In a message dated 1/23/2003 1:40:22 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Well, anyway. There are always going to be people around who claim that
> basic correctness in verbal expression is just an annoying distraction that
> we would all gratefully dispense with if we could just
"Doug Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Their, there, and they're.
...and the belief some seem to hold that the poor apostrophe is a
character used to warn the reader that he's about to observe the
letter "s" at the end of a word.
Here's a cute little quotation I came across a few years ag
I bet it's not a telephoto, but rather it's
a long focus design.
JCO
> -Original Message-
> From: Fred [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 11:34 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Elemental Watson!
>
>
> > There is a superb Leica telephoto with only thre
"Malcolm Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I hear so many people complain of computer failures and corrupt
> discs and even upgrading and sometime later finding their new
> computer doesn't support retrieval of older software - but is that
> the reality of computers in 2003?
Yes, it is. Expec
I don't suppose many of you read my column in the English magazine _Black &
White Photography_, but if you're into B&W (even as a beginner), a question
for you--are there any particular topics you personally might like to see
covered in such a column?
I was putting together ideas for the Editor to
ok - how about phrases like "I literally could not believe my eyes!" Or, as
a significant variation on the theme, "I literally died when I saw that!"
Most often if not always the speaker/writer intends "virtual" when they say
"literal".
I just had to advantage this thread to get that off my chest
Hi,
Are there any members in latvia? if so could you contact me off list.
Thanks,
Paul
Only one I've ever heard of is a Screw mount to MC/MD adapter.
At 04:02 PM 1/22/2003 -0500, you wrote:
At 03:12 PM 22/01/2003 -0500, you wrote:
From: "Evan Hanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Has anyone ever heard of modifying a K mount lens to fit the Minolta md
mount.
Evan
There is a converter you
I was thinking of the mechanical coupling. (Although why anyone would
go to the effort I don't know).
Who want's to photograph infinity anyway... :)
At 03:31 PM 1/22/2003 -0500, you wrote:
Peter Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It would probably be easier to go the other way. MD --> K.
The
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 23:51:14 -0500, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
> Scary, eh?
Some people are born without a brain, others have it removed later. :-)
TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 22:28:37 -0600, Ryan K. Brooks wrote:
> JPG is 8bits/pixel, not color. (4:2:2)
Sorry, but that's not true. JPG can represent UP TO 24 bits per pixel,
8 bits per primary color per pixel.
TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 20:51:43 -0600, Ed Matthew wrote:
> "Gotta" ain't right neither .
Yeah, well, what can I say. I'm a slacker. :-)
TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
The same thing happened to my MZ-5n a couple of years ago. Luckily, Pentax
fixed it for free, under the extended warranty. For now, maybe you could
run a short rubber band between the eyepiece and the flash to hold it up
(no, I didn't watch Macgyver that often).
Pat White
>> It reminds me (hood and all) of the time I mounted a 1955-vintage
>> Asahi-Togaku 58/2.4 (with tiny 40.5mm filter threads) on an LX -
>>
>> http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/5824lx2.jpg
> Ahh.. the new Limited... so who wins the pool?
Heh-heh. Well, I originally had (the URL to) this photo on
> Wow... I'm trying to do the same (although with an german slip-on
> hood) but I cannot find a 37mm to 42mm adapter. Anybody with a
> spare one?
Not I - sorry. I sold mine along with the rest of my Asahiflex gear
- I billed the whole package as an "Asahiflex Collector's Kit". I
think I may p
Mike Johnston wrote:
> > My pet peeve is people who use the phrase "begs the question" when
> > they don't know what it means (they think it means "raises the
> > question").
>
> A couple of pet peeves:
>
> "one of the only" (it's either "the only" or "one of the few")
>
> (snp)
>
> Anybody got a
9>>> How you can achieve the cleanest lens surfaces in the world
> With the "Lens Cleaning Set" a user, collector, or friend of fine
> optics can achieve lens surfaces as clean as the ones produced at
> the Zeiss factory.
In the light of some recent threads on the cleanliness of some new
FA lenses
> and compare the Tokina AT-X 90/2.5 macro against the Vivitar
> Series One 90/2.5 macro. The Tokina is no slouch in the saturation
> department; it has that Nikon-like warmth that makes everyone look
> as though they've been out in the sun. Fred, you own both macros;
> is the coloring the same?
