Well, I survived. Despite several disasters, well, mishaps, well, bad things.
Not sure what quite to call them. Unpleasant travel experiences?
Seeing everyone was fun, though.
Marnie aka Doe I just got back from St. Louis, visiting a friend on the way
home.
Hi,
Tuesday, June 8, 2004, 6:25:18 AM, Anders wrote:
On Mon, 7 Jun 2004, Steve Sharpe wrote:
I'm going to try through my Celestron 5...though it is raining here
right now...
It's raining here too, but I have just gotten access to a fast car and a
driver, and will soon ride some 100 miles
Joe,
OK, as soon as I'll get the Sigma 70-200, I'll setup another test, using
maximum care about focusing, shake and so on.
Ciao,
Dario
- Original Message -
From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pdml [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 2:38 AM
Subject: SMC F 70-210
Hi!
It would appear from the most recent talk that Sharpness is more or
less __the__ most important characteristic of the lens. However, from
previous talks it has become my understanding that Pentax do not
optimize their lenses specially for sharpness (except may be macro
lenses and such).
so now I can tick my 'See Venus in transit' box.
Those boxes are odd things.
I once stood by the side of a road for 1.5 hours just to see someone run
by carrying the Olympic torch on it's way to Sydney.
That box is now ticked and I'm very glad there isn't another one like it
on the list.
Simon
On 8 Jun 2004 at 11:30, Boris Liberman wrote:
Hi!
It would appear from the most recent talk that Sharpness is more or
less __the__ most important characteristic of the lens. However, from
previous talks it has become my understanding that Pentax do not
optimize their lenses specially
Rob Studdert wrote:
According to reviewers or users? I've no problems with it's sharpness,
with the
right lens it's down to theoretical limits and in at least one test that
I've
seen it showed the least problems with aliasing of all its contemporary
competition.
Rob, please elaborate on
On 8 Jun 2004 at 10:53, Dario Bonazza wrote:
Rob, please elaborate on this, since (as you know ;-) I'm so badly stressed by
unsatisfying sharpness/resolution of the *ist D. Thanks.
If you want improved real (not apparent) sharpness you'll have to wait for
sensors with greater pixel density.
Boris,
some remarks to add to your confusion ;-)
o It seems that lenses from Canon/Nikon and the likes are often closer to what
test procedures ask from a lens (contrast/sharpness), so Pentax lenses often
get less good results - at least it looks like that in my part of the world and
yes, it
Let me guess... Canon HQ? grin
Alex Sarbu
- Original Message -
From: Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 8:57 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax to focus on digital?
Hasn't anyone noticed that these rumors seem to be from the same source?
We don't know what Pentax is thinking. If they really have a different take
on
what a good lens is, a more holistic approach instead of a 'scientific'
one,
based on measured sharpness and contrast, then they are certainly not good
at
'selling' it.
I am certain many Pentax users would be
Actually this was meant to be a test message, because about 3 posts over the
past week haven't gone through. But well, just in case it -does- go through,
thought it should look a bit more interesting than -testing testing-.
So. Assuming Baby D's out, at least 5mp and more or less a 300D to a 10D,
Har! Wait until tom gets HIS pics back from his 645n Christian, I do
believe that tom took quite a few of my tootsies as well!
Damn, I wish I'd given him a pedicure before I took that shot! It would
have looked so much better with bright red toe nails!
tan. (from japan)
tom writes:
You
Monday, June 7, 2004, 10:05:07 PM, Henri wrote:
HT Quick question, how fast does negative film stop being useful after its
HT expiration date?
HT I got an offer to buy a dozen rolls of superia that had the exp. date of
HT autumn 2002.
HT I would get them at about $1-1.20/roll, so it's not bad,
on 08.06.04 10:49, Dario Bonazza at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
AFAIK, the *ist D allows excellent blow-ups up to 20x30cm, and just
acceptable ones up to 30x40cm. Not so bad, you could say, but can anybody
explain me why the hell any good 4-5MP digital PS (Canon, Konica, Leica,
Minolta, Nikon,
So, I have been ITCHING to land in Japan so that I could check my emails,
thinking that you guys would have posted HEAPS of GFM pics by now, but to no
avail...
You are all a bunch of slackos! Here I am travelling across the world and I
still manage to post mine (well, tom did, and it was
JT Conclusion: Ths Sigma's poor performance wide open, along with its size
JT and weight, mean that it will not be part of my traveling kit.
