So sorry to hear about your cat, Dave. My thoughts are with you.
--Amita
Sorry to bother everyone,just a little down
today.My favorite Cat,my best portrait subject
and Little Buddy lost a battle with a car
last night.
He'll be sorely missed in this house hold.
Dave
http
On Saturday, April 27, 2002, at 03:53 PM, Jeff wrote:
Yea, that could be just as painful.
Aaron didn't feel sorry about your cat? Bummer.
Hey now! It was tough for me, cuz Dave had downright adorable pictures
of him.
Poor kitty, looked like my mom dad's cats.
-Aaron
-
This message
Sorry to bother everyone,just a little down
today.My favorite Cat,my best portrait subject
and Little Buddy lost a battle with a car
last night.
He'll be sorely missed in this house hold.
Dave
http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/pages/odee1.ht
m
Pentax User
Stouffville Ontario Canada
http
Sorry to hear of your loss - my vet just game me word that one of my cats
has 1 - 6 months left at best. It's sad when they go.
- MCC
At 03:15 PM 4/27/2002 -0400, you wrote:
Sorry to bother everyone,just a little down
today.My favorite Cat,my best portrait subject
and Little Buddy lost
:54 -0700
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Sorry OT:No more Buddy
Sorry to hear about your loss Dave. When our
last cat died, it was pretty
tough on the whole family. We then bought a
pure bred British
shorthair, $500!, lousiest spent $500 we ever
did. We got another cat
from the pound
Sorry to hear that Dave. We have 2 and I dread the day
Cotty
___
Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Check out the UK Macintosh ads
http://www.macads.co.uk
-
This message is from the Pentax
Dave,
Sorry to hear that. The loss of a pet is never a small thing. Our
thoughts are with you.
Illinois Bill
David Brooks wrote:
Sorry to bother everyone,just a little down
today.My favorite Cat,my best portrait subject
and Little Buddy lost a battle with a car
last night.
He'll
Paul F. Stregevsky wrote:
Paul Stenquist is our motorsport expert,
Not really, but thanks.
but I'm afraid the price he quoted
for an SMC 24/3.5K is very optimistic. Adorama has had one for sale for
something like $300, and I typically see it sell for more than the SMC 24/2.8K.
Wow, I
The simple answer is: A Pentax, of course!
(Sorry, I couldn't resist...)
Jens
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]På vegne af Aaron Reynolds
Sendt: 10. april 2002 14:21
Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Emne: Re: New lister and some questions (long- sorry
What would be a good 24mm wide angle lens that isn't ultra-expensive?
I'm on a budget and would like to keep the lens at $200 or less, if
possible, used, in excellent condition.
Paul Stenquist is our motorsport expert, but I'm afraid the price he quoted
for an SMC 24/3.5K is very optimistic.
Subject: Re: New lister and some questions (long- sorry)
What would be a good 24mm wide angle lens that isn't ultra-expensive?
I'm on a budget and would like to keep the lens at $200 or less, if
possible, used, in excellent condition.
I'd switch to screwmount. I just bought a MINT
Hi,
I just wanted to say hello, as a brand-new subscriber to the list.
Being a Pentax user from day one (my father has Pentax SLRs that
I've kind of inherited), I'm looking to add to my current equipment so
that I can effectively use what I have available to me as well as
increase my equipment.
Hello and welcome!
Pentax 24/2.8 K (original) can be found on ebay for anywhere between $180
and $250 in excellent/mint- condition. I just bought an SMC-A (later)
version, effectively, for $240.
Those are reportedly superb lenses.
Best,
Mike
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.
I dont shoot fast moving objects much so my opinion might not work for
you but i didnt find this inconvenient. Often i could just focus stopped
down directly and in case it was too dark, open a few stops, focus and
quicky stop down again. But if you are used to using program mode then
this would
TM wrote:
What do you think about the following lenses?
135 f/2.5
24 f/3.5
50 f/1.4
All are SMC Super Takumar screw mount.
Those are superb lenses, all of them. Some say the 50/1.4 SMC Tak is the
best normal lens ever made. The other two are also ranked among the very
best Pentax
I guess about 90% of my gear came off ebay and I have always been
satisfied with my purchases or the seller made it right. Ebay is no
different than the big camera store in any big city. Since you are
dealing with used equipment you have to use common sense. Read the
descriptions carefully
- Original Message -
From: TM
Subject: New lister and some questions (long- sorry)
Hi,
I just wanted to say hello, as a brand-new subscriber to the
list.
