An: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Betreff: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
on 12/24/03 9:18 AM, graywolf at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hum? I figure that 127 is the equivalent of a 31mm on 135 camera. And the
105
is
the equivalent of a 46mm. I have always found it strange that people do
Thomas wrote:
if you think large chips are going to replace medium-format,
why then not make a body in MF-style (cubic body with perhaps
interchangeable backs for digi 35mm-film, interchangeable viewfinders
like prism and waistlevel of course) that takes 35mm lenses?
There once was the
Mark wrote:
Cost reduction will come from three factors (in increasing order of
significance):
Improvement in yield
Economies of scale
New, less expensive, manufacturing processes
Canon has been hammering away on #3 and their success has helped achieve
#2. Everyone else is lagging
Steve wrote:
The APS sensor may survive for the same reason 35 mm took off over MF,
i.e., it was smaller, cheaper, and good enough.
It is pretty clear that the smaller sensor are here to stay for the foreseeable future
effectively defining a new standard and format.
Pål
Was he a pediatrician or a pediatrist?
Len
* There's no place like 127.0.0.1
-Original Message-
From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 3:01 AM
To: pentax list
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
On 23/12/03, [EMAIL
35mm film. the point of going larger than APS is to replace medium format.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2003 10:41 AM
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
If Pentax
This one time, at band camp, Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
highly unlikely for a long time to come. if they can make a full frame
sensor camera at an affordable price, they will be able to make an APS frame
sensor at a much cheaper price. if the sensor also delivers as low noise as
Hello,
if you think large chips are going to replace medium-format,
why then not make a body in MF-style (cubic body with perhaps
interchangeable backs for digi 35mm-film, interchangeable viewfinders
like prism and waistlevel of course) that takes 35mm lenses?
There once was the Rollei 3003 in
Chris Brogden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Y'know, it's funny how, when using other formats, rarely is it said that
an 80mm lens for a 6x6 is equivalent to a 50mm lens for a 35mm camera.
When's the last time you heard a 4x5 user ask What's that lens in
Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This one time, at band camp, Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
highly unlikely for a long time to come. if they can make a full frame
sensor camera at an affordable price, they will be able to make an APS frame
sensor at a much cheaper price. if the
Now that`s a digital camera! I wonder how big you could go with
that, 4ft.X 6ft.?
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California
Mark Roberts
Heck, that's only a 24 x 36 mm sensor! That ain't nuthin' compared to
this 37 x 52 mm beauty:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0312/03121901fujifilmback.asp
Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Ryan Charron
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
Hi Robert,
My Pentax 35mm FA f2 makes a great 52mm lens on my
*ist D.
At the risk of being pendantic, how can a 35mm lens be anything other than a
35mm lens, great or otherwise
Hum? I figure that 127 is the equivalent of a 31mm on 135 camera. And the 105 is
the equivalent of a 46mm. I have always found it strange that people do this
stuff, because one works differently in different formats, one tends to use much
closer points of view with a large format camera and
Mark Roberts wrote:
There's an inexorable trend for sensors to increase in size and decrease
in price.
A 24x36mm chunk of silicon wafer will always be a 24x36mm chunk of
silicon wafer, and there's no real reason that I can see to expect the
price of silicon to plummet. Yields will probably go
A very big if. More to the point. would they release a FF camera and
stop producing APS? I don't think of the APS sensor as a stop gap. I
think it's a new format thet will persist for a long time.
Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA 24450
- Original Message -
From: Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 12:12 PM
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
A very big if. More to the point. would they release a FF camera and
stop producing APS? I don't think
, California
- Original Message -
From: Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 8:12 AM
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
A very big if. More to the point. would they release a FF camera
and
stop producing APS? I
If memory serves me right, a 127 on a 4x5 is much tighter than a 31 mm
on a 35 mm camera.. But i'll have to get out both cameras and do some
visual comparisons to be sure. In any case, the reason photographers
tend to communicate in terms of 35mm focal lengths is because the
customers
Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Roberts wrote:
There's an inexorable trend for sensors to increase in size and decrease
in price.
A 24x36mm chunk of silicon wafer will always be a 24x36mm chunk of
silicon wafer, and there's no real reason that I can see to expect the
price of
]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 7:32 AM
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
Hello,
if you think large chips are going to replace medium-format,
why then not make a body in MF-style (cubic body with perhaps
interchangeable backs for digi 35mm-film
- Original Message -
From: Robert Chiasson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 11:22 AM
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
This is what I believe. Manufactures like to have an experimental run that
can be walked away from in case
the incremental cost for a full frame sensor in medium format is a lot less
than for a 35mm system.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Steve Larson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 12:34 PM
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag
: Leonard Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 12:42 PM
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
Hey, I know pros that used medium and large format cameras for years and
never owned anything other than the normal lens for their cameras
This one time, at band camp, Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
think of the opportunities they never captured because they locked
themselves in to one FOV. i have 35mm lenses covering from 15mm to 500mm and
there are many things i do that are simply impossible without such a range.
i'm not
Thats a big if. Whats not a big if is that I have an *istD now with
no prime under 85mm and one zoom 15-30 that work with the camera. So I
don't need to buy a bunch of new lenses, I need at least one lens
somewhere around 28-50 mm to fill that gap.
rg
Kevin Waterson wrote:
This one time, at
Hi Robert,
My Pentax 35mm FA f2 makes a great 52mm lens on my
*ist D.