I tested three specimen of the lens as well, and can only agree. The
lens gets nice by 2.8 and quite better at 4-5.6, but from 1.8-2.8 it's
unusable for
I have the same problem,Ryan.About 3-4 of my
post did not show up.
I'm actually saving my pennies to add the *istD to the Lowepro.Unless improvements are
made in the
baby D,i'll probably bypass it for the Papa.:-)
In the last 12 months my 35mm colour film
Not photograph it,but i tried to find our old Rolofspprisim that fits on a Leica
Transit
that allows sun
observations,but its no were to be found. :-(
Bummer.
Dave
Will anyone here try to photograph the Transit
of Venus that will take
place in some
Reply attempt number 2.:-)
I just love that shot Bill.
Nice grab.
Dave Brooks
The subject says it all.
http://groups.msn.com/BillOwensPhotos/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhotoPhotoID=81
Bill
The thing that surprised me was how neutral the M 100
was: Sky noticably grayer.
Jens Bladt wrote:
Very intersting.
Maybe it is out of focus!?
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Kostas Kavoussanakis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
They are already here:
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/ja/35mm/ist-d/ex.html
--
Best Regards
Sylwek
Mark said:
Boyd's seems to be hangin' on. It's good place to get lens caps, filters,
film, and occasionally, used gear. They had short-dated Fuji Super HQ 200
film for $1.00 a roll when I went two weeks ago. Photo Express did an
excellent job printing it. I think they survive cause Camera
John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There's a significant group of people who feel that the *ist-D is arguably the
*best* of the DSLRs in image sharpness. More is *not* synonymous with better.
Yep. Count me amongst them. I don't want my camera deciding how much
sharpening to add (and what
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
on 08.06.04 10:49, Dario Bonazza at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
AFAIK, the *ist D allows excellent blow-ups up to 20x30cm, and just
acceptable ones up to 30x40cm. Not so bad, you could say, but can
anybody
explain me why the hell any good 4-5MP digital PS (Canon,
I can't judge if that's a K mount, but I do
know that the C/D label was reserved for
Soligor's better efforts. Some people comment
favorably on the CDs.
I own an old Soligor 35-140 push pull that's
not so good, but it's not a CD lens.
You might search Usenet or Photonet for comments
about this
On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, Dario Bonazza wrote:
So maybe I'm not as hallucinated as other messages should suggest.
Hi Dario,
Your posts always make sense and your photographs even more so. I fear
you read too much into my looks like it's out-of-focus comment; I
never thought you would be furnishing
Anders Hultman wrote:
On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, Bob W wrote:
It's raining here too, but I have just gotten access to a fast car and a
driver, and will soon ride some 100 miles west to try to catch it there.
well, just for once the UK has bright clear skies on the day of a
celestial display. I
On 8 Jun 2004 at 14:59, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
on 08.06.04 14:49, Rob Studdert at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Considering it's a dedicated digital only lens I'm quite surprised that the
chromatic aberrations are still not great at the edges and both images were
shot at f8.
Well, they
On 8 Jun 2004 at 15:14, Dr. Heiko Hamann wrote:
I don't have any ultra-wide-angle comparison, but I would have expected
less distortion (first picture) for a digital optimized prime lens. Look
at the vertron building on the right - seems as it will fall over
soon. Really strange... Or am I
Hi, Peter,
The next step up is probably a brief step back chronologically, to
the Super Program/Super A, which is a better and more advanced body
than the P30t, with the sole exception of a lack of an exposure
lock/hold button. It has TTL flash and program/aperture
priority/shutter
I am to take some photos of tatoos, on a test run it is
difficult to see them, unless they are new. Any suggestions
to 'bring them out' a little brighter would be greatly
appreciated.
Kind regards
Kevin
--
__
(_ \
_) )
I saw it as well, partially, thru clouds and some short moments of
almost clear sky. Shot a few pictures thru our club telescope
(150/2063 refractor equipped with a solar filter) with my LX.
The disk of Venus looked pretty big compared to my memory of the
small disk of Mercury when in transit
on 08.06.04 15:15, Rob Studdert at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well of course Bayer interpolation algorithms are the difference if the sensor
is the precisely the same type. I just don't understand why there seems to be
so much debate about something that isn't a problem. I'm happy with the
On 8 Jun 2004 at 23:32, Kevin Waterson wrote:
I am to take some photos of tatoos, on a test run it is
difficult to see them, unless they are new. Any suggestions
to 'bring them out' a little brighter would be greatly
appreciated.
