On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Paul Sorenson wrote:
No, it's not sexy, but it's a good, solid 4-place airplane. Are you set
up for IFR? It's a pretty decent instrument airplane, too. Took my
instrument check ride in a Cherokee 180 - back in the days when you were
well equipped if you had two
Those I know who have owned them have no complaints.
Same here.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: K10D - More News
I've driven quite a few 944s, once on the road course at Lime Rock,
and several of my friends have owned them
Op Tue, 08 Aug 2006 02:44:00 +0200 schreef Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Try it on any of the double-digit MZ/ZX models like the MZ-60 and 70.
I think you mean MZ-50 and MZ-60, there isn't a MZ-70.
At
least the *ist will let you take a picture with a pre-A lens. The issue
you complain of
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Lucas Rijnders wrote:
Op Tue, 08 Aug 2006 02:44:00 +0200 schreef Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Try it on any of the double-digit MZ/ZX models like the MZ-60 and 70.
I think you mean MZ-50 and MZ-60, there isn't a MZ-70.
But there is an MZ-30! :-)
The MZ-50 will let you
There's no reason to believe that any of what you say here is true.
Paul
On Aug 8, 2006, at 1:21 AM, P. J. Alling wrote:
Hey, I knew you were kidding. But I'm speaking from experience. I've
worked for companies who've made that change. Gone from product
companies and changed to marketing
Only the Canon pro cameras are full frame. None sell for less than
$3000.
On Aug 8, 2006, at 1:57 AM, P. J. Alling wrote:
After Pentax killed the MZ-D/MR-52 in IIRC 2003 there were people on
this list who predicted that Pentax would never introduce a Digital SLR
that they would be film
I don't always agree with you Aaron, but I'm with you on this. :-)
John
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 02:35:31 +0100, Aaron Reynolds
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 7, 2006, at 9:29 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
There were K lenses listed as current on the Pentax USA website when
the
Film *ist was
On Aug 8, 2006, at 2:06 AM, P. J. Alling wrote:
They were listed as current products, not historical, not bargain
closeouts.
They weren't bargain closeouts -- in fact, they were full price.
They're just old stock that they still have. What are they supposed to
do, throw it away?
-Aaron
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Lucas Rijnders wrote:
You can add positive exposure compensation or lower the ISO as you
close down. If you do either, the camera will meter and expose correctly.
The hard part is not setting it, but not forgetting to change it back :o)
Oh, I have been there with the
Op Tue, 08 Aug 2006 12:00:53 +0200 schreef Kostas Kavoussanakis
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Lucas Rijnders wrote:
Op Tue, 08 Aug 2006 02:44:00 +0200 schreef Adam Maas
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Try it on any of the double-digit MZ/ZX models like the MZ-60 and 70.
I think you mean
Op Tue, 08 Aug 2006 12:53:39 +0200 schreef Kostas Kavoussanakis
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Lucas Rijnders wrote:
You can add positive exposure compensation or lower the ISO as you
close down. If you do either, the camera will meter and expose
correctly.
The hard part is not
The 5D isn't a pro body (It's based on the Elan 7N film body) and is
under $3000 new (although not by much unless there's a sale on).
-Adam
Paul Stenquist wrote:
Only the Canon pro cameras are full frame. None sell for less than
$3000.
On Aug 8, 2006, at 1:57 AM, P. J. Alling wrote:
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Lucas Rijnders wrote:
Buying an MZ-5n failed (it was killed in transit), so I ended up with a
Z-1, and now a Z-1p. I must say I still use the MZ-50 surprisingly often.
OK, here is my -50 factoid of the day: I am selling big-time and I am
only keeping the MZ-S and the -50.
No, they were current products in the catalog and they dropped support
for them. Sheesh.
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
On Aug 8, 2006, at 2:06 AM, P. J. Alling wrote:
They were listed as current products, not historical, not bargain
closeouts.
They weren't bargain closeouts -- in fact,
I'm broke right now, but even I don't see that as a huge price. What
would you have expected to pay for a FF 35mm DSLR even three years ago.
