Tom wrote:
The nII has compensation in 1/3 stops. The n uses 1/2 stops.
Huh? Certainly not. The 645N has exposure compensation in 1/3 stops.
Pål
-
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 645N has spot and matrix metering, much better interface and exposure
data readout. It also has data imprinting and one more frame a roll (for
120 film).
Pål
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't
Thankyou William, all's fair again now.
Subject: Re: Not Fair!! - PUG
Try this:
http://pug.komkon.org/02may
William Robb
-
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
Hi Lasse,
I don't have any money to pay you.
there would be no question of payment. I intend to shoot some film
this weekend to check a lens I exchanged yesterday, and such film has
no value to me once I've evaluated the results and I would normally
throw it away. The only thing I wouldn't
Hi,
Shame on you, Bob! 8-)
Portland Hotel - London Street, Greenwich, GREENWICH [1881]
I think not the same one, though
A Google search of League of Nations 1920 brings up over 300
references. No obvious answers, unfortunately.
I do seem to remeber reference to this place in other
Hi,
I can probably get off on a technicality, Mike. I don't think
Greenwich was in London in those days. g I remember t'days when all
this were fields...
I've found several references to literary types who sent letters in
the 1920s on notepaper from the Portland Hotel, London, W. But none of
Hi,
I wrote before:
The POWER PACK M gives 25mA charge current. So the
nominal charging time for a complete empty pack
will be 110*1,4/25=6,16 = 6 hours 10 minutes.
( 1,4 is the typical effiency factor for NiCd charge
calculation )
Sorry, it has to be:
The CHARGE PACK M ...
The POWER
William Robb wrote:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1350210044
A couple of inches short on the bellows, Bill?
Cheers,
- Dave
-
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
In a message dated 01/05/02 22:37:05 GMT Daylight Time, Lasse writes:
Btw. Anybody knows whether there was/is a part of London called
Portland, which may indicate the location of this hotel?
Might it be, perchance, Portland Place? Bob Walkden is a London resident
frequents the unknown
Hi,
I have just seen these two zooms locally, the SP 3.5/70-210 and the
SMC-A 4/70-210... I ended up with the Tamron (half stop faster,
which is important for me)...
I would like some group opinions on the comparison of these two,
please!
Re: build, both are really greatly
Wednesday, May 01, 2002, 12:45:05 AM, Jim wrote:
JF I purchased a Sigma Zoom-K II 70-210 F4.5 the other day for the lowly sum
JF of $5.00. The lens looks like new and has a KA mount that works. Has
JF anybody else used this lens? Is it any good? I figured for the price I
JF couldn't loose.
Type some text.
AUTOTEXT bullet Error! AutoText entry not defined. Add a list item.
AUTOTEXT bullet Error! AutoText entry not defined. Add a list item.
AUTOTEXT bullet Error! AutoText entry not defined. Add a list item.
Type some text.
AUTOTEXT line Error! AutoText entry not defined.
[demime
Wow! Ken has pissed off the demime god for real!
Len
---
-Original Message-
From: Kenneth Waller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 6:33 AM
Subject: To provide a link to another
Type some text.
AUTOTEXT bullet Error! AutoText entry not defined. Add a list item.
Frantisek.I'll be shooting my ,new to me,smc a 70-210
f4 this weekend.I will forward my observations later.
(I know thats not answering your )
Dave
Begin Original Message
From: Frantisek Vlcek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thu, 2 May 2002 13:17:01 +0200
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
Oh Oh.My first attempt at home developing will be with a
roll of 120.May the emulsun gods be on our side Cotty:)
Dave
Begin Original Message
on 05/01/02 15:05, Cotty shared with me:
I practiced loading a roll of 120 on the same reel, extended to
6cm, and
disaster! I can see (or
From Photo Industry reporter:
While Olympus expects to talk with other digital camera makers about
standardization of lenses, it will reveal at photokina 2002 a sensationally
new interchangeable lens digital AF SLR that uses a 4/3-inch CCD sensor,
roughly half the size of that used by
Has anyone told him of the problem?
