It's a matter of context. In the narrow context of a focus mode selector
I'm sure most or all people understand what the labels mean. Besides, l've
never seen lower case letters used to label acronyms on switches or dials.
Even so, IMO medium format has the prior claim over manual focus to the
Misprint, I meant BTW (for by the way) but had a lysdexic moment :)
There's no denseness in not comprehending my gibberish, so no apology is
needed.
Regards,
Anthony Farr
- Original Message -
From: Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What is BTY? I apologize for being
AF MF has always meant medium format, and it is not the prerogative of the
AF members of one brand specific mailing list to overturn a long established
AF tradition.
AF Regards,
AF Anthony Farr
Oh, Anthony, you take the most fun out of life :)
Don't take it so seriously...
Good light,
True enough, but don't hold your breath waiting for the wide world of
photography to follow your lead. I for one will not contradict the
established
usage.
BTY I'm not deaf.
Regards,
Anthony Farr
- Original Message -
From: Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(snip)
THE MEMBERS OF THE PDML HAVE
- Original Message -
Subject: Re: MF or MF: was: Anyone shoot MF exclusively?
AF MF has always meant medium format, and it is not the prerogative of
the
AF members of one brand specific mailing list to overturn a long
established
AF tradition.
AF Regards,
AF Anthony Farr
Hmmm
Artur,
I think that, in this case, where there probably wasn't room to
spell out the words, the context makes the meaning perfectly
clear. After all, you can always Read The Friendly Manual
(RTFM) if you are not sure. We have had some messages here
where there was no clue in the context, in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2002 8:52 AM
Subject: Re: MF or MF: was: Anyone shoot MF exclusively?
True enough, but don't hold your breath waiting for the wide world of
photography to follow your lead. I for one will not contradict the
established
usage
On Sat, 19 Jan 2002 16:15:41 -0500, Tom Rittenhouse wrote:
Actually it means Massey-Furguson. MF is painted right on their tractors. On
the other hand it means something that starts with moth and and ends with
ker. But, then you are welcome to use it however you wish.
Tom,
You owe me a
True enough, but don't hold your breath waiting for the wide world
of photography to follow your lead. I for one will not contradict
the established usage. BTY I'm not deaf.
Thanks for your reply, Anthony.
I guess I didn't make myself clear enough. I also have no intent of
changing
MF has always meant medium format, and it is not the prerogative
of the members of one brand specific mailing list to overturn a
long established tradition.
Well, Anthony, I really don't care whether MF or mf stands for
medium format or manual focus or much fuss (especially since
one can
Friday, January 11, 2002, 6:04:25 PM, Chris wrote:
I think the best way (and it was used here too some way back) is this:
mf = manual focus
MF = MEDIUM FORMAT (it's bigger than sf, small format, eh g ?)
CB Personally, I prefer MedF and MF, since I tend to write AF instead of
CB af. But I'm
the
cessation of reliance on the auto-exposure capabilities, but it's
control layout similarity with the K-1000 and in fact most older MF
Pentax bodies makes it great.
That's just my 2cents (US).
-- John
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 11:37:57 -0600
From: Delano Mireles [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Anyone shoot
:57 -0600
From: Delano Mireles [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Anyone shoot MF exclusively?
Hi all,
I'm in the process of searching for a MF camera and was wondering if
anyone here shoots MF exclusively? Trying to decide if I should ditch
my ZX-5n, upgrade my digital olympus for snapshots
Thursday, January 10, 2002, 9:13:37 PM, Fred wrote:
I was just wondering the same thing Fred, is there a different abbreviation, I
always get confused (easy for me)...
I think the best way (and it was used here too some way back) is this:
mf = manual focus
MF = MEDIUM FORMAT (it's bigger than
There is also an adapter to use the Pentacon Six mount lenses on the Pentax
645.
Kent Gittings
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Evan Hanson
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 3:33 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Anyone shoot MF
Delano,
What would you use the 35mm system for if you had a MF system to
do portraits with?
If the answer really is nothing, get rid of the 35mm.
I constantly try to tell myself the same thing...:-)
I have both a 645 system and a 35mm system. I keep telling myself
that I should concentrate
I think the best way (and it was used here too some way back) is this:
mf = manual focus
MF = MEDIUM FORMAT (it's bigger than sf, small format, eh g ?)
Personally, I prefer MedF and MF, since I tend to write AF instead of
af. But I'm sure most of us can decode it regardless of the style.
