Paul Stenquist wrote:
I process some RAW files for one of my colleagues. The ISO 800 pics
from her Canon 20D are noticeably more noisy than the 800ISO pics
from my *istD. However, I too expect the 10D to be better than both.
Paul
I own(ed) both an *ist D and a 20D and processed 1000s of
Christian wrote:
Paul Stenquist wrote:
I process some RAW files for one of my colleagues. The ISO 800 pics
from her Canon 20D are noticeably more noisy than the 800ISO pics
from my *istD. However, I too expect the 10D to be better than both.
Paul
I own(ed) both an *ist D and a 20D and
From: Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 21:26:00 -0400
Not at higher ISOs, Tom.
It's part of why I'm not super-interested in the 10MP body, though
. :-)
Tom C.
I 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: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 20:56:00
Which bar? Just because 8 and 10 Mpixel cameras are out there at
similar pricing doesn't mean that they do any better on image
quality. The entry-level DSLR market generally isn't concerned with
making a 13x19 and larger presentation prints, the difference in
ultimate resolution is barely
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 20:56:00 -0400
Who cares about the number of megapixels? As many have pointed out, a
higher pixel count in the same physical
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 21:14:57 -0400
Aaron is completely correct. Some cameras with a larger pixel count
don't produce better
Thanks Tom. I needed that.
On 15/9/06, Tom C, discombobulated, unleashed:
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
--
count. We'll soon see.
Paul
On Sep 15, 2006, at 4:50 PM, Tom C wrote:
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 21:14:57 -0400
Aaron
resolution would be relatively meaningless.
Tom C.
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 18:17:57 -0400
I still stand by that. Some 10 megapixel PS
Paul Stenquist wrote:
I still stand by that. Some 10 megapixel PS cameras are horrible. As
I suspect some DSLRs may be as well. The benefits of the K10D extend
well beyond pixel count. And if the hype is to be believed, it seems
Pentax has compensated for any degradation of image quality
I process some RAW files for one of my colleagues. The ISO 800 pics
from her Canon 20D are noticeably more noisy than the 800ISO pics
from my *istD. However, I too expect the 10D to be better than both.
Paul
On Sep 15, 2006, at 7:16 PM, Christian wrote:
Paul Stenquist wrote:
I still stand
On 16/09/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I process some RAW files for one of my colleagues. The ISO 800 pics
from her Canon 20D are noticeably more noisy than the 800ISO pics
from my *istD. However, I too expect the 10D to be better than both.
I hope so but I still don't know how
Can I have a link to the hand-held shots you did with the K100D 400/5.6?
THanks
Sincerely,
Collin Brendemuehl
http://www.brendemuehl.net
He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose
-- Jim Elliott
--
PDML
- Original Message -
From: Collin R Brendemuehl
Subject: K110D - Why bother?
Can I have a link to the hand-held shots you did with the K100D
400/5.6?
http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/temp/antishake/
Actually, it was with the 600/5.6
William Robb
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail
It's called the Yo, Blair! effect...
--
Cheers,
Bob
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Aaron Reynolds
Sent: 12 August 2006 02:11
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother?
I believe that I have just been called
On 11/8/06, Aaron Reynolds, discombobulated, unleashed:
I believe that I have just been called bro by an Englishman.
Actually I meant to write 'brother' but couldn't be arsed - that's the
difference ;-)
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
On Aug 11, 2006, at 11:22, Tom C wrote:
Until you do that, please don't presume to stagger around the
internet
spouting gibberish.
That's Tom C's job. (Just joking, Tom)
I've been forgetting to look in my mailbox for my check. Thanks
for the
reminder. :-)
Not that you'd
- Original Message -
From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To have engineered
and fabricated a *new* 6MP DSLR, when by all accounts 6MP is for the most
part (from my perception) considered passe, seems kind of foolish.
Whats foolish about selling lots of cameras and making money?
