I'm using this universal remote:
http://www.amazon.com/Micnova-MQ-RC3-Universal-Wireless-Infrared/dp/B008UJL1C4
It works well with K-7 and K-3, I didn't try with other cameras.
On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 5:42 AM, Mark C pdml-m...@charter.net wrote:
Everybody but me probably knows about this already
Hi Paul - The one I downloaded was from a company called bitshift but
I only downloaded the first that I saw - no idea how it compares to the
others.
Mark
On 2/6/2015 11:25 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
I found numerous apps called dslr remote. Anything else that identifies this
app?
Paul via
I got this one from BH I tried it with every Pentax Body I've got and
it works with every one. The Zoom feature actually works as a separate
AF button on the K-5II.
On 2/7/2015 4:38 AM, Attila Boros wrote:
I'm using this universal remote:
I have an official Pentax remote that works with every camera I have
tried it with - K01, K5, K3. I also picked up a couple of generic
remotes with just two buttons on them and they work with eh K-01 and K5,
but not the K3. But, for less than $5 each, I really can't complain.
On 2/7/2015 4:38
I just tried the phone from about 20 feet away from the K3 and it worked
- but Pentax brand remote I have also works from that range.
On 2/7/2015 10:07 AM, Christine Aguila wrote:
Thanks for the heads up, Mark. While I don’t mind fishing for the remote, I am
disappointed in the range of the
Yep - that is the one I am using.
Mark
On 2/7/2015 12:46 AM, Brian Walters wrote:
Quoting Paul Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net:
I found numerous apps called dslr remote. Anything else that
identifies this app?
This is the one I found - I think it's the one Mark referred to:
Thanks for the heads up, Mark. While I don’t mind fishing for the remote, I am
disappointed in the range of the remote with the K-3. You really can’t be too
far away. Is distance improved on this phone app remote?
Cheers, Christine
On Feb 6, 2015, at 9:42 PM, Mark C
On Feb 7, 2015, at 9:21 AM, Mark C pdml-m...@charter.net wrote:
I just tried the phone from about 20 feet away from the K3 and it worked -
but Pentax brand remote I have also works from that range.
really, I would have guessed less. I’ll have to do a quick test. Thanks, Mark.
cheers,
On 2/7/2015 10:28 AM, Christine Aguila wrote:
On Feb 7, 2015, at 9:21 AM, Mark C pdml-m...@charter.net wrote:
I just tried the phone from about 20 feet away from the K3 and it worked - but
Pentax brand remote I have also works from that range.
really, I would have guessed less. I’ll have
-
From: John sesso...@earthlink.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 10:21:05 AM
Subject: Re: DSLR Remote App
On 2/7/2015 10:28 AM, Christine Aguila wrote:
On Feb 7, 2015, at 9:21 AM, Mark C pdml-m...@charter.net wrote:
I just tried the phone from about 20
Quoting Mark C pdml-m...@charter.net:
Everybody but me probably knows about this already but... I just
downloaded something called DSLR Remote to my android phone ... and
wow, my phone is now an IR remote for my cameras. No more hunting
for that little IR remote! Works with the K-3 which
I never heard of it. Thanks!
Paul via phone
On Feb 6, 2015, at 10:42 PM, Mark C pdml-m...@charter.net wrote:
Everybody but me probably knows about this already but... I just downloaded
something called DSLR Remote to my android phone ... and wow, my phone is now
an IR remote for my
Quoting Paul Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net:
I found numerous apps called dslr remote. Anything else that
identifies this app?
This is the one I found - I think it's the one Mark referred to:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=de.dslrremotehl=en
Unfortunately it seems my
I found numerous apps called dslr remote. Anything else that identifies this
app?
Paul via phone
On Feb 6, 2015, at 10:42 PM, Mark C pdml-m...@charter.net wrote:
Everybody but me probably knows about this already but... I just downloaded
something called DSLR Remote to my android phone
Prescient - just heard about a 48 Mega Pixel phone camera...
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Those of you that follow Petapixel may have already seen this:
http://petapixel.com/2013/07/15/the-dslr-camera-market-is-now-bigger-than-point-and-shoots/
I
Bob, I think it was 41 MP phone camera.