Being a Pentax user from day one (my father has Pentax SLRs
that
I've kind of inherited), I'm looking to add to my current
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 10:52:39PM -0500, Ken Archer wrote:
Check with KEH or BH for retail prices and then set your limit.
This part is very important! I have seen things going for more than
retail price of new or dealer's price of used equipment in better
condition.
cheers,
nitin
-
This
Sylwester wrote:
Very interesting. Do you know any resources on the net that could confirm
this?
It's all in the patents, although you probably have to contact the patent
lawyers to know who licensed what from who. Unfortunately, the patents are
not available anymore without paying for
Alan wrote:
Interesting that you mentioned AF OM camera. I think it's back to mid-90's
Pop.Photo. said there might be an OM-5 which was an AF camera, but then
nothing Is there any reference to prove an AF OM camera ever exist?
Only camera magazine editors, but then I see no reason to
Of course they had the OM-707 (US: OM 77?). /Erik
-Original Message-
From: Pål Audun Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: den 5 april 2002 14:45
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax direction the last decade (WAS: OT: An interesting
evening - sorry, long)
Alan wrote
Artur wrote:
How do you know that?! I was totally surprised... You say Pentax made IS
lenses 12
years ago? And haven't introduced them into production so far? Then what's
the idea? The Pentax marketing, I'm sorry to say that, is blind.
Pentax patents on image stabilizing lenses are used
Pentax patents on image stabilizing lenses are used by both Nikon and
Canon. They date back to '89 to '92 (if my memory serves me right). Theres
nothing unusual that camera companies don't launch products they develop;
Olympus had a professional, AF OM-series camera that never saw the light of
on 04.04.02 10:15, Pl Audun Jensen at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pentax patents on image stabilizing lenses are used by both Nikon and
Canon. They date back to '89 to '92 (if my memory serves me right). Theres
nothing unusual that camera companies don't launch products they develop;
Olympus
Dave wrote:
About the time the F5 comes out, Pentax introduces the PZ-70, finally a
PZ-1p, and the ZX-5.
Wasn't the (P)Z-1p released years before the F5? I bought my Z-1p in '95
and the F5 was shown in '96.
Pentax, on the other hand, goes way out into left field, and puts out the
ZX/MZ
Bruce wrote:
I think that by looking back only to 1990 you miss the
sea state change started by Minolta with the first fully
integrated AF in 1985. Not only did the Minolta 7000
start the AF revolution (yes I know about the Pentax ME-
F and the Nikon F3-AF), but also introduced a whole new
Dave wrote:
I guess this is where I really have to disagree. I don't think that Pentax
was 'whacked' by the AF 'revolution'. I think that they, more than any other
company, understood what it would take to put out a decent product.
I do believe that Pentax was seriously hurt by AF. In '84
Bruce wrote:
The K1000 and ME/ME Super were very popluar cameras.
Notice how many of them are still around?
The ME-Super was a very popular camera world wide. The K1000 success is
more strange. Here, it didn't sell at all and is as easy to find as an
Alpha. I believe that the K1000 was
2002 12:42
Aihe: Re: Pentax direction the last decade (WAS: OT: An interesting evening - sorry,
long)
Bruce wrote:
The K1000 and ME/ME Super were very popluar cameras.
Notice how many of them are still around?
The ME-Super was a very popular camera world wide. The K1000 success is
more
On Tuesday, April 2, 2002, at 08:50 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The N70 probably had the slowest, clumsiest interface of
any camera made. Why? Because by making it menu driven
you didn't need the instruction manual.
God, I hate that camera. Though after a few moments of careful study I
The N70 interface is annoying and irritating to use,
even with the manual you spend more time out of the
finder trying to scroll through the menu and hitting
several button combinations to get the functions you
want. Not to mention it wasn't very reliable either, a
little mositure and it would
On Wednesday, April 3, 2002, at 10:06 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Funny, Aaron: I have a 52-year-old friend who got dragged kicking and
screaming into the autofocus world, finally replacing his beloved Canon
AE-1 for an N-70. He loves its interface and capabilities dearly and
before
Aaron Reynolds wrote: God, I hate that camera. Though after a few moments
of careful study I could figure out its controls, they are laid out in such an
ugly, non-intuitive way that using that camera was almost physically painful
for me.
Funny, Aaron: I have a 52-year-old friend who
The first time I picked up an EOS I could not figure out
the controls by just playing around for a few minutes.
