Hi all
I was perusing the pentax forum marketplace and saw an add for pentax
m42 extension tubes for $15.
They seem to include 12, 20, 36mm.
Here's a photo:
http://bkr.smugmug.com/Other/PhotoGear/11652557_WLPQY#821679568_6HGn4-A-LB
I am clueluess about extension tubes but have heard plenty
/7/19 Sam L samthegr...@gmail.com:
Hi all
I was perusing the pentax forum marketplace and saw an add for pentax
m42 extension tubes for $15.
They seem to include 12, 20, 36mm.
Here's a photo:
http://bkr.smugmug.com/Other/PhotoGear/11652557_WLPQY#821679568_6HGn4-A-LB
I am clueluess about
Sam,
That set is OK for using M42 lenses either on screwmount and K-bayonet
cameras (via K adapter).
A k-mount set is required for using K-bayonet lenses on K-bayonet cameras.
What's the price?
Dario
- Original Message -
From: Sam L samthegr...@gmail.com
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail
I agree with the eckinator: You basically get what you pay for in the
way of convenience.
If you are interested in getting into macro inexpensively, and you
have m42 lenses to stick on the m42 extension tubes this is certainly
an inexpensive way to get started. If you are using an external flash
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 5:46 PM, CheekyGeek cheekyg...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree with the eckinator: You basically get what you pay for in the
way of convenience.
If you are interested in getting into macro inexpensively, and you
have m42 lenses to stick on the m42 extension tubes
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Sam L samthegr...@gmail.com wrote:
I was perusing the pentax forum marketplace and saw an add for pentax
m42 extension tubes for $15.
They seem to include 12, 20, 36mm.
Here's a photo:
http://bkr.smugmug.com/Other/PhotoGear/11652557_WLPQY#821679568_6HGn4
On 19/07/10 22:58, Sam L wrote:
r subject, you'll just need a little testing to
figure out your expo
TBH If you just want to have a play with Macro these will be fine.
Personally when I do Macro it is generally a pretty controlled setup, in
those cases manual tubes with manual lenses are
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 14:47 -0400, Sam L samthegr...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all
I was perusing the pentax forum marketplace and saw an add for pentax
m42 extension tubes for $15.
They seem to include 12, 20, 36mm.
Here's a photo:
http://bkr.smugmug.com/Other/PhotoGear/11652557_WLPQY
These will only work properly with M42 screw mount lenses. Pentax
stopped making lenses in this mount in the mid 1970s. To use them on
any K mount camera either film or digital you will have to get a Pentax
M42 to K mount adapter. Some third party adapters compromise infintiy
focus
Thanks for sharing your historical expertise, Dario. That new photo
is quite clear and informative and should satisfy anyone that the lens
is not sporting its original back end. It looks to me like the lens
in its original form is fixed to the IR unit, and not meant to be
dismounted in normal
http://cgi.ebay.com/Asahi-NC-Takumar-3-3-300mm-Pentax-M42-/350370216253
Strange, never seen, unknow: NC (?) Takumar 1:3.3 (?) 300 mm
It has been changed, but the ring marking seems real...
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Of what use is lens and light
to those who lack in mind and sight
(Anon)
2010/7/3 Michel Carrère-Gée michel.carrere-...@orange.fr:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Asahi-NC-Takumar-3-3-300mm-Pentax-M42-/350370216253
Strange, never seen, unknow: NC (?) Takumar
Le 03/07/2010 10:30, Anthony Farr a écrit :
Whew! It took some googling but I finally tracked this one down. It
looks like the lens from a Pentax Nocta from 1966, which is part-way
down this page:
http://www.aohc.it/oddse1.htm
Any comments, Dario?
As rare as it must be, the starting price
The mounting the tube seems also an original.
Are you sure about that? Compare the pictures at AOHC:
http://www.aohc.it/cameras/nocta.jpg
and,
http://www.aohc.it/images/sp40.jpg
to the picture at the auction:
http://i.ebayimg.com/11/!Bw0VCdQBGk~$(KGrHqIOKioEwPgB+i)hBMKt40,WIw~~_12.JPG
You
- Original Message
From: Anthony Farr farranth...@gmail.com
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Sat, July 3, 2010 3:58:31 AM
Subject: Re: Strange Asahi NC Takumar 3,3/300mm Pentax M42 on Ebay
The mounting the tube seems also an original.