I saw what I believe to be Verichrome Pan 620 listed on the BH web
site. Wasn't someone asking about that the other day? Ann, perhaps?
http://www03.bhphotovideo.com/default.sph/FrameWork.class?FNC=ProductActivator__Aproductlist_html___220893___KOVP620___REG___CatID=2721___SID=EB8FD97A9E0
Tom
I poked around a little more, and BH has a couple of pages listing
1110, 127, 620, and 828 film.
Tom Rittenhouse wrote:
Why not just say 120? Yes there used to be all kinds of roll film out there
but I think the only one in general use any more is 120. You can still find
220 and 70mm but
PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 8:17 PM
Subject: Re: MF or MF: was: Anyone shoot MF exclusively?
I poked around a little more, and BH has a couple of pages listing
1110, 127, 620, and 828 film.
Tom Rittenhouse wrote:
Why not just say 120? Yes there used to be all kinds of roll
- Original Message -
From: Delano Mireles [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Anyone shoot MF exclusively?
I'm in the process of searching for a MF camera and was wondering if
anyone
here shoots MF exclusively? Trying to decide if I should ditch my ZX-5n,
upgrade my digital olympus
Delano, as I've gotten more comfortable with Medium Format I've found it
consumes an increasing amount of my photo time. Currently when I shooting I
probably at 70% MF and 30% 35mm. That being said I think it's only fair to
point out that I usually spend twice as much time setting MF pictures
I do own a bunch of Pentax 35mm gear, shoot BW almost exclusively, (no I won't
sell it you vultures G) but I find myself shooting almost exclusively with my
6x7 gear. Those huge negatives just do something for me, I just had a 50x60
print done and you can see the individual strands of the
On 10 Jan 2002, at 11:37, Delano Mireles wrote:
Hi all,
I'm in the process of searching for a MF camera and was wondering if anyone
here shoots MF exclusively? Trying to decide if I should ditch my ZX-5n,
upgrade my digital olympus for snapshots and go MF for everything else. I'm
really
wouldn't drop 35mm. Maybe reduce its usage.
My MF work was with the so-convenient Fuji FA645.
A wonderful little tool.
Hope these thoughts are useful.
Collin
--
From: Delano Mireles [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Anyone shoot MF exclusively?
Hi all,
I'm
On Thursday, January 10, 2002, at 01:34 PM, Norman Baugher wrote:
(handheld at 125, I think the 6x7 shutter vibration complaints are
bogus).
I think that much of it has to do with technique. I've had plenty of
luck at 1/60 and 1/30 with MLU...the mirror lockup switch is so
convenient
I was just wondering the same thing Fred, is there a different abbreviation, I
always get confused (easy for me)...
Yeah, I'm easily confused, too, Norm - g. Actually, it's usually
not a problem to decode the MF abbreviation - the context (in
relation to AF, or in relation to 35mm, etc.) is
=INSP30
---
From: Paris, Leonard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Anyone shoot MF exclusively?
FA645 or GA645?
FA645 woulld make it more in line with Pentax. ;-)
Len
- ---
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go
If budget is a big concern one of the great things about the Mamiya 645
system is that with a cheap adapter they can take Pentacon Six mount lenses.
These are widely available and are very cheap. An Arsat 80mm 2.8 lens can
be had new for around $50. Combine that with a $200 m645 or m645j body
On 10 Jan 2002 at 11:37, Delano Mireles wrote:
Hi all,
I'm in the process of searching for a MF camera and was wondering if anyone here
shoots MF exclusively? Trying to decide if I should ditch my ZX-5n, upgrade my
digital olympus for snapshots and go MF for everything else. I'm really
- Original Message -
From: Delano Mireles [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi all,
I'm in the process of searching for a MF camera and was wondering if
anyone
here shoots MF exclusively? Trying to decide if I should ditch my ZX-5n,
upgrade my digital olympus for snapshots and go MF for everything
- Original Message -
From: Delano Mireles [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Anyone shoot MF exclusively?
Thanks for the opinions! Artur, sorry for the lack of clarity on my part.
I meant Medium Format when using the abbreviation MF.
NPRBLM:)
Artur
-
This message is from the Pentax
I've been shooting some MF for 25 years or so, but I recently got much heavier
into it with the purchase of a Pentax 6x7. In part because it's a new toy, and
in part because it's much easier to work with than the TLRs I used in the past.
I was just starting to feel guilty about neglecting my
33 matches
Mail list logo