Alan (who's getting them as well)
-Original Message-
From: Paris, Leonard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 12:42 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: To provide a link to another
Wow! Ken has pissed off the demime
Ok guys sorry about yesterday but it appears my mail server
crapped out on me resulting in me being unsubscribed. Here is my
question again.
Feeling comfortable enough now to start experimenting in the
darkroom, can anyone recommend alternate chemicals and/or
dilutions for Tri-X and Plus-X.
Way ahead of you.
Dave :)
Begin Original Message
From: Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Luckily, your cheap AP tank came with reels that have oversized
film-loading helpers. This will help you out. Don't panic.
I suggests taking a phone into the dark with you and putting me on
Hi Paul,
I can't help you with your developing dilemma, never having exposed
D3200 @ 400, but I do have a suggestion for carrying film. I tape empty
film cans to the camera strap, and, of course, keep film in them. It
makes the film easy to find (no more fumbling through your pockets or
Hi, Taka. I use it in LX and ME Super with great results. The manual focus
feeling is better than most af lenses but not up to the feeling of a real
manual focus lens. It's excellently constructed, feels nice and it's not
expensive for what it gives. It's the price you pay for a 1 stop slower
Here's one action sequence that turned out pretty good from my weekend at the
races. (It may take a few minutes to load. Be patient)
http://photography.skofteland.net/doh.htm
The driver was a rookie (notice the 3 diagonal stripes) running in about 7th
or 8th place (out of 41 starters) and
Bolo wrote:
Speed-wise I was refering more to the shorter lenses. A 1.x normal or
short tele would be nice to have when it is darker. However, perhaps
the DOF on such glass would be so short as to be unusable.
H, yes speedier shorter lenses would be nice - but just
actually, it makes sense to me: afaik, the *lens* resilutions are
normally in range of hundreds of lppm. so for digital, where there's no
limitation set by film of how much contrast one needs to actually
record those lps, once you have a sensor with high enough resolution,
you should be able to
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Evan Hanson
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 10:04 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: REPOST:Best Soup for Tri-X Plus-X
Ok guys sorry about yesterday but it appears my mail server
crapped out on me
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Aaron Reynolds
On Thursday, May 2, 2002, at 02:05 AM, Paul Jones wrote:
So getting to my point whats good to develop Delta 3200
in when rated
at 400?
The developers i have and mainly use are
Trust me there is nothing better than having life
development support with Aaron walking you thru.
--- David Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Way ahead of you.
Dave :)
Begin Original Message
From: Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Luckily, your cheap AP tank came with reels
Well, who knows what's really going on in the mind of Olympus, but this
seems like a far fetched plan as outlined.
First - why would any other manufacturer design lenses for such a
system? Short of absolutely staggering sales, there just would not be any
percentages in designing lenses in a
Good to know.I'll check in with him prior
to measuring out chemicals to check on ratio's
etc,BEFORE i lock the doors:)
Dave
Begin Original Message
From: Brendan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thu, 2 May 2002 10:45:48 -0400 (EDT)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Re: 120 film - developing
Comment found on the Leica list:
But the Hasselblad, like the Leica,
uses its glass to give a transcendent glow,
a luminous quality that is not to be
found in other cameras meant for mere mortals.
Is The Brotherhood comprised of mortals?
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.andyrouse.co.uk/Photogear_Page.htm
-
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 .
From: Brendan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thu, 2 May 2002 10:45:48 -0400 (EDT)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Re: 120 film - developing tanks and reels
Trust me there is nothing better than having life
development support with Aaron walking you thru.
Very funny slip there on life ;)
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 08:34:47AM -0400, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Comment found on the Leica list:
But the Hasselblad, like the Leica,
uses its glass to give a transcendent glow,
a luminous quality that is not to be
found in other cameras meant for mere mortals.
Is The Brotherhood
Perhaps Pentax historians will correct me, but something like this may have
occurred during the great days of the SLR. The Olympus OM-1 (1972)
introduced a small form factor and used a series of relatively small,
lightweight lenses. Pentax, of course, followed a with small (K and M)
cameras,
On Thursday, May 2, 2002, at 10:37 AM, tom wrote:
I'd go for Xtol herethe point at which xtol seems to work better
with D3200 is at around 800 or 1000, in my experience.