Pål
Unfortunately, the new software may incorporate some Silkypix technology,
but it's not Silkypix in disguise. It's barely more useful than the
original version.
John
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 21:37:41 +0100, John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 04:16:57PM -0400, Cory
You didn't insult me. You did something worse. You thoughtlessly
published an untrue and damaging statement about the camera system that I
use.
If you want to know about Pentax's financial position, go onto their
website and download their latest published accounts.
Until you do that,
] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John
Forbes
Sent: 11 August 2006 11:18
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Unfortunately, the new software may incorporate some Silkypix technology,
but it's not Silkypix in disguise. It's barely more useful than the
original version
Ooops... my bad. I must have mis-read a press release somewhere.
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006, John Francis wrote:
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 04:16:57PM -0400, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
Just a though, but IIRC the K1[01]0D does DNG RAW files. Are they
compressed to a non-stupid level?
Paul, stop putting words in my mouth.
Tom C.
I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or
numbered.
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother
, 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: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 21:26:00 -0400
Not at higher ISOs, Tom.
It's part of why I'm not super
Until you do that, please don't presume to stagger around the internet
spouting gibberish.
That's Tom C's job. (Just joking, Tom)
I've been forgetting to look in my mailbox for my check. Thanks for the
reminder. :-)
Tom C.
I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed
digital images never get printed.
Just my hunch...
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Kenneth Waller wrote:
Also I suspect there is a market for a 6mp dslr among the masses.
Kenneth Waller
I tend to think
On Aug 11, 2006, at 11:53 AM, Tom C wrote:
What evidence is their out there, however that any of the *latest*
generation of DSLR's has a serious noise problem?
Which ones, Tom? And I'm not saying that it's a serious problem or
even that it's particularly terrible, just that more megapixels
: Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 12:55:22 -0400
On Aug 11, 2006, at 11:53 AM, Tom C wrote:
What evidence is their out there, however that any
]
Subj: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:23 pm
Size: 1K
To: pdml@pdml.net
I'm stating that Pentax having released, what, 4 different 6MP DLSR's in the
last 3 years, why release another (2, one with Anti-shake and one w/o)? It
seems like they are repeating the PS approach
On Aug 11, 2006, at 4:38 AM, Richard Day wrote:
Hi Godders, hi Cotty!
Heya Richard! Welcome to PDMHell! Didn't realize you were lurking
here. :-)
The new software does actually have some advances over the previous
issues.
The new Photo Lab raw converter does have additional features
August 2006 19:04
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother?
On Aug 11, 2006, at 4:38 AM, Richard Day wrote:
Hi Godders, hi Cotty!
Heya Richard! Welcome to PDMHell! Didn't realize you were lurking here. :-)
The new software does actually have some advances over the previous
whether
you or I personally like their product at the moment.
Tom
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:23 pm
Size: 1K
To: pdml@pdml.net
I'm stating that Pentax having released, what, 4 different 6MP DLSR's
On Aug 11, 2006, at 3:55 PM, Tom C wrote:
Isn't this, in some respects related to the size of the print though?
Granted, we don't print all our images at 16 X 20 or larger. More
pixels
should equal more resolution and smoother gradation.
Should, but in practice it does not always mean
On 10/8/06, Aaron Reynolds, discombobulated, unleashed:
I was watching an old episode of Quincy the other day,
Holy moly, that seals it mate. You're out to lunch bro!
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
On 11/8/06, John Forbes, discombobulated, unleashed:
You didn't insult me. You did something worse. You thoughtlessly
published an untrue and damaging statement about the camera system that I
use.
You don't want to upset John, trust me!
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) |
On Thursday 10 August 2006 21:51, Asad Masede wrote:
Photobrowser 3 with Silkypix RAW engine is also something that should
count in favor of the K110D.
This is available for all Pentax DSLR users by a free download from the
Japanese Pentax website, I have done that and it works.