I think the Kodak DCS cameras were about $6000. Which was about half
the price of the equivalent Canon? While imaging chips are probably not
going to
On Aug 8, 2006, at 10:08 AM, P. J. Alling wrote:
Pentax will have to build one, just to compete.
Or they could just make excellent wide angle lenses at a good price
instead.
If there's not a functional difference to the end user beyond the use
of old lenses, why bother? They have a bigger
The Nikon-people are saying the same, but that does not make it right.
Remember that the requirements made by the FF sensor makes lot of the Canon
lenses useless (at least in vignetting, edge sharpness..), so you have to add
new lenses to the cost.
If I had to change many of my lenses anyway
Most pros make a list of what they need, and when their suppliers' rep*
stops in every month or so they hand it to him, and it arrives via Fed
Ex in a few days. Oh? It doesn't work like that for you? Maybe you are
not such a pro as you think you are. Suppliers determine whether you are
a pro
Really? They were recently manufactured and not just old stock?
Where'd you get your information? It conflicts with mine.
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: K10D - More News
Date: Tue Aug 8, 2006 10:03 am
Size: 619 bytes
To: Pentax-Discuss
Some merely use the phone and Purolator. ;)
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: K10D - More News
Date: Tue Aug 8, 2006 10:33 am
Size: 1K
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Most pros make a list of what they need, and when their suppliers
.
From: Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K10D - More News
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 19:33:00 -0400
The Pentax pro programs are also virtually non-existent. They're not
pursuing the market
- More News
None of them were top of the line bodies, the *ist is now, don't
believe
me go to www.pentaximaging.com and look.
For the longest time, the top of the line car from Volkswagon was the
Beetle.
This didn't make it a luxury car.
If you think the film ist is pro grade, you need
Although Volkswagen and Porsche are closely connected, they are
independant companies. Volkswagen's top end model back then was the
Volkwagen not the 958 (I think you might be referring to the 928 here?
The original front-engine Porsche design, not to be confused with the
924 which was
Aren't you forgetting the 914? Even if it was a Porsche, the most sold
version had a VW engine (the 411, later the two liter 412 engine), and they
were all called VW/Porsche.
Jorgen
On 8/8/06 10:35 pm, Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Although Volkswagen and Porsche are closely connected,
. Alling
Subject: Re: K10D - More News
None of them were top of the line bodies, the *ist is now, don't
believe
me go to www.pentaximaging.com and look.
For the longest time, the top of the line car from Volkswagon was the
Beetle.
This didn't make it a luxury car.
If you think
List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K10D - More News
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 10:25:47 -0400
Most pros make a list of what they need, and when their suppliers' rep*
stops in every month or so they hand it to him, and it arrives via Fed
Ex in a few days. Oh? It doesn't work like that for you? Maybe you
Nothing from nothing proves nothing. Almost like a song.
Tom C.
I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or
numbered.
From: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Which goes to prove nothing.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
Even the 356 used a VW engine, unsurprising given that the VW engine was
a Porsche design in the first place. But they were Porsche's, not
VW/Porsche's.
-Adam
Jorgen at epixx wrote:
Aren't you forgetting the 914? Even if it was a Porsche, the most sold
version had a VW engine (the 411,
, indexed, briefed, debriefed or
numbered.
From: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K10D - More News
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 10:25:47 -0400
Most pros make a list of what they need, and when
Haven't been reading that much of the ..More news thread, but noted a
reference to 645D lenses as giving the best and I gather that was in
reference to image. There was a time when MF lenses lacked the
resolving power of 35mm. A desired 'creamy' wedding look was offered as
the reason.
Suppose that
Remember that while MF lenses deliver lower lpmm in most cases, they're
delivering that slightly lower resolution to a much larger
sensor/negative, for more effective resolution.
-Adam
Jack Davis wrote:
Haven't been reading that much of the ..More news thread, but noted a
reference to
I'm sorry, but this seems wrong.
Porsche has been entirely owned and operated by Volkswagen since at
least the time of the 914, which was marketed as a Volkswagen rather
than a Porsche in many markets (only the 914-6 model was marketed
exclusively as a Porsche). The Porsche 356 model
Jorgen at epixx wrote:
Aren't you forgetting the 914? Even if it was a Porsche, the most sold
version had a VW engine (the 411, later the two liter 412 engine), and they
were all called VW/Porsche.