Sincerely,
Ryan Charron
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 21:43:13 -0600
From: Robert Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sometimes its great, my 300mm 2.8 becomes an
incredibly fast sharp
450
2.8! But many times its a pain in the a$$;
- Original Message -
From: Ryan Charron
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
Hi Robert,
My Pentax 35mm FA f2 makes a great 52mm lens on my
*ist D.
At the risk of being pendantic, how can a 35mm lens be anything other than a
35mm lens, great or otherwise
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Ryan Charron
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
Hi Robert,
My Pentax 35mm FA f2 makes a great 52mm lens on my
*ist D.
At the risk of being pendantic, how can a 35mm lens be anything other than a
35mm lens
On 23 Dec 2003 at 17:19, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Y'know, it's funny how, when using other formats, rarely is it said that an 80mm
lens for a 6x6 is equivalent to a 50mm lens for a 35mm camera. When's the
last time you heard a 4x5 user ask What's that lens in 35mm terms? This
equivalency
-Original Message-
From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The quick assessment of angular lens coverage is more
important to most any
photographer than absolute focal length. Lets face it 95%
of the population can
relate to AOV as a function of 35mm lens FL. IMHO It's not
On Dec 23, 2003, at 8:19 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Y'know, it's funny how, when using other formats, rarely is it said
that an 80mm
lens for a 6x6 is equivalent to a 50mm lens for a 35mm camera.
When's the
last time you heard a 4x5 user ask What's that lens in 35mm terms?
Hi Shel,
I've heard
- Original Message -
From: Rob Studdert
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
The quick assessment of angular lens coverage is more important to most
any
photographer than absolute focal length. Lets face it 95% of the
population can
relate to AOV as a function
Sometimes its great, my 300mm 2.8 becomes an incredibly fast sharp 450
2.8! But many times its a pain in the a$$; at the wide end, I'm having
trouble with a good walking around lens. I have a gap between very wide
(15-30 zoom, 15 fisheye) and med wide (28 ) and then to normal (50). My
28
Unfortunately, the TIFF is that size only because it is 16 bit. I need a
35 meg 8 bit file - or ~11 x 14 at 300 dpi.
- MCC
At 12:22 AM 12/11/2003 -0500, you wrote:
On Thursday, Dec 11, 2003, at 00:02 America/New_York, Mark Cassino wrote:
The stock agency I work with wants 35 meg files
At 01:01 AM 12/11/2003 -0500, you wrote:
If you use rather more of the 3040 x 2024 sensor than the 3008 x 2008
image area you can get to that 35MB boundary.
Is that possible?
_ MCC
-
Mark Cassino Photography
Kalamazoo, MI
http://www.markcassino.com
-
At 01:01 AM 12/11/2003 -0500, you wrote:
If you use rather more of the 3040 x 2024 sensor than the 3008 x 2008
image area you can get to that 35MB boundary.
Is that possible?
Sure looks like it. The RAW file holds the entire 3040 x 2024 area.
You'll lose something around the edges
Well just don't budge an inch, then. Hold your ground and never make the
switch. That'll teach 'em! ;-)
Len
---
* There's no place like 127.0.0.1
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
Date: Mon, 8
At 05:09 PM 12/8/2003 +1000, Rob Studdert wrote:
So how are *ist D users coping with the lens mag factors and are some lenses
now less useful than they were on film bodies?
Since 80% of my shooting is with telephotos, I've been quite happy with the
crop factor magnification. My birding rig is
On Thursday, Dec 11, 2003, at 00:02 America/New_York, Mark Cassino
wrote:
The stock agency I work with wants 35 meg files minimum, so I
anticipate that I will shoot film in tandem with the *ist D, just to
keep them happy.
You're almost there. A TIFF file converted from an *ist-D RAW file is
On Thursday, Dec 11, 2003, at 00:02 America/New_York, Mark Cassino
wrote:
The stock agency I work with wants 35 meg files minimum, so I
anticipate that I will shoot film in tandem with the *ist D, just to
keep them happy.
You're almost there. A TIFF file converted from an
than just FOV. And, as
you say, that does not work. Their 50mm lens on the *istD does not work like a
75mm lens on a 35mm camera, it works like a 50mm lens on an APS camera.
--
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Paul
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor
.
--
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Paul
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
I disagree, i think you can and should compare the digital sensor size
with other formats. Its often a neccesary so as to descide which tool to
use for a job
. And,
as
you say, that does not work. Their 50mm lens on the *istD does not work like
a
75mm lens on a 35mm camera, it works like a 50mm lens on an APS camera.
--
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Paul
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
I disagree, i
- Original Message -
From: keller.schaefer
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
But you are talking the subtle differences in resolution, bokeh and so on
that
differentiate one lens from another that otherwise project the same image
onto
a field, aren't you
- Original Message -
From: Rob Studdert
Subject: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
So how are *ist D users coping with the lens mag factors and are some
lenses
now less useful than they were on film bodies?
