It took me 8 weeks to get one, and that was direct from the distributor.
Feroze
- Original Message -
From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 5:37 PM
Subject: RE: Good-bye Pentax (was: Pentax needs USM and IS)
--- Brendan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rob brings up a good point abou the frequency of USM
> lenses, now how are these suppposed to be good for
> wild life if your running around the forest with the
> equivalent of a dog whislte making a racket?
>
He just may have been talking about his own
Ro
EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Good-bye Pentax (was: Pentax needs USM and IS)
This point was discussed years ago by Canon nature and wildlife shooters
on photo.net and there was no problem with ultra sonic lens noise.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Rob brings up a good point abou the frequency of USM
This point was discussed years ago by Canon nature and wildlife shooters
on photo.net and there was no problem with ultra sonic lens noise.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rob brings up a good point abou the frequency of USM
lenses, now how are these suppposed to be good for
wild life if your runni
Hi!
Boz, I am sorry I am a little late with reply. It seems that there
were no virus on my computer after all, but hotpop is indeed behaving
strangely.
Anyway, I am sorry to see you go. With all honesty I realize that you
might as well disappear from PDML, since this is mainly technical
list. I h
Hear! Hear!
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: "Greene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 11:21 AM
Subject: Re: Good-bye Pentax (was: Pentax needs USM and IS)
>
>
Can't say that I blame you, Boz.
Funny thing is most of us on this list are 'serious' photographers. Pentax
has pretty much abandoned that segment of the market. That may be a sound
marketing decision on their part, but it really means that the enthusiastic
Pentax user has been abandoned. Camera c
On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:51:33 +0100, Boz wrote:
>
> Best wishes to all and thanks for all I've learned from you!
> To all KMP contributors most sincere thanks!
>
> Bojidar Dimitrov
If I may add my small voice to the chorus,
thanks for something that's pulled back
many, many veils over the few sh
From: Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 13:46:39 +0100
The *ist D won't be cheap. It will probably cost slightly more than >the
Canon D10. A Pentax rep told me that the estimated price here in >Norway
was about 20.000Nkr (~£1700), about twice as much as it needed >to cost in
Cameron wrote:
The MZ-S was beautiful, but flawed; the *ist D is way too late, and it better be cheap
because it's last years' technology, and the *ist has some nice features but is
extremely tacky looking.
REPLY:
Mostly right on. However, the MZ-S was basically the right camera but should ha
<< Oh yes, I do own a Pentax that I think is beautiful but a bit tacky in
design. It's a transparent SF1 with a transparent zoom lens. Everything
works on it but I can't take pictures with film because the film would be
fogged. The camera and lens is on prominent display in my home. I get
Jim Apilado wrote:
>
> How many look at your cameras when you are out?
I've had more attention from my 6x7 in the last 4 months than I have had
from any other camera in 20 years. Almost invariably if I set up the beast
on the tripod some wag pops up with variations of 'Are you taking a
photograph
Reminds me of going into B&H the last few times I was in NYC and having
everyone wanting to try out the LX or two I was carrying ;-)
Cesar
Panama City, Florida
-- -Original Message-
-- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 5:33 PM
--
--
-- Jim Apil
Jim Apilado wrote:
>
> How many look at your cameras when you are out?
I've had numerous inquiries regarding my 6x7. People are intrigued by
the fact that it looks like an SLR on steroids. But my recently acquired
Leica IIIf draws a crowd. I've only been using it for a week, but people
frequen
On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:51:33 +0100, you wrote:
>Best wishes to all and thanks for all I've learned from you!
>To all KMP contributors most sincere thanks!
>
>Bojidar Dimitrov
Many thanks for the KMP site, Boz. I've enjoyed it many times.
I bought a Nikon D100 DSLR, intending to hold onto my Pent
On 17 Mar 2003 at 20:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Thanks Fred: You are exactly right. I was not in any way suggesting Boj was lazy
> ... I was, in fact, trying to convince him not to leave Pentax for the bells and
> whistles that Canon and Nikon offer.
I doubt Boz's move is about "bells and whi
; Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 09:13:07 -0800
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Good-bye Pentax (was: Pentax needs USM and IS)
> Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Resent-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 12:13:17 -0500
>
> It is indeed a sad day for Pentax a
Thanks Fred: You are exactly right. I was not in any way suggesting Boj was lazy ... I
was, in fact, trying to convince him not to leave Pentax for the bells and whistles
that Canon and Nikon offer. As photographers, collectors and gadget freaks (which most
of us are including myself) I think it
For a lot of types of photography, it may not make you a better
photographer, but you will get better photographs.
Most of this misty-eyed, romantic, manual drivel comes from people with
little of no experience using current high-end equipment.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you want the lates
Roland wrote:
I understand your decision - but I feel that Pentax are moving towards USM and IS. And
I believe that the *ist D has support for this technology.
But, the question is always - how long will it take?
New bodies and lenses with USM and IS. I believe that some might be released this
Boz,
I want to thank you for all of the effort that you put into the KMP.
It's a really great resource. I hope that, if you decide to stop
maintaining it, you'll consider finding another serious "Pentax head" to
take over the maintenance.
If you make the switch to Canon completely, perhaps you'l
From: Cameron Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 09:13:07 -0800
the *ist D is way too late, and it better be cheap because it's last years'
technology
"last years' technology"? Why are you saying that?
What's "last year" in it? We haven't seen the complete specification yet,
but from
Hi Boz,
Any system is not the be all and end all, just like with many other things,
when you feel it doesn't perform then you are free to change. What is more
important is that you are still a photographer.
Many thanks for the KMP site, which has given me and many others an
invaluable source of
ctional
though it may be. Best wishes to him from a long time (since '96) PDML
member.
Cameron Hood
On Monday, March 17, 2003, at 06:30 AM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:51:33 +0100
From: Bojidar Dimitrov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Go
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you want the latest
and greatest USM, IS etc, go out and get it, but it really won't make you a
better photographer.
Boz clearly stated that he is "a technical head more than an artist",
and I can understand his reasoning. It's his money, and he's free to
spend it as
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Bojidar: Interesting approach and conclusion. I can
> see your reasons for
> leaving... But don't ever forget that it is the
> photographs that make the
> difference not the camera, not even really the
> lenses. If you want the latest
> and greatest USM, IS etc, g
Bojidar: Interesting approach and conclusion. I can see your reasons for
leaving... But don't ever forget that it is the photographs that make the
difference not the camera, not even really the lenses. If you want the latest
and greatest USM, IS etc, go out and get it, but it really won't make y
Hi Bojidar,
I understand your decision - but I feel that Pentax are moving towards USM
and IS. And I believe that the *ist D has support for this technology.
But, the question is always - how long will it take?
New bodies and lenses with USM and IS. I believe that some might be released
this fal
At 14:51 17.3.2003 +0100, Bojidar Dimitrov wrote:
>... I bought an EOS 30 (Elan 7e) and the top-rated lenses EF
>70-200/4 USM L and 28-105/3.5-4.5 USM. What can I say, I wasn't feeling
>sick anymore. USM may be seen just as a gimmick by some on this list,
>but USM lenses have full-time manual a
Hi Roland, hi all,
Roland Mabo wrote:
>
> Choosing SLR, is choosing a system. Those who wish to use the SLR
> primarly for p&s photography doesn't bother, but those who are
> serious about learning photography - who sees photography as an
> art, as a hobby or as an income - thinks about SLR as a
30 matches
Mail list logo