Jorgen
Sometimes called the VoPo, a derogatory nickname, so named by the people, on
I hadn't forgotten that, just felt it common knowledge.
I'm curious if the lower resolution factor is still true in the
manufacture of new lenses.
Are you saying that it is?
Jack
--- Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Remember that while MF lenses deliver lower lpmm in most cases,
they're
Yeah, right! I bet you also claim to have forgotten more than you know. ;-)
I hadn't forgotten that, just felt it common knowledge.
I'm curious if the lower resolution factor is still true in the
manufacture of new lenses.
Are you saying that it is?
Jack
--- Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gpodfrey,
It's actually the other way around. Porsche took an 18.5% ownership
interest in VW in 2005 to prevent a takeover bid (increased now to
approximately 25%). Porsche was owned by Ferdinand Porsche and later his
heirs until 1972, when it became a private limited company controlled by
Air cooled engines can not meet the smog laws, of course they had to
redesign it.
I think you mean the 914. IIRC, the 924, 928 and 958 all came out about
the same time. The 924 was a sporty car (looked like a sports car, but
without the performance), the 928 was the mainstream front engined
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, graywolf wrote:
Air cooled engines can not meet the smog laws, of course they had to
redesign it.
... and require too high of octane for the compression ratio (and
power) they run at. Ask me about my airplane 8.5:1 is high
compression and requires 91/96
To complicate things further, Ferdinand Porsche developed the Volkswagen when
he worked for Daimler-Benz before World War II. Life in the car business can be
complicated.
Paul
-- Original message --
From: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Air cooled engines can not
OK - whatcha flying??
-P
Cory Papenfuss wrote:
Ask me about my airplane
-Cory
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
graywolf wrote:
Air cooled engines can not meet the smog laws, of course they had to
redesign it.
I think you mean the 914. IIRC, the 924, 928 and 958 all came out about
the same time. The 924 was a sporty car (looked like a sports car, but
without the performance), the 928 was the
Interesting.. Certainly wasn't my impression! I've not really
followed the history of Porsche and VW very closely.
What is the source of this information?
G
On Aug 8, 2006, at 12:26 PM, Adam Maas wrote:
It's actually the other way around. Porsche took an 18.5% ownership
interest in VW in
I got it from the Wikipedia article on Porsche AG, but since it's
publicly available info and non-controversial, they should be reasonably
accurate on it.
I spent some time researching Porsche a couple of months ago when it
looked like I was going to buy a used 944.
-Adam
Godfrey DiGiorgi
Thanks. Maybe I'll look it up for the details.
According to my mechanic buddy in Texas, be glad you didn't buy the
944. He once granted me a two hour litany on all the reasons why you
should never own one... and while he does seem to go extremist on
German cars once in a bit, he's a pretty
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Paul Sorenson wrote:
OK - whatcha flying??
Nothing sexy, but it gets the job done... It's a Piper Cherokee
180 (PA-28-180). Roughly 130-140mph cruise-speed. The engine is a flat,
4-cylinder, 360 cubic-inch, 180hp (sea level), 2700 RPM. It's considered
I've driven quite a few 944s, once on the road course at Lime Rock,
and several of my friends have owned them. I found them great to
drive. Far less prone to oversteer than the 911 and more responsive
steering than a 928. And they have some beautiful forged aluminum
suspension parts. When
The engine on them is a little odd to work on I hear (You need a $500
gizmo to tension the timing belt). I was considering one because it
costs about the same as a 240SX, and doesn't have the current popularity
with drifters. The issue was rendered moot a few weeks ago when I came
into a free
On 09/08/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've driven quite a few 944s, once on the road course at Lime Rock,
and several of my friends have owned them. I found them great to
drive. Far less prone to oversteer than the 911 and more responsive
steering than a 928. And they have some
As I said, it was a friend's statement. He's pretty knowledgeable
about these things, felt they have some severe design shortcomings
and are excessively expensive to run. But I have little experience
with the 944 personally to know one way or another about those things.