Darren, you obviously haven't already forgotten the Samsung Android NX
camera, which in principle can easily be turned (if it's not already)
into a very-smart-phone with interchangeable lenses and quite proper
camera insomuch as comparing it to the cell
From: Krisjanis Linkevics
John Sessoms wrote:
I expect we'll see divergence into a slightly more specialized
video equipment; it'll be a modular box with the sensor, lens
mount, LCD and connections to output the video.
Look at Sony NEX doing it here and now - lenses optimized for video
with
John Sessoms wrote:
I expect we'll see divergence into a slightly more specialized video
equipment; it'll be a modular box with the sensor, lens mount, LCD and
connections to output the video.
Look at Sony NEX doing it here and now - lenses optimized for video with silent
motors even for
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 02:24:53PM +0100, Cotty scripsit:
On-topic in that this excellent article about 35mm adaptors and shooting
video with DSLRs (will) relate to the K-7 when it is released. Nice
charts with sensor size comparisons and personal experience by a British
colleague.
Well, maybe using Pentax is against some fundamental belief...
Serious, a very interesting link indeed, and maybe from what the article
points the K-7 would perform better than the others in that area. At
first I didn't feel the 30fps a nuisance, but then almost 99.99 of what
I do is in NTSC
Both Canon and Fuji have offered dedicated IR/Astronomical digital
cameras. I think Canon's was based on the 20D.
Fuji's are more recent (possibly still available):
http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Fujifilm-FinePix-S3-Pro-UVIR-
Digital-Camera-Review-.htm
http://www.hapg.org/astrocables.htm
Hap Griffin makes Astro Accessories as well as IR filter removal. He
advertises for Canon's only but might be able to do others as well
Walt
On 1/17/08, Beaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi-
I seem to remember one of the DSLR makers offered a special camera
Thanks-
It was the Canon 20Da that I was thinking of.
Thanks for the reminder.
Cheers
Mike
On Jan 17, 2008, at 7:42 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Both Canon and Fuji have offered dedicated IR/Astronomical digital
cameras. I think Canon's was based on the 20D.
Fuji's are more recent
/lydshow.html
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 Digital
Image Studio
Sendt: 6. februar 2007 22:49
Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Emne: Re: DSLR share (12/18 - 12/24
On 07/02/07, K.Takeshita [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For those who might be interested in.
DSLR share by maker/number of units sold (Period 12/18/06 - 12/24/06)
Nikon 49.2%
Canon 35.6%
Pentax 9.4%
Sony 4.5%
Olympus1.0%
What market Ken? Home or Worldwide?
Cheers,
--
On 2/06/07 4:48 PM, Digital Image Studio, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What market Ken? Home or Worldwide?
Home.
Ken
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On 07/02/07, K.Takeshita [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/06/07 4:48 PM, Digital Image Studio, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What market Ken? Home or Worldwide?
Home.
Thanks Ken, WW it's between 5-6% currently I believe, up from 4.7% in 2004-2005?
This may be of interest to you though it's not
On 2/06/07 4:48 PM, Digital Image Studio, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 07/02/07, K.Takeshita [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For those who might be interested in.
DSLR share by maker/number of units sold (Period 12/18/06 - 12/24/06)
Nikon 49.2%
Canon 35.6%
Pentax 9.4%
Sony
From: K.Takeshita [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/11/08 Wed AM 12:22:39 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: DSLR Share by maker
Just for the fun of it.
Between 10/2 - 10/8 (Japanese market)
Canon???48.8%
Nikon??? 34.1%
Pentax???8.1%
Sony7.4%
Oly???1.5%
On 11/08/06 3:09 AM, mike wilson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: K.Takeshita [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/11/08 Wed AM 12:22:39 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: DSLR Share by maker
Just for the fun of it.
Between 10/2 - 10/8 (Japanese market)
Canon???48.8%
I wonder which electronic giant will swallow Olympus. Or perhaps a
corporation exiting from the film and chemistry business and needing a
ready-to-market DSLR ;-)
Regards,
Anthony Farr
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
K.Takeshita
Panasonic.