You can apply a subtle but effective increase in overall
on 08.06.04 15:21, Rob Studdert at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Herein lies the key to our differences in the perception of what's sharp and
what's not I guess. Did you notice that all the images were made with the
contrast on hard, the saturation high and the sharpening on hard? Even
discounting
The color's dead on. One of the diffciltuies shooting at GFM this
weekend was that everything was SO green. I'm about 250 mi north of
GFM, but the climate is similar. We've had plenty of rain this year
(much of it on Thursday night ;-)and this is a heavily wooded area.
Steven Desjardins
on 08.06.04 15:37, Sylwester Pietrzyk at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yep, indeed, I didn't noticed this, now I can see this in Photo Browser. But
I wrote seems' as we don't have samples from other lenses made in the same
place and identical parameters to compare with...
Well, anyway it is stupid.
Hi Rob,
on 08 Jun 04 you wrote in pentax.list:
That's just natural perspective distortion as the lens was pointed
downwards, it could have been largely avoided if the shot was set up
more skilfully.
Thanks Rob, that calms me down ;-)
Cheers, Heiko
On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, Kevin Waterson wrote:
Will anyone here try to photograph the Transit of Venus that will take
place in some eight hours? (05:19 to 11:22 GMT)
I was curious as to what methods people are using to photograph
the sun like this. My 1,000,000X ND filter is missing.
I have a
On 8 Jun 2004 at 15:33, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
Well, it seems that least distorted are samples from 10D and D1X, with *istD
next. But what would happen if you cramp up sharpness and contrast of *istD
image to the levels similar to let's say 10D???
The D1X is pretty good but it still
6MP, Pentaprism, SD card, under $900? Well, that does put it solidly in the
Prosumer catagory doesn't it? I would also bet USB 2.0, and cripled software
(no K/M compatability). I do not expect to see it in the Boone Wal-Mart though.
My own thought ,backed by zero experience, is that it would be
Rob Studdert wrote:
Well of course Bayer interpolation algorithms are the difference if the
sensor
is the precisely the same type. I just don't understand why there seems to
be
so much debate about something that isn't a problem. I'm happy with the
sharpness of the *ist D, but I'm sure with
On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, Henri Toivonen wrote:
I managed to see it too, after all. Took one roll of b/w and one roll of
color neg film with a 400mm lens.
Damn, we had a really cloudy day up here in Haparanda. Was it nice?
It was raining heavily in Stockholm so at 6:30 it was time to think of a
Hi,
to my eye the *ist-D is the one with the least distortion.
Only a slight color moire far down. Am I wrong? Or is
even that subjective?
Regards, Hans.
--- Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
on 08.06.04 15:15, Rob Studdert at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well of course Bayer
Hi gang.
Adelheid and I are now at the Outer Banks on the coast of North
Carolina. We're staying at Kitty Hawk. This morning I rose with the sun
in hope to capture the Venus transit, and got lucky. The fog lifted just
in time to get the last part when Venus left the sun disk. Actually, the
fog
I admit I'm a little surprised by some of these comments. I think it's
clear that the Baby D will have:
- a 6 MP sensor
- CF card storage
- plastic body, no metal chassis list the *istD
- pentamirror
less clear is whether or not they will include the firmware fix for the
K/M lense. This
On 8 Jun 2004 at 7:13, Hans Imglueck wrote:
Hi,
to my eye the *ist-D is the one with the least distortion.
Only a slight color moire far down.
This is my conclusion also, it is effectively the closest to being naturally
band-width limited, ie it's just like film.
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE
On 8 Jun 2004 at 10:15, Jostein wrote:
Hi gang.
Adelheid and I are now at the Outer Banks on the coast of North
Carolina. We're staying at Kitty Hawk. This morning I rose with the sun
in hope to capture the Venus transit, and got lucky. The fog lifted just
in time to get the last part when
Very nice catch. Funny about the fog helping, but under the right
conditions it makes perfect sense.
Hans Imglueck wrote:
to my eye the *ist-D is the one with the least distortion.
Only a slight color moire far down. Am I wrong? Or is
even that subjective?