Are you sure about
Takumar 3,3/300mm Pentax M42 on Ebay
The mounting the tube seems also an original.
Are you sure about
that? Compare the pictures at
AOHC:
http://www.aohc.it/cameras/nocta.jpg
and,
http://www.aohc.it/images/sp40.jpg
to
the picture at the
auction:
http://i.ebayimg.com/11/!Bw0VCdQBGk
: Strange Asahi NC Takumar 3,3/300mm Pentax M42 on Ebay
The mounting the tube seems also an original.
Are you sure about
that? Compare the pictures at
AOHC:
http://www.aohc.it/cameras/nocta.jpg
and,
http://www.aohc.it/images/sp40.jpg
to
the picture at the
auction:
http
10:30 AM
Subject: Re: Strange Asahi NC Takumar 3,3/300mm Pentax M42 on Ebay
Whew! It took some googling but I finally tracked this one down. It
looks like the lens from a Pentax Nocta from 1966, which is part-way
down this page:
http://www.aohc.it/oddse1.htm
Any comments, Dario?
As rare
In this case, I believe the IR unit usually (so to speak) seen between the
lens and the Nocta body has been replaced by a simple barrel, in order to
keep the register distance.
See this picture I've just uploaded:
www.aohc.it/images/Nocta_06.jpg
Dario
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
On 2010-07-03 14:01, David Parsons wrote:
How many stops is 256x?
8
--
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
I apologize for the tardiness of taking and posting these. About the
time people asked for pictures, I was starting a quick home repair job
in my living room, changing a couple of lights, and replacing a little
bit of knob and tube wiring. One of those jobs that should only take
an afternoon or
You have a Honeywell Pentax! That brings back memories. I have one
of those as well as an Asahi Spotmatic that I purchase in Japan. Both
still work, but lack batteries.
Great cameras, aren't they?
Dan
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:01 AM, Larry Colenl...@red4est.com wrote:
I apologize for the
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:01 AM, Larry Colenlrc at red4est.com wrote:
...
And for your amusement, my ghetto light tent:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157622022690123/
HAR!
Igor
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 09:59:23AM -0400, Daniel J. Matyola wrote:
You have a Honeywell Pentax! That brings back memories. I have one
There are actually two of them.
of those as well as an Asahi Spotmatic that I purchase in Japan. Both
still work, but lack batteries.
Great cameras,
Modifying the adapter is all about using auto only M42
lenses manually on a K body. I beleive this inquiry is if auto M42
lenses can be used AUTOMATICALLY via a complex adatper
on a K body, which the answer is no.
JC O'Connell
hifis...@gate.net
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun
The m42 lenses stop down by pushing in on the rod. The k-mount stop
down by pushing sideways on a lever. I can imagine something where
the widget that pushes sideway on a lever, would push on a hinged
doo-hickey (pardon the technical engineering jargon) that then pushed
on the rod on the lens
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote:
The m42 lenses stop down by pushing in on the rod. The k-mount stop
down by pushing sideways on a lever. I can imagine something where
the widget that pushes sideway on a lever, would push on a hinged
doo-hickey (pardon
M42 lenses are 42mm dia. male metric threads with a 1.0 mm thread pitch.
(t-mount are similar but have 0.75mm thread pitch)
that tool page is for something else very huge and different.
JC O'Connell
hifis...@gate.net
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun
there are no adapters that convert K bodies
to acutate m42 auto lens pins.
I believe Fuji made a bayonet camera
that did have such an adapter,but
fuji's bayonet camera was not K mount
body.
The tool
page is NOT same M42 as M42 lenses.
JC O'Connell
hifis...@gate.net
-Original Message
M42x1 would be the same regardless of whether it is photographic
equipment or heavy machinery since it describes a thread with a 42mm
diameter and a 1mm pitch. There is no guarantee that something (other
than camera equipment) described just as M42 wouldn't be M42 x 0.75 or
M42 x 1.25
The tool page he reference was M42-5 not M42-1
JC O'Connell
hifis...@gate.net
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Paul Ewins
Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 9:23 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: do any m42 adapters do
Yep, that has to be different.
