/2006 1:33:45 PM
Subject: RE: Pentax 1.8 85mm
It's like ordering a Coke when all they sell is
Pepsi, everybody knows what I am talking about
except possibly you, actually, scratch that, you
knew, you just want to argue over nothing. Since
the term IS came first, its more like a COKE than
with USM, HSM or whatever Pentax
decide to label it in the future.
John
-- Original Message ---
From: Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 09:35:45 +1100
Subject: Re: RE: Pentax 1.8 85mm
On 25/11/06, William Robb
No, it's not. A Coke is NOT Pepsi. They are different formulas and taste
different. When I order a Coke, I don't want a Pepsi. The converse is
also true. Try telling Coke that it's the same as Pepsi. If you tell me
Coke, I expect Coke, not Pepsi.
If you want to argue minutia, make a good
it in the future.
John
-- Original Message ---
From: Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 09:35:45 +1100
Subject: Re: RE: Pentax 1.8 85mm
On 25/11/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That $35.00
Not ones that that HAVEN'T.
JCO
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Shel Belinkoff
Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 6:14 PM
To: PDML
Subject: RE: Pentax 1.8 85mm
No, it's not. A Coke is NOT Pepsi. They are different formulas and
taste
On Nov 24, 2006, at 6:14 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
No, it's not. A Coke is NOT Pepsi. They are different formulas
and taste
different. When I order a Coke, I don't want a Pepsi. The
converse is
also true. Try telling Coke that it's the same as Pepsi. If you
tell me
Coke, I
: Pentax 1.8 85mm
- Original Message -
From: John Whittingham
Subject: Re: RE: Pentax 1.8 85mm
For the record, it's several parts, not one. The people at Pentax I've
heard from estimate that the parts and associated additional assembly
complexity add about $25.00-35.00 to the cost
On Nov 24, 2006, at 2:56 PM, John Whittingham wrote:
Is this the part of the thread where common sense takes over
Sadly, John, I don't expect common sense or courtesy to appear in
these discussions at all. An imbecile monomaniac will post the same
inane litany thousands of times as soon as
That is not the case with IS or SR - and the point is that a Coke is not a
Pepsi, and Canon's IS is not Penatx's SR.
Coke, BTW, has not become a generic term. Tell that to the good folks in
Atlanta.
It's not my place to come up with examples for you. If you want to argue a
point, use good
:45 +1100
Subject: Re: RE: Pentax 1.8 85mm
On 25/11/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That $35.00 (US currency) is the estimated manufacturing cost per unit
that I got from a recently retired Pentax rep. In a normal
marketplace,
that would translate to about a $150.00-$200.00
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Shel Belinkoff
Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 6:48 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: RE: Pentax 1.8 85mm
That is not the case with IS or SR - and the point is that a Coke is not
a Pepsi, and Canon's IS is not Penatx's SR.
Coke, BTW, has
John Forbes wrote:
As far as I can recall, nobody here has ever said that the aperture
simulator is totally unnecessary.
Of course not. It's called the straw man argument: Arguing against a
position which no one takes.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
I agree. Substitutions are a problem in modern society. As are brand
impeachments. I worked on Jeep advertising, and one of our major
problems was that Jeep had become a generic name for 4x4 SUVs. This
was particularly true in Europe. We even did an advertising campaign
aimed specifically
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell
Subject: RE: RE: Pentax 1.8 85mm
Listen WR, you complete dumbshit,
Thats not what you said originally, you said
they PROFITED $25-35 by not putting it in
Um, you are not only a fuckface, you are a lying homophobic fuckface.
From: William
On Nov 24, 2006, at 6:49 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
Go give your boyfried a blowjob
if you are so gay horny you cant stop with the
stupid sexual obscenities...Maybe that will
make you give it up...
Mark!
I truly think some jco quotes belong in the yearly summary. If for no
other reason,
Sent: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 09:35:45 +1100
Subject: Re: RE: Pentax 1.8 85mm
On 25/11/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That $35.00 (US currency) is the estimated manufacturing cost per unit
that I got from a recently retired Pentax rep. In a normal
marketplace
remember
your own lies?
jco
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
William Robb
Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 8:49 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: RE: Pentax 1.8 85mm
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell
Subject: RE
, November 24, 2006 8:42 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Pentax 1.8 85mm
On Nov 24, 2006, at 6:49 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
Go give your boyfried a blowjob
if you are so gay horny you cant stop with the
stupid sexual obscenities...Maybe that will
make you give it up...