--
Frits
Cotty wrote:
On 10/8/06, Aaron Reynolds, discombobulated, unleashed:
I was watching an old episode of Quincy the other day,
Holy moly, that seals it mate. You're out to lunch bro!
People who hang around with pathologists are just plain *weird*, man!
--
Mark Roberts Photography Multimedia
I believe that I have just been called bro by an Englishman.
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:43 pm
Size: 411 bytes
To: pentax list PDML@pdml.net
On 10/8/06, Aaron Reynolds, discombobulated, unleashed
On Aug 11, 2006, at 11:22, Tom C wrote:
Until you do that, please don't presume to stagger around the
internet
spouting gibberish.
That's Tom C's job. (Just joking, Tom)
I've been forgetting to look in my mailbox for my check. Thanks
for the
reminder. :-)
Not that you'd cash it
A friend is looking for an entry level DSLR, and she likes my istDS. We
talked a little about the DL/DL2 and the new (and now available) K110D and
the K100D. Price is a concern for her, so the non-anti-shake body is where
here interest lies. BuyDig has both the DL and the K110D in stock, and,
PDML@pdml.net
Subject: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 12:12:37 -0700
A friend is looking for an entry level DSLR, and she likes my istDS. We
talked a little about the DL/DL2 and the new (and now available) K110D and
the K100D. Price is a concern for her, so the non-anti-shake body
Tom C wrote:
I wondered why Pentax even thought announcing another 6MP DSLR was somehow a
good marketing strategy.
1) It's less expensive than the K100D
2) It doesn't have that stupid ist name ;-)
--
Mark Roberts Photography Multimedia
www.robertstech.com
412-687-2835
--
PDML
I think the K110D is much better than the DL on many counts. First, if
the AF is anything like the K100D (which I own), it's *MUCH* better than
what you get on the DL; second, it's much more future proof by being
SDHC compatible. I personally don't think Pentax will ever release a
firmware
I only note one difference, that being the K110D has an 11 pt AF system
whereas the DL has a 3 pt system.
DL 'prox $80 less.
Jack
--- Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A friend is looking for an entry level DSLR, and she likes my istDS.
We
talked a little about the DL/DL2 and the new
Shel -
Both have pentamirrors rather than a pentaprism - as near as I can tell,
the only difference is the the K110 has 11 point autofocus, while the DL
has 3 point, and the K110 will do high speed flash with a dedicated
flash unit and the DL doesn't have this feature.
If money is a factor,
On 8/10/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A friend is looking for an entry level DSLR, and she likes my istDS. We
talked a little about the DL/DL2 and the new (and now available) K110D and
the K100D. Price is a concern for her, so the non-anti-shake body is where
here interest
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
A friend is looking for an entry level DSLR, and she likes my istDS. We
talked a little about the DL/DL2 and the new (and now available) K110D and
the K100D. Price is a concern for her, so the non-anti-shake body is where
here interest lies.
On Aug 10, 2006, at 3:51 PM, Asad Masede wrote:
they can be forgiven for wanting people to buy their new
cameras while they're in deep financial shit
You mean while they're selling cameras in record numbers and at the
highest profitability for the camera division in the history of the
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 20:51:54 +0100, Asad Masede [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
. they can be forgiven for wanting people to buy
their new
cameras while they're in deep financial shit.
-Asad
Pentax are a profit-making company. Saying they are in deep financial
Where does this come from? Profitability defined how?
at the
highest profitability for the camera division in the history of the
company? That kind of shit?
-Aaron
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 04:16:57PM -0400, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
Just a though, but IIRC the K1[01]0D does DNG RAW files. Are they
compressed to a non-stupid level? Anyone know?
Neither the K100D nor K110D produce DNG RAW files. The new version of
Pentax Photo Laboratory (SilkyPix in
And anyway these software version 3 are vavailable for DS/DL/D also.
