on 12.06.02 17:11, Bruce Dayton at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sylwester,
No arguments there. I have and use the MZ-S and am very happy with
it. The original post discussed the need for high speed frame rate
and very fast AF for motorsports, I believe. The F100 does have a
faster winder
Mark Roberts wrote:
The F version, by the way, is identical to the FA version except for
cosmetics
and the replacement of the focus limit switch with a focus friction
control.
The FA has a focus limiter as well. I think it limits to 2m or 1.5m or
thereabouts.
Cheers,
- Dave
-
This message
Hi,
On 12 Jun 2002 at 16:51, Mishka wrote:
apart from myself, according to photodo.com the MTF ratings are
(...)
photodo tests lenses at infinity, which IMHO isn't the apropriate method for
macro lenses...
Gabor
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to
The first time I ever placed a bid for anything on ebay it was for one of
these. I won it and there were no other bidders! All of £30 ($44) it cost
me inc pp and it's been money well spent - my favourite lens, in fact
the standard lens on my LX.
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Mishka wrote:
I am curious:
Is $60 too much?
http://www.ritzcam.com/catalog/index.html
Paul Ewins
Melbourne, Australia
- Original Message -
From: Juan J. Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 11:02 AM
Subject: Re: The elusive K 35mm f3.5
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, smcforme
Hi,
there were several brand versions on the market. I own the Porst version.
For a few bucks a nice lens. I paid 60 US$ for mine and use it often instead
of my A50mm/1,2 because I mustn't pay so much attention as for the Pentax
one which is still almost mint.
regards
Mishka wrote:
Revuenon
William Peifer wrote:
The picture on the NASA site is described in the caption as a time-lapse
sequence. Typically, shots like these are taken through a very strong
filter (typically an optical density of 5 or so, corresponding to a
filter
factor of ~100,000).
I remember a guy on a
Mishka wrote:
there are tons of very good used 3rd party macro lenses (i personally
have a pka vivitar ser. 1 100/2.5 -- terrific glass, terrific build,
does 1:1, and $135 is hard to beat; my only complain is that it focuses
the wrong way). unless you are a collector, or have tons of spare
cash
Actually its my second-last day, but its my last day of work here and I
won't have internet access tomorrow. Tomorrow's plan is to get to Heathrow
early, and try to get a seat with some leg room.
I've enjoyed being over here and have had lots of fun getting out about
at the weekends. The
Mark wrote For an interesting study of the phenomenon of denial, see the
rec.photo.equipment.aps newsgroup
No kidding I used to monitor the rec.photo 35mm, APS and MF groups on
nearly a daily basis. The 35mm group had hundreds of messages per day - the
APS group usually had less than 10.
Hi,
Dave M. wrote:
I arrive home at 8:10am on Sunday morning (NZ time) after 26 hours of flying.
What a bummer - losing Saturday, of all days! I hope you get
paid for it...
Sorry we didn't manage to meet up. If it's possible, have a
good flight. You might just see (and especially hear)
The quandary is is $60.00 too much to pay for one of the best 35s ever?
Depends on the supply
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Paul Ewins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Not so elusive K 35mm f3.5
Is $60 too much?
http://www.ritzcam.com/catalog/index.html
-
This message is from the
In a message dated 13/06/02 10:16:53 GMT Daylight Time, Dave writes:
The English weather generally lived up to its reputation:
I don't think I ever saw the sun in London. Or in sunny Brighton.
You obviously weren't looking.
Have a good one, and don't worry about the air traffic
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I lucked out. My b-day present came today and this one is no
paperweight!
My source rated this one an 8+...it's more like a 9+! Almost perfect...what a
gem.
I'm thrilled. I saw that Richard Tillis was selling one for $549 not long
ago. Mine was only $269 plus
Are there any listers who read german that i could send a couple of lines of
german text to, so they could tell what it means?
The online translators are making a mess of it.
Please contact me offlist at
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Go here:
http://babelfish.altavista.com/
and either translate a web
Cheers Dave - have a good flight - chuck us out any old lenses you don't
want as you climb over the skies of Oxfordshire ;-)
Best,
Cotty
___
Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Check out the UK
An excerpt from, THE REVOLUTION IN PHOTO MARKETING, PART
II - The Darker View, from:
http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0206/editorial.htm
Pentax and Minolta are on life support. Olympus,
although strong now is relying on other manufacturers to
produce their products and has little of their
On Thu, 13 Jun 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An excerpt from, THE REVOLUTION IN PHOTO MARKETING, PART
II - The Darker View, from:
http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0206/editorial.htm
I, personally, like the last paragraph:
Many of these retailers see a gradual move in the future back to
Robert,
The lab I use has Agfa equipment and printed on Agfa Prestige paper.