-Adam
Anthony Farr wrote:
I wonder which electronic giant will swallow Olympus. Or perhaps a
corporation exiting from the film and chemistry business and needing a
ready-to-market DSLR ;-)
Regards,
Anthony Farr
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you want a live image you are going to have to use a camera without a
mirror in the way. Pentax does have computer control software available
(see their website), but it can not give a live image.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
Idiot Proof ==
David Bean wrote:
Is there any software available to operate the Pentax DSLRs from a computer?
What I'd like to find would, at a minimum, show the live image on the
computer screen and allow the shutter to be released from the keyboard. (It
would be nice to be able to do everything the camera's
Pentax Remote Assistant (downloadable from the Pentax Imaging
website) is designed to operate the *ist D body via a USB connection
from either Windows or Mac OS X. It will also drive the *ist DS body,
up to the level of what functions are common between the D and DS
bodies; perhaps the
David Bean wrote:
Is there any software available to operate the Pentax DSLRs from a computer?
What I'd like to find would, at a minimum, show the live image on the
computer screen and allow the shutter to be released from the keyboard. (It
would be nice to be able to do everything the
On Mar 29, 2006, at 10:21 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
As far as I'm aware, tethered software is available from just about
every brand of DSLR. But Live Views aren't possible, there's a
mirror and shutter in the way (Oly E-330 Might support this, as it
supports live views, but it's unique in
On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 19:15:49 +0100, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
. You cannot show the live image on the computer screen with any
of them because the DSLR sensor used in these bodies do not include the
ability to produce a real-time live display.
Nor does the
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Mar 29, 2006, at 10:21 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
As far as I'm aware, tethered software is available from just about
every brand of DSLR. But Live Views aren't possible, there's a
mirror and shutter in the way (Oly E-330 Might support this, as it
supports live
BTW, many ps digitals have the ability to show a live view on a television.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
Idiot Proof == Expert Proof
---
Adam Maas wrote:
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Mar 29, 2006, at 10:21 AM, Adam
Op Wed, 29 Mar 2006 21:10:26 +0200 schreef Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
but I was only covering cameras that are currently available, as the DL2
also has some sort of 'live view' mode doesn't it?
I believe the *ist-DL2 (and Samsung GX-1L?) simply take a photo that isn't
stored on the card,
Yeah, about the same as when you don't have any CF in your D and you
shoot (if set that way). It will still shoot and show the pic but
won't record it.
On 3/30/06, Lucas Rijnders [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Op Wed, 29 Mar 2006 21:10:26 +0200 schreef Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
but I was only
Cotty wrote:
Are there any other DSLRs with mirror lockup?
On 19/3/06, Adam Maas, discombobulated, unleashed:
Canons all have it, accessed via annoying menu.
Depends how you use it. I have it set so that it is activated with a
press of 2 buttons together on the top
On Mar 20, 2006, at 5:44 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
Are there any other DSLRs with mirror lockup?
Canons all have it, accessed via annoying menu.
Depends how you use it. I have it set so that it is activated with a
press of 2 buttons together on the top plate.
That's 1-series only. the
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Mar 20, 2006, at 5:44 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
Are there any other DSLRs with mirror lockup?
Canons all have it, accessed via annoying menu.
Depends how you use it. I have it set so that it is activated with a
press of 2 buttons together on the top plate.
David Bean wrote:
Easy to answer for you aficionados...
Are there any other DSLRs (besides Pentax) that can easily use lenses from
earlier film cameras?
Canon and Minolta via adaptors (full metering), Olympus, Nikon low-end
(no metering, but otherwise functional), Nikon mid-high-end (Full
David Bean wrote:
Easy to answer for you aficionados...
Are there any other DSLRs (besides Pentax) that can easily use lenses from
earlier film cameras?
Yes
Are the Pentax DSLRs unusually lightweight?
Yes
Are there any other DSLRs with mirror lockup?
Yes
Thanks
yer welcome
On Mar 19, 2006, at 3:54 PM, David Bean wrote:
Are there any other DSLRs (besides Pentax) that can easily use
lenses from
earlier film cameras?
- Canon DSLRs use the EOS mount, same as their film cameras for the
last 20 years or so.