The 944 was never in
No, it's not sexy, but it's a good, solid 4-place airplane. Are you set
up for IFR? It's a pretty decent instrument airplane, too. Took my
instrument check ride in a Cherokee 180 - back in the days when you were
well equipped if you had two nav/comms and an ADF, and an NDB approach
was part
On Aug 5, 2006, at 11:32 PM, David J Brooks wrote:
Thirdly, i have the grip foir the 200 and it helps in balance, but the
feel is just not there for me, but its close.
I got to play with a D200 the other day. The anti-shake is a little
disconcerting: my brain knew that the viewfinder image
On Aug 6, 2006, at 8:31 AM, Bob W wrote:
My mobile phone has a ringtone that's like an old-fashioned phone with
a bell - so it sounds like Sam Spade's office when it rings.
If I actually used my cellphone a lot I'd consider one of these:
Of course, you guys know SR at the sensor will not stabilize the
viewfinder image like the in the lens type does?
--
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
Idiot Proof == Expert Proof
---
David Mann wrote:
On Aug 5, 2006, at
At what a wimpy idea. My friend has one of those wall phones with the
separate ear piece and ringer crank on the side. I have been thinking
of adapting it to plug into my cel-phone. The only problem is that he
has already refused a $1500 offer for that old phone.
Hu...? On a more serious
On Aug 7, 2006, at 9:49 AM, graywolf wrote:
Of course, you guys know SR at the sensor will not stabilize the
viewfinder image like the in the lens type does?
That was the hardest part of shooting with the Minolta 7D for me.
I've been using Canon with its image-stabilized lenses for years
graywolf wrote:
Of course, you guys know SR at the sensor will not stabilize the
viewfinder image like the in the lens type does?
Yes, but the D200 doesn't have built-in antishake, however one of the
kit options for the D200 is the 18-200 VR, which is optically stabilized
and will
On 07.08.06, at 17:58 , Bob Shell wrote:
That was the hardest part of shooting with the Minolta 7D for me.
I've been using Canon with its image-stabilized lenses for years and
was used to seeing it work in the viewfinder. With the Minolta
system, and presumably the Pentax system, you just
On Aug 5, 2006, at 7:35 AM, Mark Roberts wrote:
And encourage us to buy new lenses? Gosh, no!
I just can't see it. They've never screwed with the customer like that
before.
Plus, their pro commitment is still to medium format.
-Aaron
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
They've never screwed with their customers like that before. Well not
until the introduction of the *ist Film and Digital introduction that
is. Try to meter with a pre-A lens on the film *ist and let me know how
that works for ya.
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
On Aug 5, 2006, at 7:35 AM, Mark
Tom, the Nikon F70 was the death knell for simple, elegant, useable camera
controls.
God in heaven, that thing sucked, and sold like wildfire.
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: K10D - More News
Date: Sat Aug 5, 2006 2:33 pm
Size: 7K
To: Pentax
any.
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: John Celio [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: K10D - More News
Date: Sat Aug 5, 2006 7:19 pm
Size: 986 bytes
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
While you're right that pro representation is slim, your store doesn't have
the glass because your
Especially because all those features just do something I already know
how to do myself. You can read a 12 page camera manual and a 200 page
book on photography; or you can read a 200 page camera manual, and a 200
page book on photography, so you know when to turn on those hundreds of
pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K10D - More News
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 19:11:00 -0400
John -- this does not change the fact that the store could order it and
have it in a few days. Like I said, the reason you have no Pentax pro
glass for sale is that you ordered no Pentax pro glass. All you have
-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K10D - More News
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 19:11:00 -0400
John -- this does not change the fact that the store could order it and
have it in a few days. Like I said, the reason you have no Pentax pro
glass
will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or
numbered.
From: Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K10D - More News
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 19:33:00 -0400
The Pentax pro programs
Quoting Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I don't have any Porches available for sale -- therefore, Porche
doesn't make cars any more. See what I mean?