I did remember a couple of cases of a different M42 in the photo
world - an early Adaptall type mount that is M42 x .75 and also a
Schneider Componon enlarging lens that used an M42 x .75 retaining
ring. Earlier and later versions of the same lens were
-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Paul Ewins
Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 10:52 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: do any m42 adapters do auto stopdown?
Yep, that has to be different.
I did remember a couple of cases of a different M42
Actually, the reference chart was M42 x 4.5 tpi, which is mixing
metric and ASA. Somethings not right there. It then goes on to
describe the inch equiv. as 1.6535 x 5.64 inches.
Your Pentax camera lens SM is 42 mm x 1 mm, as Paul said. I measured.
On Apr 1, 2009, at 19:44 , JC OConnell
Larry Colen a écrit :
The m42 lenses stop down by pushing in on the rod. The k-mount stop
down by pushing sideways on a lever. I can imagine something where
the widget that pushes sideway on a lever, would push on a hinged
doo-hickey (pardon the technical engineering jargon) that then pushed
On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 06:57:22AM +0200, Michel Carr?re-G?e wrote:
Larry Colen a ?crit :
The m42 lenses stop down by pushing in on the rod. The k-mount stop
down by pushing sideways on a lever. I can imagine something where
the widget that pushes sideway on a lever, would push on a hinged
I can't locate my screw mount to K Pentax adapter. Does anyone have one for
sale? Should original Pentax make.
Thanks, Bill Lawlor
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above
FYI, this part is called mount adapter K
if youre looking for the real thing.
JC O'Connell
hifis...@gate.net
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Subash
Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 9:54 PM
To: pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: WTB M42/K
On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 14:32:29 -0700
Bill Lawlor w...@comcast.net wrote:
I can't locate my screw mount to K Pentax adapter. Does anyone have
one for sale? Should original Pentax make.
Thanks, Bill Lawlor
Bill, you can still buy one from here:
http://www.pentaxwebstore.com/detail/PTX+30120
Pentax part number 30120.
Bought one a few months ago.
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: JC OConnell hifis...@gate.net
Subject: RE: WTB M42/K converter
FYI, this part is called mount adapter K
if youre looking for the real thing.
JC
A coworker was asking about the sigma 30/1.4. There is pretty much
one shot that the needs it for. A yosemite falls moonbow shot. It
occured to me that he might be able to pick up something decent in m42
for a lot less money. Of course if I look on ebay, all the faster m42
lenses I see are 50mm
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote:
A coworker was asking about the sigma 30/1.4. There is pretty much
one shot that the needs it for. A yosemite falls moonbow shot. It
occured to me that he might be able to pick up something decent in m42
for a lot less
A coworker was asking about the sigma 30/1.4. There is pretty much
LC one shot that the needs it for. A yosemite falls moonbow shot. It
LC occured to me that he might be able to pick up something decent in m42
LC for a lot less money. Of course if I look on ebay, all the faster m42
LC lenses I
, March 24, 2009 2:30 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Is there a good, fast, inexpensive 30mm or so m42?
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote:
A coworker was asking about the sigma 30/1.4. There is pretty much
one shot that the needs it for. A yosemite
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 3:19 PM, JC OConnell hifis...@gate.net wrote:
Vivitar series 1 28mm F1.9 should do the trick.
Its a great lens. I sold mine after I got the
K28/2 but not because it wasnt any good.
JC O'Connell
hifis...@gate.net
Good lens, bloody hard to find. I've had my eye out
but not because it wasnt any good.
JC O'Connell
hifis...@gate.net
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf
Of
Adam Maas
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 2:30 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Is there a good, fast, inexpensive 30mm or so m42
I had it in both M42 and PK for a while,
both gone...
JC O'Connell
hifis...@gate.net
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Adam Maas
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 3:23 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Is there a good
...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
JC OConnell
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 4:10 PM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: RE: Is there a good, fast, inexpensive 30mm or so m42?