- Nikon DSLRs can be used with most Nikon mount lenses,
Are there any other DSLRs with mirror lockup?
On 19/3/06, Adam Maas, discombobulated, unleashed:
Canons all have it, accessed via annoying menu.
Depends how you use it. I have it set so that it is activated with a
press of 2 buttons together on the top plate.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
||
David Bean wrote on 07.03.06 15:42:
All of the Pentax DSLRs seem to have a 2-sec timer mode that flips the
mirror 2 sec before the shutter operates. I have two Qs.
1. Does the mirror flip immediately on operating the shutter switch - then 2
sec later the shutter?
Yes.
2. Does the mode
You don't know what you are talking about. The MX has an over sized
mirror, the ZX/MZ mirrors were just big enough, in the *ist-D they
become over sized mirrors. (I have the advantage of owning an MX LX,
(which has an even bigger mirror than the MX), MZ3, and *ist-D, while I
haven't actually
It would help if you didn't pose your response as intimating I was
stupid, PJ. That's uncalled for.
No need for apology; I'm not offended.
As I said, I don't have a ZX-5n. However, oversized mirrors in SLRs
are typically longer to preclude image cutoff with long lenses, not
wider. If you
I didn't intend to imply that you were stupid. In fact maybe you are
correct as far as the DS is concerned, I however have the *ist-D not
the DS and I have the MZ3, both of which are in my hands right now. The
mirror is considerably larger than the focusing screen on the *ist-D, it
is
Could you take a picture of them, similar to what I presented, and
post it so we can
all see the differences? I find these technical differences interesting.
I'm quite surprised to hear that the DS and D models have such
different mirror assemblies. Can anyone with both a D and a DS
Don't I wish, but the only other digital camera I have won't focus close
enough. I'll see what I can do but it may take a few days.
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Could you take a picture of them, similar to what I presented, and
post it so we can
all see the differences? I find these technical
Won't focus close enough?
I took the photos of the MX and DS with a DS fitted with a 35mm lens
at 2-3 feet away, cropped them to the size I wanted. Any 3-4Mpixel
digicam should be able to do that, it's not necessary to produce a
macro masterpiece. ;-)
thanks
Godfrey
On Sep 21, 2005, at
Ok, Ok, I've got to find the damned battery.
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Won't focus close enough?
I took the photos of the MX and DS with a DS fitted with a 35mm lens
at 2-3 feet away, cropped them to the size I wanted. Any 3-4Mpixel
digicam should be able to do that, it's not necessary to
PS to do polarizing? I don't see how that could be fully possible.
Some of the effects of a polarizer, correct?
JCO
-Original Message-
From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 7:48 AM
To: PDML
Subject: DSLR E-Book
I just recieved the (now don't
polariser.
Don
-Original Message-
From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 7:10 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: DSLR E-Book
PS to do polarizing? I don't see how that could be fully possible.
Some of the effects of a polarizer, correct
What these seem to do, and I have a few, is
to increase saturation, and perhaps darken,
in some mysterious way. Reflections from
water, leaves, glass, etc. are NOT affected.
It seems to me the filters you still need in
this Photoshop era are Polarizers and perhaps
ND grads and FLD (fluorescent
BW filers makes a Plug-In for Photoshp CS - it has all kinds of filrers.
It's app. 150 USD.
Cheers
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 1. november 2004 13:48
Til: PDML
Emne: DSLR
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell
Subject: DSLR Viewfinder Scree Question
Are there any DSLRs on the market (ANY MAKE) with interchangable
viewfinder screens?
If not, which one has the best viewscreen for manual focussing?
The istD screen can be changed, although there
JCO wrote:
Are there any DSLRs on the market (ANY MAKE) with interchangable
viewfinder screens?
The *ist D should be, and I believe it can accept Pentax focusing screens,
all MECHANICALLY interchangeable each other MX to MZ-S (while metering can
be affected). Not tried though.
If not, which
The discussion about burst mode in *ist D suddenly reminds me
of one thing. I remember the film Star Wars: attack of the
clones was shot simultaneously digitally and on film. Now
that is 24 high-resolution frames per second for each cut,
which will be several minutes long at least. Does
John Francis said:
[...]