The only other thing that I can come up with is that I didn't use my
Lumiquest SoftBox on the flash unit. But I don't recall this shine in
the past when I haven't used it. It probably would have helped,
but...
Bruce
Bruce tossed out for our perusal
An excerpt from, THE REVOLUTION IN PHOTO MARKETING, PART
II - The Darker View, from: ... digitaljournalist.org
What else would one expect from an outfit that is riding
the digital wave? Anything remotely affecting film in a
Bruce,
Thanks for pointing that out. It is always interesting to hear other
points of view. Gives you more perspective to sort things out.
Bruce Dayton
Thursday, June 13, 2002, 10:07:47 AM, you wrote:
ban An excerpt from, THE REVOLUTION IN PHOTO MARKETING, PART
ban II - The Darker View,
Well, it seems that the general thought is that digital will eventually win
out over APS and maybe so. However, there will always be those who will
never use digital because of the expense technology. The camera cost is
only a small part of ownership... you need a computer to download them to
- Original Message -
From: gfen
Subject: Re: Pentax and Minolta on Life Support
I, personally, like the last paragraph:
Many of these retailers see a gradual move in the future back
to film.
According to one, most people don't know what the hell
they are doing
with those
I just got back into darkroom work after about 15
years.
I just read through the Darkroom sections of Upton and
Upton's Photography. This along with a Kodak
darkroom guide, and I've had no trouble.
I forgot how much fun it was. I was thinking I was
bound for the digitial Darkroom (almost gave
I had them processed at a local lab in Toronto, called Custom Colour
Imaging.
They use Kodak Professional paper.
Jeff
- Original Message -
From: Robert Woerner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 12:58 PM
Subject: Re: Agfa Portrait 160
Hi,
Can you
HUDERER Bernd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How much did you get for the 50/1.2A and how was the state ?
I sold it on EBay last week for $375 BIN to an American living in Japan. I
described it, basically, as EX++, a fine specimen. He was not disappointed.
Paul Franklin Stregevsky
-
This message is
I really don't think film will disappear anytime soon. The interesting
question is if there will be room in the smaller market for Pentax.
In addition, smaller sales provides less RD money, so it becomes hard
to keep up. I'm not sure how diversified Pentax is, although I do know
they make
- Original Message -
From: Bowman, John
Subject: re:APS Film
My local camera shop sez that Agfa and Konica are going to stop
producing APS film very soon, and all the majors are going to
stop making cameras for the format within a couple of years.
If that happens, I can't see Fuji
Oops--I forgot you're looking at a 24. I was still thinking of the 35/3.5K
thread from this morning.
I wrote:
If you're going to settle for a quasi K mount, get an M42 Carl Zeiss Jena
35/2.4 Auto (49mm filter), arguably the finest 35 ever made.
Paul Franklin Stregevsky
-
This message is from
Hi,
I've enjoyed being over here and have had lots of fun getting out about
at the weekends. The English weather generally lived up to its reputation:
I don't think I ever saw the sun in London. Or in sunny Brighton.
I expect our summer will start as soon as you're out of our airspace.
John,
I think that most of us are saying that APS will be supplanted by
digital - not film in general. The small number of APS cameras
(percentage wise) is one of the key issues. The other is that the
most obvious advantage to APS is the size of body/lens combinations.
Digital can be
I was lucky enough to find 12 Beatles Videos on sale at $1.95 CDN each at
Rogers Video. I have just been watching Vol.3 of the 8 Volume Anthology,
and low and behold - Paul was talking about his impressions of Miami, and
said something like We were just like tourists in Florida, going around
I used Portrait 160, along with Fuji NPS 160, for a model shoot a couple of years ago,
and was very disappointed with the results. The NPS pictures looked much nicer.
IIRC, the Agfa prints looked grainy and dull. I actually preferred Agfa HDC 100 or
200 over Portrait 160
Pat White
-
This
William Robb wrote:
The APS target market is young (median age range 15 to 30)
Funny, around here I've *never* seen anyone under 35 using an APS camera
and most users are probably in their 40s. (Although I suspect the 15-30
age range was the original target for APS.)
--
Mark Roberts
Steven Desjardins wrote:
Does anyone know where you can look at any financial information
about these companies?
Hi Steven,
Answer to your question is, Sure -- I know a couple places! All publicly
traded companies in the US (don't know if this includes ~all~ of the major
camera
Steven,
If you have a good public or college library near you try their Reference
Dept. Good libraries often have a financial section with up-to-date reports
in the Reference Dept. You can't check the material out, but you should be
able to find what you need quite easily. And don't forget
Pat,
And I thought you were strictly a landscape shooter.
Jeff.