I had it in both M42 and PK for a while,
both gone...
JC O'Connell
hifis...@gate.net
-Original Message-
From: pdml
A friend in Canada just told me that her father is looking for
a telephoto lens longer than 200mm, for night sky photography,
for his Spotmatic-F that he's been using since the 1970s. And
he hasn't been able to find any. I suggested that for screwmount
lenses he'll probably have to resort to
A friend in Canada just told me that her father is looking for
a telephoto lens longer than 200mm, for night sky photography,
for his Spotmatic-F that he's been using since the 1970s. And
he hasn't been able to find any. I suggested that for screwmount
lenses he'll probably have to
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 4:50 PM, D. Glenn Arthur Jr. dgl...@panix.com wrote:
A friend in Canada just told me that her father is looking for
a telephoto lens longer than 200mm, for night sky photography,
for his Spotmatic-F that he's been using since the 1970s. And
he hasn't been able to find
Bob W p...@web-options.com suggested:
http://www.ukcamera.com/usedcams/index.htm
Thanks. Forwarded.
Adam Maas a...@mawz.ca wrote:
eBay or KEH. No real options locally unless he's in Toronto.
London, but gets to Toronto once in a while, I think ...
--
On 2/22/09, D. Glenn Arthur Jr. dgl...@panix.com wrote:
A friend in Canada just told me that her father is looking for
a telephoto lens longer than 200mm, for night sky photography,
for his Spotmatic-F that he's been using since the 1970s. And
he hasn't been able to find any. I suggested
it might be worth suggesting that he finds an older lens of any make, and
then buys a body or adapter to suit. It could save a lot of looking and be
cheaper. For example, there's a 600mm Olympus here:
http://www.acecameras.co.uk/asp/web/shopid/1557/default.asp with some
reasonable looking bodies
to Toronto once in a while, I think ...
-- Glenn
Henry's does see some T-mount and M42 long teles or mirror lenses on occasion.
--
M. Adam Maas
http://www.mawz.ca
Explorations of the City Around Us.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http
D. Glenn Arthur Jr. wrote:
A friend in Canada just told me that her father is looking for
a telephoto lens longer than 200mm, for night sky photography,
for his Spotmatic-F that he's been using since the 1970s. And
he hasn't been able to find any. I suggested that for screwmount
lenses
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 5:27 PM, mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote:
D. Glenn Arthur Jr. wrote:
A friend in Canada just told me that her father is looking for a telephoto
lens longer than 200mm, for night sky photography, for his Spotmatic-F that
he's been using since the 1970s. And
: Re: Source of M42 telephoto lenses?
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 5:27 PM, mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com
wrote:
D. Glenn Arthur Jr. wrote:
A friend in Canada just told me that her father is looking for a
telephoto lens longer than 200mm, for night sky photography, for his
Spotmatic-F
From: Ken Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2008/11/24 Mon PM 05:38:39 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?]
Ford, and probably others, totally immerse the body shell, have for years,
in addition to using non metallic body panels (aluminum
From: David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2008/11/23 Sun AM 06:09:19 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
2008/11/23 Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 11/22/08, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 22, 2008, at 9:43 AM
.
Cheers
John Poirier
- Original Message -
From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 12:29 PM
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
Some have been asking for that for a long time. We may yet see a digital
be enormous.
That last sentence is probably the biggest argument against any such thing
(just as in the case of the putative M42 DSLR in the title of this thread).
If the body isn't going to lead to additional sales of lenses (which are
usually significantly more profitable than the body) that means
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 4:59 PM, Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/23/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That would be Paul. The P key on my daughter's laptop apparently
requires extra effort
aul
You have to give that P your aul.
They should hammer that out them
/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: Joseph McAllister [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?]
In the late 70s Porsche started dipping all their cars in a galvanizing
solution while still a bare metal shell. Over the next ten years, all
other manufacturers started doing
On Nov 24, 2008, at 9:33 AM, David J Brooks wrote:
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 4:59 PM, Scott Loveless
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/23/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That would be Paul. The P key on my daughter's laptop
apparently requires extra effort
aul
You have to give
Not when there's no competition. Whoever puts out the
first M42 DSLR will have no competition, so that gives
them at least some leeway on pricing.