I believe there was *no* film shot for Episode II: it was
all digital, all the way.
From what I remember at the time the digital film cameras
are based on regular film cameras, rather than on video
cameras, so that all the usual lenses, cranes, etc. can
be
On 27 May 2004 at 8:22, Peter Loveday wrote:
Unfortunately HD cam doesn't really compete with film yet in terms of
dynamic range or resolution. Most people likely wouldn't notice the lack of
res, but its certainly there. The dynamic range is another matter, horrible
shadow detail, or blown
- Original Message -
From: Stan Halpin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sorry - I followed the link and all I found was a typical
1:1 slide duplicator. No indication that they had addressed
the DSLR issues. I may not have found the right spot in the
web site...
Stan
Stan,
You need to read the
Sorry - I followed the link and all I found was a typical
1:1 slide duplicator. No indication that they had addressed
the DSLR issues. I may not have found the right spot in the
web site...
Stan
Anthony Farr wrote:
Stan,
It's because of that discussion I posted the link. It seems everyone
- Original Message -
From: Anthony Farr
William,
I remember that thread. The pertinant remark in your message was
that the
execution of the theory was still (at that time) in the future.
Results are
still to be shared AFAIK.
I think the best lens I have for this at the moment is
- Original Message -
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 12:50 AM
Subject: Re: DSLR slide duplicator
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg168084.html
Some of us have already answered.
William Robb
- Original Message
You need to go look in the archive at a discussion a couple
of weeks ago. Because of the 'film' size on the *ist-D (aka
the 'magnification factor), a slide duplicator forces you
to crop your image. To get a full frame slide onto digital
we need about a .75:1 rather than a 1:1 - 1:2 IIRC
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd disagree with the premise here. Sticking a blue filter on the
front of your lens to balance tungsten light to a daylight sensor
isn't going to do anything to improve the blue channel noise. In
fact all it will do is reduce the amount of light falling on the
red
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd disagree with the premise here. Sticking a blue filter on the
front of your lens to balance tungsten light to a daylight sensor
isn't going to do anything to improve the blue channel noise. In
fact all it will do is reduce the amount of light falling
On 10 Apr 2004 at 16:10, Gonz wrote:
Am I figuring something wrong here. I welcome any corrections.
Your reasoning is born out in practice (from my experience shooting products
under hot lights) along with the added benefit of more consistent colour
fidelity due to improved linearity.
Rob
I'd disagree with the premise here. Sticking a blue filter on the
front of your lens to balance tungsten light to a daylight sensor
isn't going to do anything to improve the blue channel noise. In
fact all it will do is reduce the amount of light falling on the
red and green sensors, thus
In a message dated 3/28/2004 10:57:46 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
One of my co-workers, who is adamant that Canon is better, has a K1000
that he takes mountain biking. He wound up with my 135/3.5 and 24/2.8.
DJE
-
Well, good to hear it!
And thanks for the
comments inline.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2004 12:43 AM
Subject: DSLR sales
How many did they SELL? Last I looked you could still buy NEW Nikon F3s,
but I doubt they have been
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does this mean that pros are abandoning MF in droves?
My sources in the photo retail business say that medium format sales are
just about dead.
I observed some time ago that many professionals who use/used medium
format didn't do so for the increased resolution
Very true, Mark. Also many used MF because pro's were expected to use BBC's (Big
Black Cameras). In this day and age a DSLR is a BBC to most of their customers.
The *istD has a major faults. It is small.
--
Mark Roberts wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does this mean that pros are abandoning
graywolf wrote:
Very true, Mark. Also many used MF because pro's were expected to use
BBC's (Big Black Cameras). In this day and age a DSLR is a BBC to most
of their customers. The *istD has a major faults. It is small.
--
[...]
Two disparate comments.
What do you call one or more of the
With all the Digital Rebels and other Canons and Nikon DSLRs out
there, you'd think I'd be seeing them out and about. I was walking
1) The numbers somebody posted said that in the last couple of years all
the companies had sold something like 1.5 to 2 million DSLRs total, most
of them to
Small black cameras do not have the psychological impact with photographers's
customers that big black cameras do. To a very large percent of the population's
minds big black camera and pro are synonymous.