Mark!
I
- Original Message -
The simpleton, lying, abusing coward and active long term coprophagiac
incurable homophobic fuckface posted:
Subject: RE: RE: Pentax 1.8 85mm
Thats NOT all you posted on the topic,
you specifically posted they told you they decided
to keep the $35 as profit
I don't want or need mechanical aperture position sensors in my
DSLRs. I'd rather Pentax saved me the cost of it, no matter what it
might be, and put the development money into delivering a DA28mm f/2
Limited lens. My lens kit is all most recent series Pentax lenses ...
they do a better
With all due respect
Mark !
Double Har - as if this exists here.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax 1.8 85mm
John,
I'm tired. I have had it up to my eyeballs with your BS. I've also had
it up to my eyeballs with JCO's
Part of the problem there is that Jeep should never have been a brand in
the first place. In fact it originated as a WW1 term for an unproven
vehicle, although how it came to be applied to the 1/4 ton 4x4 truck of
WW2 is speculation.
Of course, the exact same thing has happened with Hummer
I seem to recall that the name came from General Purpose Passenger
Vehicle or GP or jeep.
Kinda like the penetrating oil, WD-40, name came from Water
Dispersal formulation number 40.
Godfrey
On Nov 24, 2006, at 9:10 PM, Adam Maas wrote:
Part of the problem there is that Jeep should never
But Jeep is a trademarked brand, and it's a valuable one. So if you
own the trademark, you do your best to protect it. It's just good
business. What should have been or could have been is irrelevant.
Willys made it a brand. American Motors and, later, Chrysler invested
in it and will of
Chrysler are victims of their own marketing then. Jeep has now entered
the English language, they will forever be defending the trademark.
It's the same problem that Apple is having with it's i-Pod trademark.
Look at the number of mp3 players that are now i-this or pod that.
I remember reading a
That actually came later. The earliest use was of 'untested vehicle'.
Although the 1/4 ton truck was referred to in at least one TM as a
general Purpose vehicle.
To make life interesting, Ford (the largest manufacturer of the original
Willys Jeep) referred to the vehicle as model GP or GPW (G
Jeep is a generic term that Willys co-opted then spent years turning
into a brand. That gives them and their successor companies exactly zero
right to bitch when people use the term genericly as far as I'm concerned.
This is different from a situation where the brand came first (like
Kleenex,
Actually, they aren't. Willys co-opted something that entered common
usage during WW2 (note that the Willys Jeep wasn't the only Jeep of WW2,
the term was also used for CVE escort aircraft carriers, which were
called Jeep Carriers). Since they're using a generic term as a
trademark, they'll
Thanks for the clarification Adam.
That's another thing I hate. When corporations trademark common usage terms.
Dave
On 11/25/06, Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, they aren't. Willys co-opted something that entered common
usage during WW2 (note that the Willys Jeep wasn't the only
I was offered to buy this lens locally. A K-mount lens, I believe.
Is it worth buying?
Thanks in advance.
Regards
Jens
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.14/548 - Release Date: 11/23/2006
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss
Yes. It's a great optic. If you can get it for less than $300 US,
it's a steal.
Paul
On Nov 23, 2006, at 3:05 PM, Jens Bladt wrote:
I was offered to buy this lens locally. A K-mount lens, I believe.
Is it worth buying?
Thanks in advance.
Regards
Jens
--
No virus found in this outgoing
It's one of the all-time great K-mounts!
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Jens Bladt
I was offered to buy this lens locally. A K-mount lens, I believe.
Is it worth buying?
Thanks in advance.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Yes.
Jens Bladt wrote:
I was offered to buy this lens locally. A K-mount lens, I believe.
Is it worth buying?
Thanks in advance.
Regards
Jens
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Emne: Re: Pentax 1.8 85mm
Yes.