JC O'Connell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
John Francis
Sent: Monday
to which M42 lenses could be adapted. I'd rather spend $1500 on
a 5D and not get Auto Aperture with M42 lenses than spend $3500 on an
otherwise identical body with the Auto Aperture plate added.
-Adam
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 12:47 PM, JC OConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not when there's
On Nov 24, 2008, at 11:47, JC OConnell wrote:
Not when there's no competition. Whoever puts out the
first M42 DSLR will have no competition, so that gives
them at least some leeway on pricing.
I would posit that they would NEVER have any competition! :-)
-Charles
--
Charles Robinson
Your M42 DSLR is/was here:
http://tinyurl.com/5sa2ht
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 6:47 PM, JC OConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not when there's no competition. Whoever puts out the
first M42 DSLR will have no competition, so that gives
them at least some leeway on pricing.
JC O'Connell
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 11:08 PM, JC OConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eww... A FF fisheye on a tiny 4/3 sensor? Thats a semi
fisheye which is about as appealing to me as getting semi-laid.
I have a semi-fisheye (16mm Zenitar on my *istD).
I've never been semi-laid. Does it have something
their cleverness in reworking basic bodies in
interesting ways.
[ . . . ]
The potential user base of classic lenses would be enormous.
That last sentence is probably the biggest argument against any such thing
(just as in the case of the putative M42 DSLR in the title
On Nov 24, 2008, at 2:42 PM, frank theriault wrote:
I have a semi-fisheye (16mm Zenitar on my *istD).
I've never been semi-laid. Does it have something to do with large
transport trucks?
;-)
It probably has more to do with fantasy rather than experience, as
most of these absurd posts
Semi laid...
It goes something like this.
A young wife is attempting to get an annulment from her Priest.
long pointless setup snipped
Priest: So you're telling me that you've been married for six months
and you two still haven't consummated?
Bride: Yes, father.
Priest: What in the
.
[ . . . ]
The potential user base of classic lenses would be enormous.
That last sentence is probably the biggest argument against any such thing
(just as in the case of the putative M42 DSLR in the title of this
thread).
If the body isn't going to lead to additional sales of lenses (which
ways.
[ . . . ]
The potential user base of classic lenses would be enormous.
That last sentence is probably the biggest argument against any such thing
(just as in the case of the putative M42 DSLR in the title of this
thread).
If the body isn't going to lead
in
interesting ways.
[ . . . ]
The potential user base of classic lenses would be enormous.
That last sentence is probably the biggest argument against any such
thing
(just as in the case of the putative M42 DSLR in the title of this
thread).
If the body isn't going to lead to additional sales
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 1:09 AM, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Datsun 120Y
My very first car, in 1973, was a brand new Datsun 1200. Paid $2300
for it. I had enough cash left over(college student at the time) to
buy rust proofing or a stereo.
It rusted out in 4 1/4 years.:-)
Dave
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
David J Brooks
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 12:19 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 1:09 AM, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Datsun 120Y
My very first car, in 1973
://cameraquest.org/mailman/listinfo/cvug
Discovering lenses BABA, by Douglas Sharp, November 13, 2008
Cheers
Mike
On Nov 19, 2008, at 11:39 AM, JC OConnell wrote:
Man, I would die for a basic M42 DSLR at this point.
All I would need on it was the M42 screw mount, basic stop down
metering
a shutter
David J Brooks wrote:
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 1:09 AM, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Datsun 120Y
Imagine how fast it would have happened if you hadn't paid extra for the
rust-proofing...
My very first car, in 1973, was a brand new Datsun 1200. Paid $2300
for it. I had
From: Ken Waller
If I had money, I wouldn't be driving at all. I'd have someone else behind
the wheel, so I could have my hands free for the camera.
Given the right road car, driving can be one of life's pleasures
photography surely is another with the right subject light.