I'd try Xtol 1:1 9 min at 68 degress.
Then again, I haven't actually tried it. I've done it at 800, but
don't have
Shel and Aaron inquired about by current chemistry. But I am
going to try XTOL.
Evan
Then you saw our responses? Why are you asking again?
tv
-
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
On Thursday, May 2, 2002, at 10:37 AM, tom wrote:
Then you saw our responses? Why are you asking again?
Well, I for one asked what he was using now, and that info has been
added to his repost.
Ok, so, Evan, how do your negs look right now? How clear is the base?
How heavy is the
Dooh! remind me not to type while I'm blabing with
Aaron on the phone.
--- Nitin Garg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Brendan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thu, 2 May 2002 10:45:48 -0400 (EDT)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Re: 120 film - developing tanks and
reels
Trust me there
Oh,to be that good someday!!!
Dave
Pentax User
Stouffville Ontario Canada
http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj
Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the
On Thursday, May 2, 2002, at 08:34 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Comment found on the Leica list:
But the Hasselblad, like the Leica,
uses its glass to give a transcendent glow,
a luminous quality that is not to be
found in other cameras meant for mere mortals.
Is The Brotherhood comprised
Shel Belinkoff quoted from the Leica list:
But the Hasselblad, like the Leica,
uses its glass to give a transcendent glow,
a luminous quality that is not to be
found in other cameras meant for mere mortals.
Sounds like one of those artistic descriptions of lens flare. Would they
like
This move will require something of an about-face for Olympus's PR department. The
company has been claiming that interchangeable-lens digicams that use existing 35mm
lenses cannot guarantee the fit tolerances needed in such a tiny sensor. Olympus will
have to now explain that by starting from
On Wed, 1 May 2002, Aaron Reynolds wrote:
Not really -- the Honeywell/Pentax/Asahi logo is on the prism, which is
removable. You could have a new body with an old prism.
Its the little, obvious things, that make me feel the stupidest when I
miss them. :)
That they're a newer version of a
HC-110 gives some very nice blacks with Plus-X.
Haven't used it with Tri-X as yet.
--
Collin Brendemuehl, KC8TKA
---
Get over it.
Dr. Laura
--
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions.
Two aspects of the 35mm SLR architecture make it a bad platform for a
digital camera: the mirror box size, and the image circle coverage. I have
no doubts that if you free lens designers from these constraints they'll be
able to design better lenses than those available for 35mm systems.
A film developer doesn't deliver nice blacks - that's a result of
paper choice and developer. However, perhaps you should define what
nice blacks are so we can be sure we're thinking of the same thing.
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
HC-110 gives some very nice blacks with Plus-X.
Haven't used it
You know.. I've been trying to figure out WHY there is such a mystique around a
camera based in 1950's technology. I've shot an M6 with a 50mm Summicron f2 - results
in low light were nice - images were sharp but it wasn't a religious experience by any
means.
Comparing the images to my
I get real nice blacks when I underexpose
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Shel Belinkoff
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 9:38 AM
A film developer doesn't deliver nice blacks - that's a result of
paper choice and developer.
puke
Norm
(not you Shel, the Leica comment)
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Comment found on the Leica list:
But the Hasselblad, like the Leica,
uses its glass to give a transcendent glow,
a luminous quality that is not to be
found in other cameras meant for mere mortals.
Is The Brotherhood
All,
Mike Johnston has a great article on the Luminous Landscape website that
addresses black and white printing, glow in a print, and bokeh with old
Pentax lenses:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/sm-02-04-28.htm
--Mark
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To
Aaron you're a genius the words I was looking for but couldn't
find are my base isn't clear enough. What causes that?
Highlights are ok but I would like to pull more detail from the
shadows. I know it's there because when I spring for the pro-lab
shadow areas have show their details better.
On Thursday, May 2, 2002, at 12:24 PM, gfen wrote:
Since I primarily see this with the 105 f2.4, which seems to almost be
the
default lens with this, which is preferable the newer one or the older?
I don't think they changed anything other than cosmetics and maybe
coatings. I have a new
As long as the mirror box tyranny gives me an optical TTL
viewfinder, then so be it. The hell will freeze before I buy a
digital viewfinder camera.