This doesn't make it bad, or inefficent, but you do have
to read the directions.
Compared to my ZX-5...I didn't have to read the instructions. Intuitive is
not having to read the
Pål wrote:
I do believe that Pentax was seriously hurt by AF. In '84 Pentax started
the release of their most ambitious and complete lens line and by '85 it
was obsolete due to the success of the Minolta 7000. In retrospect, Pentax
should have ditched the whole A-series of cameras and lenses
BTW Why on earth is this post labeled OT?
Pål
Mostly because I didn't want it to turn into a rant. It was really something
to look over ten years of photography (even thought it was throught the eyes
of Popular Photography). Reading reviews, and seeing all of the different
cameras that
How do you know that?! I was totally surprised... You say Pentax made IS lenses 12
years ago? And haven't introduced them into production so far? Then what's
the idea? The Pentax marketing, I'm sorry to say that, is blind.
Don't tell me they have already made ultrasonic AF drives...
However
I think that by looking back only to 1990 you miss the
sea state change started by Minolta with the first fully
integrated AF in 1985. Not only did the Minolta 7000
start the AF revolution (yes I know about the Pentax ME-
F and the Nikon F3-AF), but also introduced a whole new
interface.
On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 08:35:45PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So what did Pentax do? They made cameras that seemed a
lot like everyone elses with a feature or two they could
call their own: power zoom Hyper Programs for
instance. All the market progress they made in the 70's,
they
I think that by looking back only to 1990 you miss the
sea state change started by Minolta with the first fully
integrated AF in 1985.
It is just where I started my search through the magazines. A decade looked
good to me. I understand it missed a few things.
Ever since that time camera
I am very sorry about the multiple posts.
My email program told me the message hadn't been sent. It remained in my
out-box, why I pressed send till it left. Obviously the program
played a trick on me.
Lasse
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http
Well , neither can I but I don't tell everyone! hardyhar
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: herb greenslade
Subject: Sorry can't keep up. until next time
unsubscribe pentax-discuss
Wimp.
HAR!!
WW
Well , neither can I but I don't tell everyone! hardyhar
annsan
unsubscribe pentax-discuss
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
- Original Message -
From: herb greenslade
Subject: Sorry can't keep up. until next time
unsubscribe pentax-discuss
Wimp.
HAR!!
WW
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit
Vlcek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Vastaanottaja: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Päivä: 28. joulukuuta 2001 4:44
Aihe: Re: We are sorry for any inconvenience
JT Whatever happened to Photodo? They haven't updated in 18 months. (There
JT I go, complaining again about a free service.)
Joe, don't trust Photodo
JT Whatever happened to Photodo? They haven't updated in 18 months. (There
JT I go, complaining again about a free service.)
Joe, don't trust Photodo. If you have a friendly shop where you will
buy it or some other opportunity, just ask them to try the lens, take some
pictures. Try it for
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 12:23 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax Optio Digital Camera - YUH take into account
the sorry shadow det...
In a message dated 11/12/01 3:20:48 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
On Tuesday, November 13, 2001, at 02:03 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There shouldn't be any tests after properly calibrating your
system...
Shouldn't be, but the best laid plans... g
C'mon, really, Mafud. If you've calibrated your monitor, printer and
papers, what you see is what
then, what you get out of the printer (any) is ~NEVER~ what you see on
the monitor. ~Each~ digital image comes out different and take more time to
finish than chemical prints. That does ~not~ take into account the sorry
shadow detail in digital prints (and slides), no matter what kind of flash
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax Optio Digital Camera - YUH take into account
the sorry shadow detail
In a message dated 11/12/01 7:09:16 AM Eastern Standard Time,
***With digital paper
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 11:27 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax Optio Digital Camera - YUH take into account the sorry
shadow detail
In a message dated 11/12/01 7:09:16 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
In a message dated 11/12/01 3:20:48 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You are in a unique position where you can do your own colour
printing. If a person has to pay 15 bucks or more for a custom
wet print, the digital prints suddenly make a lot of economic
sense.
In a message dated 11/12/01 3:20:48 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thats what CD burners were invented for.