-Aaron
Yes, and sorry i spoke up.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: K10D - More News
Tom C wrote:
Yeah, I see what you mean. :-) It's a chicken/egg argument. Sure the
Pentax gear exists. But if it's unprofitable for the store to stock it on
their shelves, then it's unavailability is not just because the store did
not order it, or because a customer did not place the order.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K10D - More News
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 19:11:00 -0400
John -- this does not change the fact that the store could order it and
have it in a few days. Like I said
Minolta IVF
Dave
Quoting P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
They've never screwed with their customers like that before. Well not
until the introduction of the *ist Film and Digital introduction that
is. Try to meter with a pre-A lens on the film *ist and let me know how
that works for ya.
On Aug 7, 2006, at 7:45 PM, Tom C wrote:
Sure the
Pentax gear exists. But if it's unprofitable for the store to stock
it on
their shelves, then it's unavailability is not just because the
store did
not order it, or because a customer did not place the order. It goes a
little deeper
- Original Message -
From: P. J. Alling
Subject: Re: K10D - More News
They've never screwed with their customers like that before. Well not
until the introduction of the *ist Film and Digital introduction that
is. Try to meter with a pre-A lens on the film *ist and let me know
On Aug 7, 2006, at 6:45 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
They've never screwed with their customers like that before. Well not
until the introduction of the *ist Film and Digital introduction that
is. Try to meter with a pre-A lens on the film *ist and let me know
how
that works for ya.
Um,
- Original Message -
From: Aaron Reynolds
Subject: Re: K10D - More News
Exactly. It's not that Pentax don't make pro glass.
It's that they don't make pro cameras in a 35mm sized chassis.
William Robb
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman
On Aug 7, 2006, at 8:02 PM, David J Brooks wrote:
Yes, and sorry i spoke up.
Huh what? Did you order a Porche?
-Aaron
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
The film *ist was a limited offering aimed at newbie amateurs. It
was built for use with consumer zooms. It wasn't likely that many
would want to use it with pre-A lenses.
Paul
On Aug 7, 2006, at 6:45 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
They've never screwed with their customers like that before.
Try it on any of the double-digit MZ/ZX models like the MZ-60 and 70. At
least the *ist will let you take a picture with a pre-A lens. The issue
you complain of long predates the *ist's.
-Adam
P. J. Alling wrote:
They've never screwed with their customers like that before. Well not
until
, that thing sucked, and sold like wildfire.
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: K10D - More News
Date: Sat Aug 5, 2006 2:33 pm
Size: 7K
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Me!
Especially because all those features just do
the then current TOL film camera couldn't meter with them. I expect
them to act the same way as any marketing company from here on in.
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: P. J. Alling
Subject: Re: K10D - More News
They've never screwed with their customers like that before. Well
There were K lenses listed as current on the Pentax USA website when the
Film *ist was introduced and every high end body, including the MZ-S
disappeared. True most were special purpose, but you can't say they
didn't do that to current catalog items. The old days are dead long
live the New
wrote:
- Original Message -
From: P. J. Alling
Subject: Re: K10D - More News
They've never screwed with their customers like that before. Well not
until the introduction of the *ist Film and Digital introduction that
is. Try to meter with a pre-A lens on the film *ist and let
P. J. Alling wrote:
I expect
them to act the same way as any marketing company from here on in.
I expect them to act as they always have: As the absolute best, bar
none, in backward compatibility.
--
Mark Roberts Photography Multimedia
www.robertstech.com
412-687-2835
--
PDML
On Aug 7, 2006, at 9:29 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
There were K lenses listed as current on the Pentax USA website when
the
Film *ist was introduced and every high end body, including the MZ-S
disappeared. True most were special purpose, but you can't say they
didn't do that to current
It was sold as the new top of the line, and in most respects had, at
least for Pentax top of the line specifications. The MZ-S was the
Flagship but was soon discontinued anyway. The *ist effectively
replaced the MZ-S the MZ3/ZX5n MZ-6/ZX-L etc. Don't forget the green
button Kludge on the
On Aug 7, 2006, at 9:33 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
Yet
the then current TOL film camera couldn't meter with them.
This is all about the fact that they stopped making film cameras? Well
geez, P.J., no one is buying them! They'd be idiots to keep cameras
that they couldn't sell in production.
None of them were top of the line bodies, the *ist is now, don't believe
me go to www.pentaximaging.com and look.