And how much is this lens - 5 MPixels? And how many megapixels is
capable of the 20 years old, mirror box constrained, 5x zoom
A
it rather depends on which stop it is, and which lens.
It also depends upon when the judgement is being made: If I'm in
the middle of balancing the checkbook I'd give a different answer
than if I'm in a situation where I need just a smidgeon more light
for a photo than I seem to have at that
I'm looking to buy a zoom lens in the 70 - 300mm size, and spend in the
region of $200-$250. I think I have narrowed it down to the Sigma 70-300
4/5.6 APO or the Pentax SMCP-FA 80-320 4.5/5.6.
I thought I would open it up to the experts on the list. i would be
grateful of any advice.
Thanks
Bob W. wrote:
Hi Lasse,
I don't have any money to pay you.
there would be no question of payment. I intend to shoot some film
this weekend to check a lens I exchanged yesterday, and such film
has
no value to me once I've evaluated the results and I would normally
throw it away.
Well, I
mike w. wrote:
Hi,
Shame on you, Bob! 8-)
Portland Hotel - London Street, Greenwich, GREENWICH [1881]
I think not the same one, though
A Google search of League of Nations 1920 brings up over 300
references. No obvious answers, unfortunately.
I do seem to remeber reference to
My Sears Auto KS arrived this week. This camera, sold by Ricoh as the XR-2s, appears
to be Ricoh's answer to the Pentax K2. That is, you get manual and aperture-preferred
exposure, combined with a moving needle and mirror lockup (when using the mechanical
timer).
The shutter is loud--louder
I have a MX which I bought 25 years ago and I am re-discovering it
after almost ten years of non-use. I'll be using it mainly for
macrophotography (I just bought a SMC 100 f/4 Macro). Can some one
advice on the best focusing screen to use for Macro? I read
somewhere that SE and SG are best
Mohamed wrote:
Hello every one, I just joined the discussion group and this is my
first
message.
I have a MX which I bought 25 years ago and I am re-discovering it
after almost
ten years of non-use. I'll be using it mainly for macrophotography
(I just
bought a SMC 100 f/4 Macro). Can some
I 2nd the sigma, be warned tho for weird aperture
readings at times, still exposes correctly.
--- Richard Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm looking to buy a zoom lens in the 70 - 300mm
size, and spend in the
region of $200-$250. I think I have narrowed it down
to the Sigma 70-300
4/5.6
I thought I would open it up to the experts on the list.
Hey - what about the rest of us? ;-)
Fred
-
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 Thu, May 02, 2002 at 03:35:35PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The eyepiece blind is a nice touch: It's an internal blind, or
shutter, that completely blocks off the light for autoexposed timed
shots. Unlike aftermarket blinds like HAMA's, this one allows you to
use an eyepiece
Alin,
I didn't say, tyranny of the mirror box, I said, tyranny
of the 35mm mirror box. The tyranny is not the mirror box
per se, but rather the fact that a 35mm box is oversized when
compared to the imaging array. I submit that a properly
sized mirror box is not tyranny.
Imagine if you
I'm sure you know more than you think!
Fred wrote:
I thought I would open it up to the experts on the list.
Hey - what about the rest of us? ;-)
Fred
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget
I guess, what I would care to know is what are the situations when 1 or
less extra stop makes critical difference.
I can understand fast tele: when you stick 2X converter on 300/2.8, 1
stop initial difference would translate into 2 stops, and I do think
that's quite a bit. But what are situations
My guess: SMC-A* 600mm F5.6 with extended shade, lots of camo tape, and a
teleconverter. See the picture of such lens at Boz' site:
http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/extreme-tele/A600f5.6.html
Focus ring, shoulder strap, aperture ring, all look to be in the right
places.
--Mark
I have the Sigma 70-300 Macro for a short time now but for Canon. I used it for
some Macro and close up photography. It seems OK. But this a very preliminary
impression.