Jens Bladt wrote:
I was offered to buy this lens locally. A K-mount lens, I believe.
Is it worth buying?
Thanks in advance.
Regards
Jens
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
http://www.jensbladt.dk
+45 56 63 77 11
+45 23 43 85 77
Skype: jensbladt248
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne
af P. J.
Alling
Sendt: 24. november 2006 00:47
Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Emne: Re: Pentax 1.8 85mm
Yes.
Jens Bladt
: SV: Pentax 1.8 85mm
Thanks Paul, Shel and PJ.
I'll se if I can get it for 300 USD.
Regards
Jens Bladt
http://www.jensbladt.dk
+45 56 63 77 11
+45 23 43 85 77
Skype: jensbladt248
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af P.
J. Alling
Sendt: 24
supporting K/M lenses..
joco
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of
Jens Bladt
Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 6:56 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: SV: Pentax 1.8 85mm
Thanks Paul, Shel and PJ.
I'll se if I can get it for 300
PROTECTED] Auftrag von
Jens Bladt
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 23. November 2006 21:06
An: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Betreff: Pentax 1.8 85mm
I was offered to buy this lens locally. A K-mount lens, I believe.
Is it worth buying?
Thanks in advance.
Regards
Jens
--
No virus found in this outgoing message
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Paul Stenquist
Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 9:20 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Pentax 1.8 85mm
HAR!
I use it all the time on my digital Pentax cameras. No problem. An
*istD/K85/1.8 sample:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2154000
Paul
On Nov 23
should be fully supporting K/M lenses.. joco
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of
Jens Bladt
Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 6:56 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: SV: Pentax 1.8 85mm
Thanks Paul, Shel and PJ
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of
Paul Stenquist
Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 9:20 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Pentax 1.8 85mm
HAR!
I use it all the time on my digital Pentax cameras. No problem. An
*istD
] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 10:06 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: RE: Pentax 1.8 85mm
So the $5 part is now a $50 part?
Do you have any other pet subjects you'd like to rant about ad nauseum?
Quoting J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Put it the way
Once more into the breach
Paul, stop encouraging this line of commentary.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Paul Stenquist
HAR!
I use it all the time on my digital Pentax cameras. No problem.
An *istD/K85/1.8 sample:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2154000
Paul
On Nov
I would not.
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 10:31 PM
Subject: RE: Pentax 1.8 85mm
A HAR! does not answer the question. Would you
pay $50 more for full K/M support on a top line
] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 10:06 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: RE: Pentax 1.8 85mm
So the $5 part is now a $50 part?
Do you have any other pet subjects you'd like to rant about ad
nauseum?
Quoting J. C
] On Behalf Of
Paul Stenquist
Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 10:20 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Pentax 1.8 85mm
HAR!
On Nov 23, 2006, at 9:55 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
Put it the way it is, if you could buy a high end DSLR body for
only an
extra $50
that would fully support
to argue that one?
jco
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 10:06 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: RE: Pentax 1.8 85mm
So the $5 part is now a $50 part?
Do you have any
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Pentax 1.8 85mm
HAR!
On Nov 23, 2006, at 9:55 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
Put it the way it is, if you could buy a high end DSLR body for
only an
extra $50
that would fully support this and the many
other fine K/M lenses you wouldnt? I certainly
would
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Re: Pentax 1.8 85mm
Once more into the breach
Paul, stop encouraging this line of commentary.
Discussion.
Fuckface.
End of discussion.
William Robb
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman
At 11:48 AM 24/11/2006, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Re: Pentax 1.8 85mm
Once more into the breach
Paul, stop encouraging this line of commentary.
Discussion.
Fuckface.
End of discussion.
William Robb
ROTFLMAO
Dave
--
PDML
On Nov 23, 2006, at 10:35 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Paul, stop encouraging this line of commentary.
HAR!!!
Shel, you do have a sense of humor.
Paul
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Read between the lines ...
John, why do you insist on continuing this stupidity. We all know your
position on this, and for those of us who buy and use Pentax DSLR's, we
have either accepted the reality of the situation or just don't care. I
love my K-mount lenses, and I'm glad to be able to
101 - 152 of 152 matches
Mail list logo