S
> There is a superb Leica telephoto with only three elements!
Are you referring to the 560/6.8 Telyt, perhaps, Bill? (I've had
meaningless, totally-unlikely-to-be-fulfilled daydreams about
replacing my follow-focus Novoflex 600/8 lens head with that one -
.)
Fred
Well I guessed the second part.
At 08:45 PM 1/22/2003 -0500, you wrote:
Why do you think I know big words like impecunious? More to the point,
why do you think I don't know ~exactly~ what it means?
-frank
Mike Johnston wrote:
> You were a LAWYER?!?
>
> --Mike
--
"The optimist thinks this is
Long live the Spoties and Takumar lenses. Say... how about a digital camera
with m42.
Bob Rapp
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 3:12 PM
Subject: On camera obsolescence and 35mm lenses
> For tho
On Wednesday, January 22, 2003, at 12:46 PM, Thibault GROUAS wrote:
Here is a sample autoportrait shot with a 20x25cm pinhole box :
http://photofr.ath.cx/files/stenopees/pages/Balcon.htm
Nice, too.
I was also wondering maybe you could be charged to take people's
garbage
away so if you use
Mishka wrote:
600*sizeofpixel. and pixels are 3 bytes in 8 bit/color, or 6 bytes in
"more than 8 bit/color" mode. which comes down to either 18MB or 36MB. that
is, if it's uncompressed format. for jpegs, it's only 8bit/color, and should
be about 2MB (but it *really* depends on how far you are
On Wednesday, January 22, 2003, at 12:11 PM, Altaf Shaikh wrote:
Here is mine http://www.usefilm.com/showphoto.php?id=228
A few others are in my portfolio below.
Al Shaikh
http://www.usefilm.com/browse.php?mode=port&data=1
Very nice!
Dan Scott
It should work on your new computer it might have trouble being read by older
cd-ROM drives.
At 10:55 PM 1/22/2003 -0500, you wrote:
John:
That was on CD-RW's, not CD-R's? I currently have the same set up on a
computer I will be replacing shortly. Everything I've burned, however has
been in CD-R
For those who might be interested the current edition of Popular
Photography has feature called "Shoot into the Sun." Which features
a series of beautifully exposed with good color saturation razor sharp
and surprisingly flare free photographs. What camera and lenses made
these photographs? The
On Wednesday, January 22, 2003, at 06:46 PM, Mike Johnston wrote:
Mike, you need a better dictionary.
Definitions 8 & 9 are not positional. "OVER a hundred years " is fine.
See definition 3 for LESS.
Ah, yes, well, dictionaries have been going to hell ever since that
damned
liberal subvers
You know, Sometimes I think we underestimate how good some of these older,
third party lenses really are. Some of my favourite lenses are third party
lenses
Vic
> Weapons of mass destruction.
now, this is a good one !!!
> I don't shoot enough macro shots to hold on to this, and now that
> I have a Tokina ATX 90/2.5 with 1:1 adapter, this "cult classic"
> belongs to someone who will use it regularly as a superb closeup
> lens.
This sounds like a good move for somebody. The only "bad" news is
that you'll pay a lot
> Am I the only one that feels Pentax neck straps, while the
> pockets are nice, are not the most comfortable thing?
I hate those MZ straps, they are very uncomfortable. Go buy a domke or
lowepro strap instead.
On 22 Jan 2003 at 15:40, Keith Whaley wrote:
> Andre Langevin wrote:
> >
> > But it's always surprising to read in many tests that even expensive
> > lenses are not perfectly centered. Does it mean that a (good)
> > repairman could do better (afterwards) than the original lens maker
> > did at t
I had one for a number of years. I think that price is a bit high, for
about that you can probably get the SMC M 135/3.5 which is a superior
lens... however the Vivitar isn't bad. Here is a link to a PUG submission
made with this lens.
http://pug.komkon.org/01mar/cameo.html
William in Utah
John:
That was on CD-RW's, not CD-R's? I currently have the same set up on a
computer I will be replacing shortly. Everything I've burned, however has
been in CD-R clicking the compatible with most equipment button. Not that
I've burned a whole lot but I would like access to it on the new computer
Vivitar made at least two 135/2.8s. The only one that comes close to Series
One quality was their 1:2 Close-Focus model, made by Komine. The 20-inch
close focus was achieved strictly by a l-o-n-g helicoid. It uses a 62mm
filter and is said to be very good. It was also sold as Maginon and probably
P
On 23 Jan 2003 at 13:52, Kevin Waterson wrote:
> How 'big' is a 6 Mega pixel image?