Fred, Thank you very much and thanks to Lasse too. You seem to know this subject
very well, so I have another question ( well, I am new and enthusiastic); do you
think using an extension tube on the SMC 100 f/4 Macro to extend the ratio to
1:1 is a good idea? If so which do you recommend? Thanks
Welcome aboard, Mohamed! What part of the world do you hail from? You'll
find we have members from all over. Can't help you much on selecting the
best screen for an MX, but I can point you to a couple of sites to watch for
used screens -- eBay (http://www.ebay.com) and KEH
Hopefully yes, Pentax will make a new mount for it's digital SLR, taking advantage of
a smaller frame size, but (unlike Olympus) with adapters to use both Kmt and M42
lenses.
I agree with your comment IRT electronic viewfinders, but I think the poster was
referring to tyranny of the size of a
I will pay as much as a couple hundred dollars for one stop on my
frequently used focal lengths. More for the focusing ease than the low
light shooting capability. But then, I'm old and my eyes are going away :-)
Paul
Mishka wrote:
a question for the collective wisdom:
just curious, how much
No, the construction is poor. Mine is already broken, I use a piece of tape
to close it. I am still thinking if I could fix it with a better
construction
Greetings, Jos.
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Namens £ukasz Kacperczyk
Verzonden:
On Thu, 2 May 2002 10:22:31 -0700 (PDT)
Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
this popped to my mind as i just received a M135/3.5, light and smooth,
in absolutely gorgeous condition, along with hard case, BINned for
$49...
I have one of these lenses and it is quite useful. but I do alot of
Hi,
But what are situations where 50/1.2 is absolutely
needed over 50/1.4? If you say available light, I have hard time
believing that the gain of speed, say 1/50 vs 1/40 makes difference
between a shot taken and a shot missed. Does it, really?
sometimes, yes. The 1 stop shutter speed gain
I have that lens. I like it but I'm no judge of sharpness.
I paid considerably more for mine than you did. I've even used it with a
Vivitar 2X to take some LONG shots of race cars. I think you couldn't have
done bad for $5
Cory Waters
- Original Message -
From: Jim Fellows [EMAIL
I'm looking to buy a zoom lens in the 70 - 300mm size, and spend in the
region of $200-$250. I think I have narrowed it down to the Sigma 70-300
4/5.6 APO or the Pentax SMCP-FA 80-320 4.5/5.6.
I thought I would open it up to the experts on the list. i would be
grateful of any advice.
Thanks
no sigma? Alan thats a bit vauge.
--- Alan Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm looking to buy a zoom lens in the 70 - 300mm
size, and spend in the
region of $200-$250. I think I have narrowed it
down to the Sigma 70-300
4/5.6 APO or the Pentax SMCP-FA 80-320 4.5/5.6.
I thought I would open
Chris Niesmertelny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of particular note, and my favorite of the month (indeed,
taken by one of my
favorite photographers) is Gianfranco Irlanda's Walking
Shadow. What an
incredible shot! I love the near fantasy-blue of the
reflected sky, and how
the paving stones each
Mishka,
Many times the stop extra is more for viewfinder usage - focusing,
composing, etc. Try shooting a wedding in dim light on moving targets
trying to keep them in focus when you can see well enough. Or try
focusing an f4 wide angle on a nearby group in dim light. It's hard
to focus when
Boy I've got to proofread better!
I meant ...trying to keep them in focus when you CAN'T see well
enough. and later It's hard ENOUGH to focus when things are
bright.
Maybe I should take an english class.
Bruce
Thursday, May 02, 2002, 2:44:30 PM, you wrote:
BD Mishka,
BD Many times the
Fred wrote:
If I'm in the middle of balancing the checkbook I'd give a different answer...
Fred,
If you're going to introduce a new term to the list, please define it. What, exactly,
is balancing a checkbook? :)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Roger!
The bigger the glass the brighter the screen and (most importantly) the
narrower the depth of field. This makes focusing s much easier,
especially in dim light. The big glass is worth it's weight in gold for this
alone.
Regards,
Bob...
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I
Welcome aboard, Mohamed. The list has four active members in greater Washington, DC:
Tom VanVeen (I know I spelled that wrong; sorry); Geoff Moes; Christian Skofteland;
and me, Paul Stregevsky. The first two live in Northern Virginia; the second two, in
Montgomery County, Maryland. Christian
Hi friends,
I'm working on putting together a Pentax 50 years poster (100x70cm format)
showing all (74 models) Asahiflex, Asahi Pentax and Pentax mass-produced
SLR's from 1952 to 2002.