Kenneth
My first car, in 1966 was a 1957 Ford Fairlane 500 with a 312 V8. It was rusty,
and ran very rough. I paid $50 for it. I got it to run well by relacing the
distributor which had a worn bushing and wouldn't hold dwell. But it had bad
steering parts and kind of dragged one front weel.
[...]
For fun driving, I have an MGB in the basement awaiting the time and
money for me to rebuild it again. It's not the MGB's failure
this time.
A few years ago, I had some work to do around the house and needed to
park the MG out on the street for one night. Never had done
that
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 03:09:19PM +0900, David Savage wrote:
2008/11/23 Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 11/22/08, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 22, 2008, at 9:43 AM, Joseph McAllister wrote:
... Me too an Aston Martin. ;-)
You guys are pikers...
for the most part today.
JC O'Connell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
David J Brooks
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 12:19 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008
Great story, Paul. :-) Cheers, Christine
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 1:46 PM
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
My first car, in 1966 was a 1957 Ford Fairlane 500 with a 312 V8
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
David J Brooks
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 12:19 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 1:09 AM, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Datsun 120Y
My very first
On Nov 23, 2008, at 12:18 , Bob W wrote:
[...]
I had an MG B Roadster for a few years, but ended up giving it away
after it
rotted from spending too much time parked outdoors. To bring it up to
standard would have cost more than it would have been worth, and
given the
nature of the
Hmmm. To get t-boned by a trolley I think you have to be in the wrong place at
the wrong time! :-)
aul
-- Original message --
From: Joseph McAllister [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Nov 23, 2008, at 12:18 , Bob W wrote:
[...]
I had an MG B Roadster for a few years,
That would be Paul. The P key on my daughter's laptop apparently requires
extra effort
aul
-- OriginaTTl message --
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hmmm. To get t-boned by a trolley I think you have to be in the wrong place
at
the wrong time! :-)
aul
I'm not saying nuthin'.
Joseph McAllister
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Nov 23, 2008, at 13:54 , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hmmm. To get t-boned by a trolley I think you have to be in the
wrong place at the wrong time! :-)
aul
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On Guam cars rust so bad and so quickly that we commonly called cars
biodegradable :-)
Walt
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 3:39 PM, Paul Sorenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Define recent. Come to Wisconsin and I'll show you plenty of rusty
cars...
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On 11/23/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That would be Paul. The P key on my daughter's laptop apparently requires
extra effort
aul
You have to give that P your aul.
--
Scott Loveless
New Cumberland, Pennsylvania, USA
http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/
--
PDML
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Paul Sorenson
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 3:39 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?]
Define recent. Come to Wisconsin and I'll show you plenty of rusty
cars...
-p
JC OConnell wrote:
Yup, I am old enough to remember rust. In the bad
: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)?]
Define recent. Come to Wisconsin and I'll show you plenty of rusty
cars...
-p
JC OConnell wrote:
Yup, I am old enough to remember rust. In the bad ole days rust was
common on car bodies. But, when was the last time you saw any recent
car with ANY
From: Bob W
But, that was the night 4 high school students decided to go on a
rampage smashing cars. [...]
Insurance?
Didn't pay a dime.
I did a themed photo last year for Country Roads and found
out there
are none where I live any more; had to drive 90 miles to get
far enough
- Original Message -
From: Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 11/23/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That would be Paul. The P key on my daughter's laptop apparently
requires extra effort
aul
You have to give that P your aul.
lol, good one, Scott.
--
PDML
In the late 70s Porsche started dipping all their cars in a
galvanizing solution while still a bare metal shell. Over the next ten
years, all other manufacturers started doing the same thing, though
some only dip the bottom foot or so. It's the wheel wells and rocker
panels that take the
Most automotive manufacturers started employing galvanizing or zinc
coating in the seventies, although the Japanese were a bit late in
implementing it. In truth, the first application of this technology
for rust proofing was on farm implements. I know of no auto
manufacturer that employs
I was referring to the plastic sheets that are in the wheel wells, to
keep the spray off the back of the headlights, out of the engine
compartment, and from going back into the sills, Take a look. It's no
longer a big opening that leaves the entire fender's underside exposed.
Joseph
101 - 200 of 1105 matches
Mail list logo