Yeah, but then you end up with a closet full of CDs full of images you're
never gonna use! : )
Mafud
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
This message is from
In a message dated 11/12/01 8:17:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 11:27 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax Optio Digital Camera - YUH take into account the sorry
shadow
Leon Altoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I haven't got it but I've seen lots of people say how good it is and it
has a useful feature if you do the occasional macro shot - the head
will tilt down by 5 degrees (I think - it could be slightly more) so
you can leave the flash mounted on the hotshoe
There is one other aspect which may, for just a few folks, impede the total
triumph of digital over slide film - even after the resolution, cost, and
all other functional limitations are removed (which will of course happen
very soon indeed): namely, the questionable authenticity of a digital
Robert Wetmore wrote:
snip
Very interesting and thoughtful views.
I'll not buy a digital camera any time soon - I have no interest in simply
the outward appearances of images.
I think the notion that film/chemical images are more than just outward
appearances of images in a way that digital
Sorry, I've been so busy I haven't been able to keep up with the digests.
What was the question?
--Mike
pentax-discuss-digest at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Whoopsie,
my bad! Sorry about that folks, guess that
wasn't it after all.
Maybe Mike will let us know which one it is for sure
- Original Message -
From: Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 6:58 PM
Subject: Not able to pay attention, sorry
Sorry, I've been so busy I haven't been able to keep up with the digests.
What was the question?
Hi Mike.
Regarding
In a message dated 24/08/01 06:28:30 GMT Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Subject: Sorry guys, I hit Send before thinking . . .
As soon as I hit the send button I thought I meant that to go to Peter. Not
to the List! Duh. Sorry for inflicting my commercial transactions on
everbody
Seeing as I insulted Mafud in public, I feel I
should also apologise in public, as well as in person.
I am sorry Mafud for saying P--- off Noddy. I did
not intend it to be racist (it wasn't), and I realise
now that you were not the only one carrying on this
argument.
Also I am sorry
In a message dated 7/31/01 8:35:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Subj: I am sorry.
Date: 7/31/01 8:35:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (petit miam)
Sender:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-to: A HREF=mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED];[EMAIL PROTECTED
After unsubscribing for a recent trip I've been following via the mail archive but got
tired of it being so far behind so I finally decided to resubscribe. Also, I keep
wanting to comment. If I had read the directions I could have avoided a couple of
unnecessary posts to the list due to
the list. Doesn't make a lot of sense, I
admit, given that a spammer could just subscribe regularly, but there you have it.
Doug
At 10:20 PM +02004/25/01, Shot caused thus to appear:
Hello.
I'm very sorry to post this to the group, but I want to check whether
pentax-discuss-nomail works the way
Uuugh! I just reread my last post to do with my "shopping list" and noticed
that I wrote this sentence:
"Most importantly, it is for the macro
capabilities, second most-importantly is the Autofocus, I also like this
particular focal length and at this price, this is the fastest lens that
with the early F lenses). Distance info is
used in some sort of 3D program mode as well as in TTL flash programs.
I supposed that without it, the body will revert to the functionality
of its older camera.
Sorry for not being able to tell you more but hey, I'm just a poor
Pentaxmatic...
Servus, Alin
1st, sorry that I am sending this to list. But I had persistent problems
getting tru Gianfranco's mailserver anti-spam filter g, so this is my
last option. Again, I am very sorry.
*
***
**
*
Message for Gianfranco follows:
Hi Gianfranco!
I had an error regarding your anti
I know a pair of members use Minoltas AF. I need to know something: The lenses
used in a very old Minolta AF (I think it's a Minolta Maxxum 7000, or something
like that, it's the first AF model I think) can be used with full functionality
in a modern new Maxxum AF body?
It's because my boss' wife
Albano wrote:
Thanks in advance (and please give me good info, because my head is in game)
So we shall have you beheaded for this capital offense!
;o)
But, as I admire your guts of having uppercased the curse right in
the title... yes, it's the same AF mount, except that older lenses
Sorry, my last message to Rob was private... (dammn
'reply' :-) )
jaume
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go
On Mon, 26 Feb 2001 12:00:52 -0600, you wrote:
I just set up an old Apple II (e?)
That's a screw-mount, right?
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at
On Mon, 26 Feb 2001, Mark Roberts wrote:
On Mon, 26 Feb 2001 12:00:52 -0600, you wrote:
I just set up an old Apple II (e?)
That's a screw-mount, right?
Closer to an Asahiflex, methinks, but not worth as much. :)
chris (btw, I think it's a ][ clone)
-
This message is from the
Sorry! I had problems with my ISP, so some of my replies are coming long
after I wrote them - possibly even into already dead threads. Sorry.
Frantisek
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget
401 - 474 of 474 matches
Mail list logo