It will be this year AOHC gadget for members attending 7th Pentax Day in
Florence (Italy) next June 2nd. See:
Kevin Waterson wrote:
Now I am in search of a yet another fast lens (is'nt this the essence of
the photogaphers quest) a 135/2 or 1.8 would be quite nice, but it is a
substatial increase in price. So I will search for a reasonably priced
used unit, unless a job arises that will justify the
Hi friends,
I'm working on putting together a Pentax 50 years poster (100x70cm format)
showing all Asahiflex, Asahi Pentax and Pentax mass-produced SLR's from 1952
to 2002. It will be AOHC gadget for members attending 7th Pentax Day in
Florence (Italy) next June 2nd. See:
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Are We Merely Mortal?
Comment found on the Leica list:
But the Hasselblad, like the Leica,
uses its glass to give a transcendent glow,
a luminous quality that is not to be
found in other cameras meant for mere mortals.
I was making a delivery on Front Street at Jarvis, and noticed that
they're opening a Spring Rolls right next to St. Lawrence Market. Seems
to be the same outfit as the one on Yonge, judging by the signage.
There's way more good stuff to shoot down around there than up at Yonge
and Bloor, imho
Hi,
there's a long article on this subject here:
http://people.smu.edu/rmonagha/mf/fast.html
It includes an actual table of costs!
Bob
-
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
- Original Message -
From: Pål Audun Jensen
Subject: Re: Thanks Ultra-Wide Anglers! (Now a few more
questions...)
William wrote:
If diffraction is going to be a problem with MF, it will also
be
a problem with 35mm, if DOF is the same, and field of view is
the same.
Sure if DOF
H. Pentax already has a smaller format mirror box SLR
system in the parts bin - remember the 110? And there are
several imagers out there aboyut the size of a 110 frame! Holy
hotcakes, Batman, could the 110 SLR system be the basis for a
Pentax digital SLR!?!?!?
I sure hope not! I want to
Spoken like a true wedding photographer, Bruce. g
On the street and shooting in poor light, fast glass is good because it
allows one to hand-hold the camera at a faster shutter speeds in low
light. F1.4 v F2.0 is a stop, and means the difference between 1/8sec
and 1/15sec, which may mean the
Ye
Jeff
- Original Message -
From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 5:59 PM
Subject: Hey, Aaron (and other TO folks)
I was making a delivery on Front Street at Jarvis, and noticed that
they're opening a Spring Rolls right
On Thursday, May 2, 2002, at 05:59 PM, frank theriault wrote:
I was making a delivery on Front Street at Jarvis, and noticed that
they're opening a Spring Rolls right next to St. Lawrence Market. Seems
to be the same outfit as the one on Yonge, judging by the signage.
There's way more
On 2 May 2002 at 11:28, Mark Cassino wrote:
Well, who knows what's really going on in the mind of Olympus, but this
seems like a far fetched plan as outlined.
It makes less sense to me from an economic perspective than an technical
perspective and that's pretty poor too IMHO. Maybe this
On 2 May 2002 at 7:35, Mishka wrote:
actually, it makes sense to me: afaik, the *lens* resilutions are
normally in range of hundreds of lppm. so for digital, where there's no
limitation set by film of how much contrast one needs to actually
record those lps, once you have a sensor with high
On 2 May 2002 at 12:26, Mark Erickson wrote:
Two aspects of the 35mm SLR architecture make it a bad platform for a
digital camera: the mirror box size, and the image circle coverage. I have no
doubts that if you free lens designers from these constraints they'll be able to
design better
Fred,
If you're going to introduce a new term to the list, please define it. What,
exactly, is balancing a checkbook? :)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Paul,
Think trained seals...
Regards, Bob S.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net
Fred wrote: If I'm in the middle of balancing the checkbook I'd
give a different answer...
Fred, If you're going to introduce a new term to the list, please
define it. What, exactly, is balancing a checkbook? :)
Good point, Paul. But, please be aware that I was only speaking
1 - 100 of 119 matches
Mail list logo