- Original Message -
From: Pat White [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 3:18 PM
Subject: Re: Agfa Portrait 160
I used Portrait 160, along with Fuji NPS 160, for a model shoot a couple
I just plopped down 40 UK quid to a man I've never met for a 35mm f/2.8 -
having done zero research first. Not my usual style, but needs must. A
present for the S.O. as she expressed a great interest in David Mann's
35mm f/3.5 and with all the chat recently about how their owners are
I love wides. Can't wait to shoot with this bad boy.
And you'll really love this one.
Below 28mm, the A 20/2.8 is my most frequently used lens. I take
the bulky and rather dear 15/3.5 rectilinear and 16/2.8 Fisheye
lenses out only if I know ahead of time that I have a need for them.
Then, I
Hi, James,
Yeah, I've seen several shots of the Beatles around '63 or '64, with Pentaxes
around their necks - the ones I've seen looked like a pre-Spotmatic non-metered
model. I've also seen shots of various English Royals from about that time
period with Pentaxes in hand.
Back in the days
Hi all!!
Today in the mail I received my first Pentax SLR camera. It's a KX series.
And a few days ago I received a SMC 50/1.7 pentax series A lens.
When I look through the eye piece I can see specks. It's not the lens
because they are still there with out the lens. How should I go about
Hi, Mike,
First, welcome to the list. You'll learn a lot about Pentaxes and photography
here. The KX is a favourite among many here; I'm sure you'll enjoy yours.
You're among good company with that body (not me though!).
Anyway, about the specks - I wouldn't worry about them. Unless they
- Original Message -
From: Mike P
Subject: New to the world of Pentax and Photogrophy!!
Hi all!!
Today in the mail I received my first Pentax SLR camera. It's
a KX series.
And a few days ago I received a SMC 50/1.7 pentax series A
lens.
When I look through the eye piece I can see
if you mean M35/2.8 -- it's a good lens. from boz's site,
--
Yoshihiko Takinami's Resolution Results
Average Center Resolution 77 lpm
Average Corner Resolution 63 lpm
Best Aperture f/8
---
so, no, it's definitely not a dog!
i used to own one, and was perfectly happy with it.
Either live with it or spend $20-$50 to have the screen cleaned. It won't
affect your photos since it's probably dust on the focusing screen.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Mike P [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 5:22 PM
Subject: New to
aol
me too!
/aol
...never had guts to do a postdoc though. a decent apartment here costs
about what the postdoc salary (after the taxes) is. and, of course, the
the scholarly squalor was a factor too...
oh well, who am i to complain now :)
mishka
From: Peifer, William [OCDUS]
Subject: RE:
Hello everyone,
I have the possibility to get a mint K 28/3.5 shift lens for app. US$ 550.
Is the lens worth spending that amount of money? Can anyone please share
their personal experience in regard to this lens?
Thanks, Eric
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To
I sometimes find the photodo ratings a bit dubious. As in the chart they
have the F and FA with quite a large difference in peformance, although they
are optically identical.
I had the FA100/2.8 macro and now have the Tamron 90/2.5. I would disagree
with the photodo rating that the FA resolves
Hi Cotty ...
I've several Pentax 35mm lenses: S-M-C 2.0; S-M-C 3.5; K 3.5; K 2.0; and
the M 2.8
The M 2.8 is my least favorite, with the 3.5 versions being the
favorites. Compared to the S-M-C and the K lenses, the M 2.8 seems a
little soft - and that's the only way I can describe it. I find
- Original Message -
From: E. Kragtwijk
Subject: 28mm/3.5 shift lens: worth getting?
Hello everyone,
I have the possibility to get a mint K 28/3.5 shift lens for
app. US$ 550.
Is the lens worth spending that amount of money? Can anyone
please share
their personal experience in
One thing you should keep in mind is that the distortion caused by
viewing things at an angle through a regular lens can be fixed easily
through digital manipulation. For an example using very cheap software,
see my page at http://ca.geocities.com/spirope/perspective.htm
Paul Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I sometimes find the photodo ratings a bit dubious. As in the chart they
have the F and FA with quite a large difference in peformance, although they
are optically identical.
Ditto for the F50/1.4 and the FA50/1.4
Photodo is completely bogus if you ask me.
In a message dated 6/13/2002 8:56:44 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
other lenses that are just as good and many that are -- dare I say
it -- even better.
Yes! Now it can be told! Zeiss, Kern Switar, Angenieux, Schneider and others
are every bit as good if not better
Interesting - looking at both Fred and Mishka's corrected images on my
screen, they seem over-corrected! Does anyone else get this effect?
John Coyle
Brisbane, Australia
On Friday, June 14, 2002 12:32 PM, Fred [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
Eric, I have some photos at:
54 matches
Mail list logo