You can not imagine the utter respect that carrying a black Mamiya Universal
Press
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 28. marts 2004 19:49
Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Emne: Re: DSLR sales
With all the Digital Rebels and other Canons and Nikon DSLRs out
there, you'd think I'd be seeing them out and about. I was walking
1) The numbers somebody posted said
Thank you. I suspected as much...
I'm very aware of image.
You don't get to my age, having had so many jobs as I've had when
dealing with the public, without becoming keenly aware of what flies and
what doesn't...
I agree with you. keith
graywolf wrote:
Small black cameras do not have the
In a message dated 3/28/2004 1:41:03 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My point is that the average shooter probably bought a K1000 years ago and
STILL HAS IT.
Actually, tons of people who bought them sold them. And people who have
bought them more recently, for
Hi Marnie...
I have one I might be persuaded to part with, in case you ever get the
urge again... g
keith whaley
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 3/28/2004 1:41:03 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My point is that the average shooter probably bought a K1000
In a message dated 3/28/2004 2:01:53 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Marnie...
I have one I might be persuaded to part with, in case you ever get the
urge again... g
keith whaley
LOL!
I gotta to admit, except for film load, an all manual camera has a lot
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In a message dated 3/28/2004 1:41:03 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My point is that the average shooter probably bought a K1000 years ago
and
STILL HAS IT.
Actually, tons of people who bought them sold them. And people who have
bought them
That's the only really good reason for not getting one!
John
On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 21:14:16 CST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
chibitul smecher asked:
anything you DO NOT like about the *istD? thanks!
The fact that I can't afford one?
ERN
--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client:
Argh! I think we should introduce a $10 fine for anyone starting a
thread about the pros/cons of the *istD. ;-)
S
chibitul smecher wrote:
anything you DO NOT like about the *istD? thanks!
- Original Message -
From: mapson
Subject: Re: dSLR: to *ist or not to *ist, that is the question!
At 12:55 PM 19/03/2004, you wrote:
anything you DO NOT like about the *istD? thanks!
* No other position than A for lens
Update your firmware. This one goes away like majik
At 12:55 PM 19/03/2004, you wrote:
anything you DO NOT like about the *istD? thanks!
A very terrible thing :
Pentax do such a good job on it.
Remember, Z1/Z1p and MZ5/MZ5n, the improvement was significant for my use.
So may be what I am do not like, is that the *ist D N might content
- Original Message -
From:
Subject: Re: dSLR: to *ist or not to *ist, that is the question!
So may be what I am do not like, is that the *ist D N might
content such
an improvement that I might regret to buy the *ist D
Good thing you don't shoot Canon. You would be spending a lot
So may be what I am do not like, is that the *ist D N might
content such
an improvement that I might regret to buy the *ist D
Good thing you don't shoot Canon. You would be spending a lot of time
regretting things.
William Robb
I know, I used to own Canon stuff
I'll second that one.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
chibitul smecher asked:
anything you DO NOT like about the *istD? thanks!
The fact that I can't afford one?
ERN
--
graywolf
http://graywolfphoto.com
You might as well accept people as they are,
you are not going to be able to change them
chibitul smecher asked:
anything you DO NOT like about the *istD? thanks!
The fact that I can't afford one?
ERN
On 30/1/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
Interesting, this only usually happens when either sales are so slow that
they have to kick them back into action, or they are running down stock
to make way for new products.
I think it's more likely that they are doing it because they *don't*
have
it just
introduced last year?
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: alex wetmore [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: DSLR price wars?
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004, Peter Alling wrote:
Digital equipment is ephemeral. The production life for the *ist-D
was expected to be 6 months.
Where did
Kenneth asked:
I last November I purchased an Optio S and now I don't see it advertised in
places where I previously saw it. Is it out of production? Wasn't it just
introduced last year?
Yes, it was -- and so was its successor, the S4.
Same is true of the 550 (February) and the 555
Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Did anyone see this:?
http://www.pentaxusa.com/news/news_display.cfm?pressid=174
Veeery interesting. Perhaps the folks at Pentax have heard some PMA
rumours that we haven't...
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com
1 - 100 of 350 matches
Mail list logo