>
> eg, 20 Meg?
>
> I ask for storage reasons
File size depends upon the file type and bit depth and compression. The bit-map
size for a 6MP image at 8 bits per pixel is 18M bytes so consider that size the
wor
> God, in his infinite wisdom, granted the man's wish
here's an (old) joke: there was a righteous man, who spent most of his life
studying scriptures and stuff... and so God saw it, and came down to talk to
him.
"o, the most righteous one" -- he said, "i had seen you from above, and had
been s
It varies a lot depending on the compression you use. I have a Minolta
Dimage 7, which is 5 MP, and pictures can range all the way from 12
megabytes uncompressed to 1.5 megs at medium jpeg compression. You lose a
little bit of texture with the smaller files, but the difference in
appearance i
Fred wrote:
Just got yesterday what is the smallest M42 Takumar I've ever
owned ( & I own ALOT). The 1959 vintage 35mm F3.5 Auto-Takumar.
This has a semi-automatic aperture and is so small the filter size
is 46mm! Way cool. http://jcoconnell.com/temp/spotat3535.jpg
It reminds me (hood and all)
600*sizeofpixel. and pixels are 3 bytes in 8 bit/color, or 6 bytes in
"more than 8 bit/color" mode. which comes down to either 18MB or 36MB. that
is, if it's uncompressed format. for jpegs, it's only 8bit/color, and should
be about 2MB (but it *really* depends on how far you are compressing it
yes for 4 to 6 element designs,
no for 12 to 15 element desings.
JCO
> -Original Message-
> From: Paul Franklin Stregevsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 10:07 PM
> To: 'Pentax-Discuss'
> Subject: RE: Vivitar 35-85 better than Pentax 24-90?
>
>
> "J. C. O'
Language is like a river. It wears a bit here and there and changes its
course. What was correct yesterday may seem unwieldy tomorrow. Yet, I
must admit that some contemporary usage bothers me. Chief among these is
"I've got." I've got the answer. I've got to get another lens. When of
course al t
Christian wrote:
Gotcha. I am not the smartest person in the world when it comes to
interpreting distortion. I thought barrel and pincushion distortions were
varieties of perspective distortion. Search on the web has explained a lot
to me. Ignore my previous post.
I, too, withdraw my critici
Greetings list!
No one seems to have knowledge of this. Is that lug on the grip there for
another purpose? Am I the only one that feels Pentax neck straps, while the
pockets are nice, are not the most comfortable thing?
Two stores in Chicago offered me that Canon one. I can't imagine they'd b
Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
LESS is an amount or volume word. FEWER is a number word.
Mike is correct. In English, "less" modifies a "mass noun" (like Jell-o);
"fewer" modifies a "count noun". A word is a count noun if it can be
preceded by "a" or "an".
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tried to send this earlier, but was having mail problems.
Who the hell coined the word "preventative"? I always thought it should be
"preventive"
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Johnston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 9:47 PM
Subject: Re:
Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There's a guy who sells a Photoshop action that does this, but I forget his
name. It "blends" two separate exposures to create effectively ideal dynamic
range.
PhotoImpact 8 (for Windows only) does this.
PhotoImpact can use PhotoShop plug-ins.
[EMAIL PROT
All I care about is that they can understand me, and I can understand them.
Was it Thomas Jefferson who said it was a poor mind indeed that could only
think of one way to spell a word. I think that was in response to the use of
"inalienable" instead of "unalienable" in some paper he authored. I can
"J. C. O'Connell" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is a trade off to adding elements:
A. on one hand they reduced abberations IF precisely ground and placed
B. BUT on the other hand, the extra air glass surfaces REDUCE contrast (and
apparent resolution).
Didn't Super Multicoating (SMC) all-but-eli
> >that's [...]
> Add improper use of contractions to your list. Example: that's.
Gotta keep grist in the mill. Intentionally or not. :-)
TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
"Gotta" ain't right neither .
