, 2011, at 2:25 PM, John Sessoms wrote:
From: David Parsons
The palm of your hand is also reasonably close to 18% as well.
Unless you have really dark hair.
Ha!
The most reliable of all appendages.
On 2/10/2011 1:25 PM, John Sessoms wrote:
From: David Parsons
The palm of your hand is also reasonably close to 18% as well.
Unless you have really dark hair. ;-D
-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version:
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 1:02 PM, David Parsons
parsons.da...@gmail.com wrote:
The palm of your hand is also reasonably close to 18% as well.
Frank and i cannot use this method. We wear gloves most of the year.
get some 18% gloves.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 01:57:55PM -0500, David J Brooks wrote:
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 1:02 PM, David Parsons parsons.da...@gmail.com
wrote:
The palm of your hand is also reasonably close to 18% as well.
Frank and i cannot use this method. We wear gloves most of the year.
Dave
My bike
From: Walter Gilbert
So, I now have this K1000 and a decent array of lenses to use on it.
Having finally figured out how to properly operate the camera after
wasting one roll of Fuji Superia X-tra 400 due to the fact that I opened
the back of the camera prematurely thinking I had it completely
On Feb 8, 2011, at 22:23, Walter Gilbert wrote:
So, I now have this K1000 and a decent array of lenses to use on it. Having
finally figured out how to properly operate the camera after wasting one roll
of Fuji Superia X-tra 400 due to the fact that I opened the back of the
camera
used UltraMax, so can't help you there!
HTH
John Coyle
Brisbane, Australia
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Walter Gilbert
Sent: Wednesday, 9 February 2011 2:23 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Advice solicitation
Thanks, John! I did notice that difference just after I sent this
message last night.
I do believe the camera shop where I bought the film will develop it --
for how much, I don't know. It may be all for naught, though,
considering the film appears to be a year out-of-date. I'll give it
On Feb 9, 2011, at 15:55, Walter Gilbert wrote:
BTW -- I did note that the date stamp on the Plus-X box is 01/2010. I assume
that's the expiration date and not the date of manufacture. With that in
mind, I can't help wondering if it's still worth shooting. The shop had it
on a shelf,
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Walter Gilbert ldott...@gmail.com wrote:
, and nearly wasting a roll of
Kodak Plus-X 125 by not properly affixing it to the advance mechanism
(didn't securely set the notches onto the teeth), I think it's time I ask
for a little guidance before I proceed any
, February 9, 2011 05:46 PM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Walter Gilbert ldott...@gmail.com wrote:
, and nearly wasting a roll of
Kodak Plus-X 125 by not properly affixing it to the advance mechanism
(didn't
cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose
-- Jim Elliott
-Original Message-
From: David J Brooks [mailto:pentko...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2011 05:46 PM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 11:23 PM
-Original Message-
From: David J Brooks [mailto:pentko...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2011 05:51 PM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Collin Brendemuehl
coll...@brendemuehl.net wrote:
Good
Good news. Thanks, Charles!
-- Walt
On 2/9/2011 4:39 PM, Charles Robinson wrote:
On Feb 9, 2011, at 15:55, Walter Gilbert wrote:
BTW -- I did note that the date stamp on the Plus-X box is 01/2010. I assume
that's the expiration date and not the date of manufacture. With that in mind,
Thanks for the tips, David!
As for prints from the 400CN, I'll probably just have negatives made,
then scan them at home. Any prints will come from the digital scans,
which I assume will help produce less-funky results.
I've looked around Flickr at scans made from UltraMax and, from what
to gain what he cannot lose
-- Jim Elliott
-Original Message-
From: David J Brooks [mailto:pentko...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2011 05:46 PM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Walter
Or a fry-cook at The Happy Gizzard.
On 2/9/2011 4:57 PM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
What should those of us that made it to grade 7 do then
If you've made it past the 6th grade then you should consider becoming a brain
surgeon or a double-naught spy.
Sincerely,
Collin Brendemuehl
Or a fry-cook at The Happy Gizzard.
I don't know that one.
My reference was to Jethro Bodine.
(For the youth among us, a character from the Beverly Hillbillies, c. 1965.)
Sincerely,
Collin Brendemuehl
http://kerygmainstitute.org
He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he
On 2011-02-09 19:15, Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
Or a fry-cook at The Happy Gizzard.
I don't know that one.
My reference was to Jethro Bodine.
(For the youth among us, a character from the Beverly Hillbillies, c. 1965.)