Just fine. I made the transition pretty seamlessly in this regard
On Monday, Dec 8, 2003, at 02:09 America/New_York, Rob Studdert wrote:
So how are *ist D users coping with the lens mag factors and are some
lenses
now less useful than they were on film bodies?
More or less transparently. I don't even think about the mag factor at
all when I shoot. Over time,
on 08.12.03 16:09, Juey Chong Ong at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So I guess I'm looking for a 15-60 lens. Is there any out there?
So you'd better wait for this:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0308/03080801pentaxda1645m.asp
--
Best Regards
Sylwek
- Original Message -
From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
So how are *ist D users coping with the lens mag factors and are some
lenses
now less useful than they were on film bodies?
Are you using the *ist D in parallel with film bodies?
Cheers,
Rob
I'm coping just fine! I no
The only problem I found is with the wa side. My 24 is the widest I've got
and I used the 24 a lot with my film camera. My lense lined up nicely
otherwise.
24 to 35mm
35 to 50mm (I might sell this one since I don't use 50mm much)
50 to 75mm (finally a portrait lens)
100 to 150mm (haven't done
I am awaiting the DA 16-45 f4, and hope it is followed soon by DA 50-200
f4, DA 12-18 f4, and fast (at least f2) primes at 13 and 16 mm. I told
the Pentax rep that if Pentax doesn't fill these gaps soon, Sigma will.
Pentax will fill the holes in its own time, at least for zooms. If we
see
Hi,
I think its a bad idea to think of it as a magnification factor, as its
really cropping the edges. One thing that annoys me is that even though
a 50mm becomes the right length for a portrait lens, its not as
flattering as really having an 85mm focal length on the camera. Also my
standard
On 8/12/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
I think its a bad idea to think of it as a magnification factor, as its
really cropping the edges. One thing that annoys me is that even though
a 50mm becomes the right length for a portrait lens, its not as
flattering as really having an 85mm focal
Rob Studdert wrote:
So it seems that most users who have adopted the *ist D and
previously had a functional SLR kit have ceased using film
and have been enticed to buy new lenses.
Interesting, thanks for the replies.
... all part of the grand design, I suppose. Another
- Original Message -
From: Paul
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
Hi,
I think its a bad idea to think of it as a magnification factor, as its
really cropping the edges. One thing that annoys me is that even though
a 50mm becomes the right length
.
Len
* There's no place like 127.0.0.1
-Original Message-
From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 1:09 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
So how are *ist D users coping with the lens mag factors
I disagree, i think you can and should compare the digital sensor size
with other formats. Its often a neccesary so as to descide which tool to
use for a job.
William Robb wrote:
Try using a 105mm lens on a 6x7, or a 150mm lens on a 4x5.
You can't compare APS format digital to 35mm that way.
The really clever scheme to separate folks from their money is what
they'll have to spend for film sometime down the road.
Len
* There's no place like 127.0.0.1
... all part of the grand design, I suppose. Another
clever scheme to separate folks from their excess $$
;^)
I've heard that some new dslr users have given up food so they get new
lenses.
Jim A.
From: Bill D. Casselberry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 14:57:01 -0800
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
Resent-From
So it seems that most users who have adopted the *ist D and previously had a
functional SLR kit have ceased using film and have been enticed to buy new
lenses. Interesting, thanks for the replies.
That's exactly what I have been thinking... Seems marketing and consumerism
is once again winning
- Original Message -
From:
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
So it seems that most users who have adopted the *ist D and previously
had a
functional SLR kit have ceased using film and have been enticed to buy new
lenses. Interesting, thanks for the replies
On 8 Dec 2003 at 22:55, William Robb wrote:
Would it have been better if the ist D wasn't compatable with a current lens
series at all?
Would we be that much happier if Pentax had offered up a completely new lens
mount that didn't offer any way to mount current lenses?
Buying into a new
- Original Message -
From: Rob Studdert
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
I for one was most interested in a FF sensor, I also expected to be able
to use
the aperture ring on a compatible body. Such is life.
A FF sensor would have solved a lot of issues
So it seems that most users who have adopted the *ist D and previously had a
functional SLR kit have ceased using film and have been enticed to buy new
lenses. Interesting, thanks for the replies.
That's exactly what I have been thinking... Seems marketing and consumerism
is once again
So how are *ist D users coping with the lens mag factors and are some lenses
now less useful than they were on film bodies?
Are you using the *ist D in parallel with film bodies?
Cheers,
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 2:09 AM
Subject: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
So how are *ist D users coping with the lens mag factors and are some
lenses
now less useful than they were
Whoops again. Make that the DA 16-whatever :-)
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 1:25 AM
Subject: Re: Coming to terms with *ist D lens mag factor?
- Original Message -
From: Rob Studdert
For me, I kind of started fresh. I sold off 35mm gear some time back.
Based on friend's experiences with focal changes, I knew that I would
probably not use the lenses in quite the same manner.
At this stage, I have aquired or will aquire the following:
F 17-28/3.5-4.5 fisheye
Tokina
67 matches
Mail list logo