Ed
_
Add photos to your e-mail with M
- Original Message -
From: "Kevin Waterson"
Subject: How big is 6 Mp
> How 'big' is a 6 Mega pixel image?
Yer close, I think around 18mb if tou are saving as a tiff or PSD.
William Robb
JCO wrote:
While i agree that this lens isnt distortion free,
I dont think this shot in particular reveals that.
Where are you noticing obvious disortion in the shot?
Like Christian, I noticed it, but it wasn't obvious. You can see it in the
sloping walls of the buildings at the far left and right
My favorite is "preventative" Where in hell did this word come from. I
always thought the proper word was "preventive".
Bill
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Johnston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 5:51 PM
Subject: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitc
Andre Langevin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well... the Pancolar for sure... a screw mount lens more expensive than SMCT
85/1.8..
But much easier to find, often for less than $200. I can't recall when I
last saw an SMC Takumar 85/1.8T for that little.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Why do you think I know big words like impecunious? More to the point,
why do you think I don't know ~exactly~ what it means?
-frank
Mike Johnston wrote:
> You were a LAWYER?!?
>
> --Mike
--
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist fears it is true." -J. Rob
Alan Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I once had XR-P with PG-4 grip, but so long ago I don't remember much.
http://www.butkus.org/chinon/ricoh_pg-4/ricoh_pg-4.htm
OK, I cleaned the contacts (on winder and camera), as Fred suggested. But
the winder still seemed to take at least 2 shots. I say "at
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 11:30:01 +1000, jcoyle wrote:
> If I sat down and thought about it, I could probably go on all day!
To, too, and two.
Their, there, and they're.
Dangling prepositions.
Subject/verb agreement.
Improper pronoun choice (me instead of I, etc.).
Word misuse, a la Mike's rant.
In a message dated 1/22/2003 5:51:55 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> You may return to your regular programming...sorry again.
> (Most of the time,
> I'm really getting pretty good at holding my tongue.)
>
> --Mike
Good thing, since my grammar and sentence structure often
Hey Steve,
I think Frank's called off the "Let's Help Frank" fund :)
All those who've replied can stand easy :) and "Thank You".
It seems that he's got enough stuff to tide him over for now.
Frank, I'm sure we'll have other things to discuss come Feb 1.
Cheers to all,
Dave
-Original Messa
Been through this loop before, but here's one which is at least photography
related - 'aperature' instead of 'aperture'. You'd think those who do this
would have come across the correct spelling so many times it would have
raised a question in their minds when typing it.
Probably from people with
Something always goes wrong with my plans
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Johnston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 9:43 PM
Subject: Re: More about DSLR lifespans: Canon D60 discontinua
Yes, it was Direct CD - sorry.
It took a little while to sort it out, but in the end I got there and it was
99% reliable - just the occasional buffering problem. Incidentally, I had
to drop the write speed on the CD burner to 2x instead of 4x under XP, using
the inbuilt Cd software, otherwise I go
>From my experience its off to the repair person for this, the top plate has
to be removed to repair it. It can be one of two problems that i know off.
The spring is broken or the a little plastic clip inside is broken. I've
seen this on quite a few MZ series bodies.
Regards,
Paul
- Original M
trade ya for the 19mm
> Jeff.
>
> frank theriault wrote:
> > No worries, Brendan,
> >
> > I've got that old Soligor 35-105 m42, and another
> Soligor 35-70 k-mount,
> > along with some wide-ish primes (Super Tak 3.5
> 35mm, the Vivitar 2.8 28mm
> > you sold me, the Vivitar 3.8 19mm Dave sold m
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 09:28:19 -0500, Evan Hanson wrote:
> I read all day long. The list is the only thing that saves me from the
> drudgery of my job.
I skim the titles at work during the day, and scan or read almost every
message when I get home in the evening. I do have filters on some
topics,
I don't shoot enough macro shots to hold on to this, and now that I have a
Tokina ATX 90/2.5 with 1:1 adapter, this "cult classic" belongs to someone
who will use it regularly as a superb closeup lens.
Magnifies 1:2 at 180mm, 1:4 at 90mm. See discussion and photos at
http://www.cameraquest.com/viv
Sorry. In Webster's Second College Edition (1970) OVER, prep: #11 -
during; through [over the past ten years].