The Happy Gizzard was the restaurant Granny opened, staffed with Jed,
: Wednesday, February 9, 2011 07:19 PM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On 2011-02-09 19:15, Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
Or a fry-cook at The Happy Gizzard.
I don't know that one.
My reference was to Jethro Bodine.
(For the youth among us
From: Walter Gilbert
I just happened to notice last night, after I sent this message,
that the Plus-X wasn't C-41 process film. I think the shop where I
bought it will process it, though.
I still don't have a dark room or supplies -- nor a tank or dark bag --
to work with, so I'll have to
Thanks, John!
I put all of my film in the freezer as soon as I got home, since I'm
just not sure how often I'll use it. Whenever I get ready to use it,
I'll pull it out and stick it in a zip lock bag with a little silica gel
pouch overnight to keep any condensation from getting to it.
If the scene you're shooting is primarily snow covered, you should overexpose
by about two stops. At a centered meter reading, you'll get gray snow. The
alternative is to take your meter reading from a gray card.
Paul
On Feb 9, 2011, at 9:20 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote:
Thanks, John!
I
Dammit! I knew I was forgetting something last time I left the camera
shop! Been meaning to get one of those for a while.
I've clearly got a lot to learn, and appreciate all the help everyone's
giving me.
Thanks, Paul.
On 2/9/2011 8:34 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
If the scene you're
The few shots I've taken so far, I've dead-centered the meter as closely
as possible at 125 under pretty bright conditions (snowy). Hopefully
they'll still look OK.
-- Walt
No!!! Always overexpose snow by 2 stops.
Why?
Because an averaging meter expects a mid-gray tone.
The result will be
Thanks for the explanation, Collin.
When Paul said to overexpose, I was actually thinking it sounded
counter-intuitive -- that you'd want to under-expose in a snowy
situation. But, it makes sense now that you explained that the meter
assumes a neutral grey.
So, I'm assuming that in
More for dark subjects, like a black dog. When you get to very low
light situations, the rules completely change since you need to deal
with reciprocity failure.
So, I'm assuming that in extra-low-light situations, I'd want to
under-expose by a couple of stops in that case.
--
David
When Paul said to overexpose, I was actually thinking it sounded
counter-intuitive -- that you'd want to under-expose in a snowy
situation. But, it makes sense now that you explained that the meter
assumes a neutral grey.
So, I'm assuming that in extra-low-light situations, I'd want to
On Feb 9, 2011, at 10:05 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote:
Thanks for the explanation, Collin.
When Paul said to overexpose, I was actually thinking it sounded
counter-intuitive -- that you'd want to under-expose in a snowy situation.
But, it makes sense now that you explained that the meter
On Feb 9, 2011, at 10:18 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
On Feb 9, 2011, at 10:05 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote:
Thanks for the explanation, Collin.
When Paul said to overexpose, I was actually thinking it sounded
counter-intuitive -- that you'd want to under-expose in a snowy situation.
From: Collin Brendemuehl
Or a fry-cook at The Happy Gizzard.
I don't know that one.
My reference was to Jethro Bodine.
(For the youth among us, a character from the Beverly Hillbillies, c. 1965.)
For a really obscure Beverly Hillbillies reference ... Donna Douglas
appears as the unmasked
Thanks, David/Collin/Paul.
I think I understand, now.
I was thinking that since the snow was so glaringly bright that it would
throw the meter off irrespective of the actual subject -- assuming the
subject isn't the snow itself.
But, as I understand you all now, as long as there's a dark
Most older SLR meters are center weighted, so something in the middle of the
frame influences the meter reading more than on the edges. But generally
speaking, you need a balance of dark and light to achieve the reflectivity of
gray. The newest matrix meters compare what the camera sees to some
Excellent.
Thanks again for all the help everyone's offered. It's been the
photography 101 class I never got to take.
I'll just have to burn through some film and make notes as I go. I can
already tell that the $40 I spent on that K1000 will probably be the
best investment I'll ever
So, I now have this K1000 and a decent array of lenses to use on it.
Having finally figured out how to properly operate the camera after
wasting one roll of Fuji Superia X-tra 400 due to the fact that I opened
the back of the camera prematurely thinking I had it completely wound
(didn't
Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Walter Gilbert
Sent: Wednesday, 9 February 2011 2:23 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
So, I now have this K1000 and a decent array of lenses to use on it.
Having
64 matches
Mail list logo