2006/8/10, John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 04:16:57PM -0400, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
Just a though, but IIRC the K1[01]0D does DNG RAW files. Are they
compressed to a non-stupid level? Anyone
John Forbes wrote:
2 Indicative that you are in deep intellectual shit (ie: stupid)
John
Wow, when did I ever insult you? Is venting online the only way you can
cope with your frustration?
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
On Aug 10, 2006, at 3:51 PM, Asad Masede wrote:
they can be forgiven for wanting people to buy their new
cameras while they're in deep financial shit
You mean while they're selling cameras in record numbers and at the
highest profitability for the camera
The screen on the K110D is bigger, brighter, and has a better viewing angle.
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Thu Aug 10, 2006 3:19 pm
Size: 749 bytes
To: PDML PDML@pdml.net
A friend is looking for an entry level
. ;)
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Thu Aug 10, 2006 4:36 pm
Size: 271 bytes
To: pdml@pdml.net
Where does this come from? Profitability defined how?
at the
highest profitability for the camera division in the history
Sorry, is this based on something factual or when you say IMO do you mean
that you're just guessing about Pentax's financials?
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: Asad Masede [EMAIL PROTECTED]
They've just begun to do that, they have started climbing out of their
hole, yes, but are they
Same size actually, the DL was the first Pentax with the 2.5 screen.
-Adam
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
The screen on the K110D is bigger, brighter, and has a better viewing angle.
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: K110D - Why bother?
Date
, debriefed or
numbered.
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: PDML PDML@pdml.net
Subject: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 12:12:37 -0700
A friend is looking for an entry level DSLR, and she likes my istDS. We
talked
pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 18:30:41 -0400
Parts commonality. K110D is replacing the DL entirely. Because it can be
made from K100D parts.
-Adam
Tom C wrote:
I wondered why Pentax even thought announcing
Thanks, Scott ... good to know. I forgot about the Samsung. Might be worth
adding to the discussion with my friend.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Scott Loveless
Have you mentioned the Samsung GX-1S? Looks to be a DS2, more or less.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
Thank you so much, Paul. Very good and valuable information.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Paul Sorenson
Both have pentamirrors rather than a pentaprism - as near as I can tell,
the only difference is the the K110 has 11 point autofocus, while the DL
has 3 point, and the K110 will do
That's what I heard forgot about it, though. tks!
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Aaron Reynolds
The screen on the K110D is [...] brighter, and has a better viewing
angle.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
How so? Please be as specific as you can. Thanks.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Asad Masede
I think the K110D is much better than the DL on many counts. First, if
the AF is anything like the K100D (which I own), it's *MUCH* better than
what you get on the DL;
--
PDML
On Aug 10, 2006, at 4:02 PM, Tom C wrote:
I was questioning the wisdom of continuing with any 6MP DSLR body
when the
bar has been raised in entry level DSLRs for some time now.
Which bar? Just because 8 and 10 Mpixel cameras are out there at
similar pricing doesn't mean that they do any
Well, I can't (and won't) do any timed tests, but the K100D is much
better at low light AF than the last gen of Pentax DSLRs. I have an *ist
DS and it has trouble locking onto subjects when it's dark, and when it
does lock-on, it's slow; the K100D on the other hand, locks on very
quickly even
- Original Message -
From: Asad Masede
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother?
John Forbes wrote:
2 Indicative that you are in deep intellectual shit (ie: stupid)
John
Wow, when did I ever insult you? Is venting online the only way you
can
cope with your frustration?
It's all good
is often everything in the
marketplace.
Tom C.
I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or
numbered.
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Perhaps you mean the marketing bar.
Well that's the *polite* word for it...
;-)
--
Mark Roberts Photography Multimedia
www.robertstech.com
412-687-2835
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
It's all good.
I called John a bad name once.
Now he's called you a bad name, so you can call me a bad name and
everyone's karma is even.