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I doubt very much that Webster's Second (of sainted memory) would approve of
"In business for over 25 years" (which phrase I happened to just read on the
B
"jcoyle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>There can be a problem with changes of OS. I used Adaptec's Easy CD creator
>on Win98 with great success: now, having changed to XP, the old CD-RW's are
>not readable! Adaptec does not have an XP driver for the version of the
>program I have, so I have to for
Just rip the darn thing off and use you shoe mount flash.
Jeff.
Brendan wrote:
the pop up flash on the MZ-3 is broken, it pops up but
it doesn't stay up, where is the spring in there? do I
have to send it to Pentax to fix?
__
> BTW: Shouldn't it have been "What the hell brought on THAT?"
>
> (Insert Winston Churchill quotation here.)
Mark,
You do know why American split infinities, don't you? It's because Fowler*
actually approved of the practice--he thought it was pedantic to disallow it
categorically. We promptly s
Ok, time for my mini-rant.
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, Mike Johnston wrote:
> You can have less water in a bucket, less brains in your head, and you could
> care less.
Why do people always use "I could care less" to indicate that they don't
care at all? If they could care less than they currently do,
> My pet peeve is people who use the phrase "begs the question" when
> they don't know what it means (they think it means "raises the
> question").
A couple of pet peeves:
"one of the only" (it's either "the only" or "one of the few")
"that" for "who," as in "the woman that was doing her nails
Collin,
I read your post in the MF group about the performance of the Schneider lens.
I guess the Fujinon you mentioned is a more modern lens. If it has the EBC
coating, then it's probably an awesome lens.
Jeff.
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
Likewise.
I'm looking @ replacing my 150/5.6 Schneider wit
Yeah, Mike I know what you mean when you say that "Nodoby (sic) ever get
(sic) these things right..."
However, I recall someone posting once that we shouldn't correct other
folks' grammar and spelling on the list, since for many, English is not
their first language. You can't always be sure wheth
- Original Message -
From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Hands up: who will be looking 'very closely' at the Pentax DSLR (assume
> 6MP at less than 1500 bucks) in the following categories:
>
> 3/ Need to see it first, see if I really want one.
I think
John Coyle
Brisbane, Austra
Hi Evan,
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 14:19:26 -0500, Evan Hanson wrote:
> Has anyone ever heard of modifying a K mount lens to fit the Minolta md
> mount.
I found a converter on ebay that allowed K mount lenses to work on
Minolta MD bodies. I think I only paid about US$ 50 for it, a couple
of years ago
http://www.news2web.com/cgi-bin/dnewsweb.exe?cmd=article&group=rec.photo.mar
ketplace&item=305883&utag=
http://www.news2web.com/cgi-bin/dnewsweb.exe?cmd=article&group=rec.photo.mar
ketplace&item=305881&utag=
> Mike, you need a better dictionary.
>
> Definitions 8 & 9 are not positional. "OVER a hundred years " is fine.
> See definition 3 for LESS.
Ah, yes, well, dictionaries have been going to hell ever since that damned
liberal subversive Webster's Third came out. AHED is actually one of the
better
the pop up flash on the MZ-3 is broken, it pops up but
it doesn't stay up, where is the spring in there? do I
have to send it to Pentax to fix?
__
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 19:04:07 +0100, W. Krasowski wrote:
> What is quality of this 1.7x Converter? Does it belong to those cheap
> "softeners" or it will provide good quality/small loss in sharpness?
NO! It does hurt image quality a little bit, but I have to look fairly
hard to notice it. And
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, Andre Langevin wrote:
> Wow... I'm trying to do the same (although with an german slip-on
> hood) but I cannot find a 37mm to 42mm adapter. Anybody with a spare
> one?
These are very hard to find, going beyond scarce into downright rare. If
you ever find one consider yours
Marnie:
Every day, twice a day, but only the threads I am interested in. But then,
I just spent two days away, and had 663 messages unread when I logged in
this morning!
John Coyle
Brisbane, Australia
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday,
I had one of those. It's OK.
Jeff.
Gary L. Murphy wrote:
Just snagged a FA 70-200 f/4 ~ f/5.6 PZ on eBay this morning. Comes complete with box and all for $95 US!