Adam Maas wrote:
Try it on any of the double-digit MZ/ZX models like the MZ-60 and 70. At
least the *ist will let you take a picture with a pre-A lens. The issue
you complain of
The *ist was a stopgap film camera. No one considered it a top of the
line offering. I will eat this message if Pentax releases a 1.3 or
full-frame camera. It ain't gonna happen.
Paul
On Aug 7, 2006, at 9:57 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
It was sold as the new top of the line, and in most
On Aug 7, 2006, at 10:01 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
None of them were top of the line bodies, the *ist is now, don't
believe
me go to www.pentaximaging.com and look.
According to that site it's fun to use. It surely has that going
over the F70, anyways.
-Aaron
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail
On Aug 7, 2006, at 9:57 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
It was sold as the new top of the line,
Bullshit. It was sold as the only film camera still made by Pentax.
It was not sold as the pro-grade F5 competitor. Just because it was
the only film camera they made anymore, that doesn't make a
Many K lenses were also listed as current at the Pentax Japan site,
until just recently, I can't remember exactly which ones they were but
there were a couple of mirrors the shift 28mm an 400mm struck my eye. I
can't check now, both those sites were revamped about 1 year ago and the
lens
On Aug 7, 2006, at 10:09 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
Many K lenses were also listed as current at the Pentax Japan site,
until just recently, I can't remember exactly which ones they were but
there were a couple of mirrors the shift 28mm an 400mm struck my eye.
I
can't check now, both those
Nope, the *ist never was a top-end camera, but it pretty much replaced
all the low-end cameras. Considering it cost a smidgen more than my F65
did (Which was second from the bottom in the Nikon line) it has no claim
on 'top-end'. It's a consumer body, and spec'd to match.
Pentax stopped making
- Original Message -
From: P. J. Alling
Subject: Re: K10D - More News
Weren't you the person who first pointed out to the list that there
were
still K mount lenses listed on the Pentax websites as current? I seem
to remember you were. After all what good is auto focus on a shift
- Original Message -
From: P. J. Alling
Subject: Re: K10D - More News
None of them were top of the line bodies, the *ist is now, don't
believe
me go to www.pentaximaging.com and look.
For the longest time, the top of the line car from Volkswagon was the
Beetle.
This didn't make
On Aug 7, 2006, at 10:08 PM, William Robb wrote:
For the longest time, the top of the line car from Volkswagon was the
Beetle.
This didn't make it a luxury car.
But if you looked at the lineup of cars they sold, it was clearly at
the top and therefore top of the line! I beat you up with
- Original Message -
From: P. J. Alling
Subject: Re: K10D - More News
There were K lenses listed as current on the Pentax USA website when
the
Film *ist was introduced
And film ist buyers were, I suppose, lining up at the door to buy em?
This is a dead parrot.
William Robb
The 400mm that was recently listed on the Pentax site is an A. The K
400 was replaced twice: first by an M, then by an A.
Paul
On Aug 7, 2006, at 10:09 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
Many K lenses were also listed as current at the Pentax Japan site,
until just recently, I can't remember exactly
Hey, I knew you were kidding. But I'm speaking from experience. I've
worked for companies who've made that change. Gone from product
companies and changed to marketing companies. The first thing to go is
respect for their customers, (after the loss of large numbers of
employees, first in
On Aug 8, 2006, at 1:58 AM, graywolf wrote:
Hu...? On a more serious vein, if one could adapt a cel-phone
to it
and mount it inside the case he could actually make calls with the
thing.
http://www.sparkfun.com/tutorial/Port-O-Rotary/portable-rotary.htm
Large page but well worth it
On Aug 8, 2006, at 1:49 AM, graywolf wrote:
Of course, you guys know SR at the sensor will not stabilize the
viewfinder image like the in the lens type does?
Good point. I think I'd prefer it the Minolta/Pentax way so I can
see just how much the technology is going to save me :)
- Dave
After Pentax killed the MZ-D/MR-52 in IIRC 2003 there were people on
this list who predicted that Pentax would never introduce a Digital SLR
that they would be film forever. The *ist-D was announced, what within
a year, in peoples hands in less than 1 1/2 years. Canon has managed to
bring
1 - 100 of 243 matches
Mail list logo