William Robb
No. You called me a name so bad that true justice means I must do more than
call you a bad name. I must come and see to it that you gum your
Also I suspect there is a market for a 6mp dslr among the masses.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Tom C wrote:
I wondered why Pentax even thought announcing another 6MP DSLR was somehow
a
good marketing
How do they compare with the same batteries? It seems that, in the past,
someone used NiMH bats that were a little hotter than the standard CRV-3
bats and claimed to have gotten faster autofocus. Several people noted,
iirc, that NiMH bats (maybe rechargeable ones)were not recommended for the
Kenneth Waller wrote:
Also I suspect there is a market for a 6mp dslr among the masses.
Kenneth Waller
I tend to think that group would buy a 6+MP point and shoot. Don't know
though.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On 11/08/06, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was questioning the wisdom of continuing with any 6MP DSLR body when the
bar has been raised in entry level DSLRs for some time now.
You're just sore because you want a camera with better than a pissy
little 6MP sensor, what's wrong with the 645D
picture or a bigger number?
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Thu Aug 10, 2006 8:18 pm
Size: 2K
To: pdml@pdml.net
Your last interrogative (Why not sell it?) was more or less where I was
coming from. Will it sell *that* well
Both.
From: Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 20:56:00 -0400
Who cares about the number of megapixels? As many have pointed out, a
higher pixel
As we've seen reported on the web most digital images never get printed.
Just my hunch...
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Kenneth Waller wrote:
Also I suspect there is a market for a 6mp dslr among the masses.
Kenneth
. :-)
Tom C.
I 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: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 20:56:00
Ah, but isn't bigger always better? ;+)
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Who cares about the number of megapixels? As many have pointed out, a
higher pixel count in the same physical space often yields
. :-)
Tom C.
I 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: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 20
-- demand for both new bodies is quite strong, despite your
belief that no one wants one. ;)
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Thu Aug 10, 2006 9:12 pm
Size: 3K
To: pdml@pdml.net
I guess you're saying all those existing
As someone who until recently made his living making prints for other people,
I've seen it too.
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Thu Aug 10, 2006 9:26 pm
Size: 4K
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Aaron
Thanks to all who answered my questions.
Shel
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Aug 10, 2006, at 6:09 PM, Kenneth Waller wrote:
I tend to think that group would buy a 6+MP point and shoot.
Don't know
though.
Might be right, especially if the price is significantly lower than
a 6mp
dslr.
My limited experience (among my acquaintances) says a point shoot
Shel,
It's the rechargable CR-V3's that aren't recommended for the DSLR's,
because of excess voltage (they're 3.6V instead of 3V for Lithium
CR-V3's). And they do Af a bit quicker. NiMH AA's are indeed
recommended for use in the *istD's and the K1x0D's.
-Adam
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
How do
@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 16:37:03 -0700
On Aug 10, 2006, at 4:02 PM, Tom C wrote:
I was questioning the wisdom of continuing with any 6MP DSLR body
when the
bar has been raised in entry level DSLRs for some time now
- Original Message -
From: Aaron Reynolds
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother?
As someone who until recently made his living making prints for other
people, I've seen it too.
Just before I left the industry, one of my pro customers went from a 6mp
Canon to an 8mp Canon. As far as I
- Original Message -
From: Tom C
Subject: Re: K110D - Why bother?
It's all good.
I called John a bad name once.
Now he's called you a bad name, so you can call me a bad name and
everyone's karma is even.
William Robb
No. You called me a name so bad that true justice means I must
On Aug 10, 2006, at 11:48 PM, William Robb wrote:
But if you must come and help me eat steaks, Charmi and I are still
planning to be at Rosebery Provincial Park from about Sept. 4 till the
18th.
We'll keep the BSE stuff on ice for you.
I was watching an old episode of Quincy the other day,
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
How do they compare with the same batteries?
The K100/110D is *MUCH* faster even if they're both using NiMH cells.
You have to use it to notice the big difference in AF, I'm sure upcoming
reviews will take not of this.
It seems that, in the past,
someone used NiMH
91 matches
Mail list logo