Good deal?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=4688&item=3002637394&rd=1
Later,
Gary
There can be a problem with changes of OS. I used Adaptec's Easy CD creator
on Win98 with great success: now, having changed to XP, the old CD-RW's are
not readable! Adaptec does not have an XP driver for the version of the
program I have, so I have to fork out for a new version, on which I canno
Hey Frank,
You've got more lenses than me.
Can you lend me one? ;-)
Jeff.
frank theriault wrote:
No worries, Brendan,
I've got that old Soligor 35-105 m42, and another Soligor 35-70 k-mount,
along with some wide-ish primes (Super Tak 3.5 35mm, the Vivitar 2.8 28mm
you sold me, the Vivitar 3.8 1
> Bob (similarly tooth-grated despite background as linguist, especially about
> split-infinitives, a particular habit of our transatlantic cousins)
Split is a bad way to have one's infinitives, all right. And while I may
split infinitives with Yankee abandon, at least we know the difference
betw
> Lensbians.
I'll say it: HAR!
--Mike
Likewise.
I'm looking @ replacing my 150/5.6 Schneider with a 180/9 Fujinon-A.
Immediate 25% resolution improvement.
Acros with that will be, to say the least, nice.
Collin (no Nikkors in my bag) Brendemuehl
***
I'll stick with the G690 & GSW690III.
Love
> I was pretty pissed yesterday when I found out that the lens may be
> irrepairable (but a second tech is going to give it a shot), but after
> ruminating overnight, I awoke this morning, and realized "hell, it's
> ~just~ a lens!"
>
> People are starving in the third world, we seem to be slowly l
>As I recall, I went to high school with Doona Nook. (And she gave me
>Cleethorpes)
Was that with the Full English?
Oh, swipe me! He paints with light!
http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/
Free UK Macintosh Classi
"J. C. O'Connell" wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > >> simple, if two lenses are equally corrected, the one with less
> > >> elements will be better.
> > >
> > > I absolutely believe that statement...
> >
> >
> > Well it seems bizarre to me. How can one be better if they're equally
> > corrected?!? Either th
>What's the date on this thing? I might be enticed to fly over if the
>scenery is right.
Resistance is futile.
Mike Wilson started it, he's back at work at 0900 GMT on the 23rd. Poor
lad lives 'Up North' where they still light the streets with gas, bless.
Can't imagine you coming all this way t
- Original Message -
From: "Keith Whaley"
Subject: Re: what a great place!
> What do they call those folks? Lensitians? Lensologists? Lensmiths?
Lensbians.
WW
Hi,
Wednesday, January 22, 2003, 11:15:09 PM, you wrote:
> Dare I ask? What the hell brought THAT on?
probably:
>> simple, if two lenses are equally corrected, the one with less
>> elements will be better.
Bob (similarly tooth-grated despite background as linguist, especially about
split-infini
Hi all,
Since there are so many mails in this newsgroup, I will keep my questions
short:
* Do you have comments on the Vivitar K-mount 135 mm f/2.8 lense?
* Will it be worth about $45 second hand & in good shape?
Thanks for sharing your knowledge with this greenie!
Syb
__
And...we've not even mentioned centering or collimation problems.
Where did that come from? Not me...
That sort of thing belongs to the lens maker (grinder/polisher), so
s/he doesn't introduce such...
keith whaley
But it's always surprising to read in many tests that even expensive
lenses are
> (Mike, was your Humber esutary affected?)
Great Grimsby, no! I can still father children, happy to say.
--Mike
>> Yeah. There's a guy who sells a Photoshop action that does this, but I
>> forget his name. It "blends" two separate exposures to create effectively
>> ideal dynamic range. His plugin is just for PCs so I didn't pay too enough
>> attention. Plus of course it can't be used for anything that moves,
Aha! You mean "...fewer" elements. Yes, I now understand...
Mike Johnston wrote:
Somebody said:
>
> >> simple, if two lenses are equally corrected, the one with less
> >> elements will be better.
To which I replied:
>
> > I absolutely believe that statement...
So, Mike countered:
> Well it s
Dare I ask? What the hell brought THAT on?
Mike Johnston wrote:
>
> Also, I'm so sorry about this, but I'm about to ramp up into schoolmaster
> mode. I do this every now and then, and I *know* it's obnoxious. I'm fully
> aware that *most* of you are smarter and better educated than I am and just
1 - 100 of 241 matches
Mail list logo