And the *ist D is the one where the BW lines get already confused when
other competitors can still resolve them, hence same comment as to
Hi,
from that test I cannot distinguish which one has the better
resolution. To my opinion all of them are losing real resolution
at the middle of the graphs. The bottom part is faked on the
most ones. Real resolution would mean:
Seeing 9 lines.
Regards, Hans.
--- Dario Bonazza [EMAIL
Who says it had to be slightly mutated. It is entirely possible the thing that
laid the egg was nothing like a chicken. May have been a dinosaur in fact.
Nature is much like Tom Edison, she keeps trying different things until
something works. Only she will try 100 billion times instead of
Hello Lon,
If I remember correctly, Tom Reese placed with a shot of an eagle.
Perhaps he will share it with all of us.
Bruce
Tuesday, June 8, 2004, 6:24:04 AM, you wrote:
LW Subject says it all.
And an SD card reader is easier to fit, hence expect it.
Dario Bonazza
Steve Desjardins wrote:
I admit I'm a little surprised by some of these comments. I think it's
clear that the Baby D will have:
- a 6 MP sensor
- CF card storage
- plastic body, no metal chassis list the *istD
-
Talk about contrast, North Western NSW:
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~audiob/temp/_IGP3729.jpg
I couldn't resist posting this after seeing all that gren :-)
Cheers,
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Wonderful shot!
Jostein wrote:
Hi gang.
Adelheid and I are now at the Outer Banks on the coast of North
Carolina. We're staying at Kitty Hawk. This morning I rose with the sun
in hope to capture the Venus transit, and got lucky. The fog lifted just
in time to get the last part when Venus left the
Lon Williamson a écrit :
I can't judge if that's a K mount, but I do
know that the C/D label was reserved for
Soligor's better efforts. Some people comment
favorably on the CDs.
On the pic (first line, second column) one sees very well the hole for
the lock, the electrical contacts (including 3
On 8 Jun 2004 at 16:31, Dario Bonazza wrote:
And an SD card reader is easier to fit, hence expect it.
If it has CF it could be a viable back-up body (assuming that Papa-D takes as
long to arrive as the *ist D) to the *ist D. If not they are shooting
themselves in the foot for all markets,
Only film is just like film. The primary difference between film and
digital images is that whereas digital pixels are, of necessity, regularly
ordered, each is of identical effective size and their placement is uniform.
Grain on film is randomly organized in position, size and density. For me,
Michel Carrère-Gée wrote:
Lon Williamson a écrit :
I can't judge if that's a K mount, but I do
know that the C/D label was reserved for
Soligor's better efforts. Some people comment
favorably on the CDs.
On the pic (first line, second column) one sees very well the hole
for the lock, the
Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I admit I'm a little surprised by some of these comments. I think it's
clear that the Baby D will have:
- a 6 MP sensor
- CF card storage
- plastic body, no metal chassis list the *istD
- pentamirror
less clear is whether or not they will include the
Jostein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To: PDML
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 4:15 PM
Subject:
Actually, the
fog turned to be an ally instead of an enemy, because the sun
that shone
through was bleak and mute. And well within exposure range for
the
*istD.
So here's the pic:
Jostein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, the
fog turned to be an ally instead of an enemy, because the sun
that shone
through was bleak and mute. And well within exposure range for
the
*istD.
So here's the pic:
http://www.oksne.net/paw/venustransit.html
Hi Jostein,
That's a great shot!
In the second photo of the city, there is a spot in the sky, looks like a
spec of something was on the sensor. I find it Ironic, considering that
many people ahve complained about dust collecting on the istD's sensor. I
guess its a problem with most DSLR's though.
-Shawn
-Original
You can't screw with the picture in Photoshop and call it a test of the
camera!
Tom C.
From: Dario Bonazza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: On Sharpness (Confusion)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 17:39:40 +0200
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
Hi Dario,
I have to disagree with you here Rob. The 16-45 has CA problems worse than
this that I've seen, so it doesn't surprise me, especially since this lens
is 14mm, and that alone is a difficult thing to accomplish... I don't think
it's superb, but viewing it at 50% I have to say it looks quite good.
In a message dated 6/8/2004 6:39:35 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why does the picture look like it's taken out of Shrek 2? :-)
It does give me a feeling of a computer generated image. Too
sharp? Too clean? Too vivid? I'm sure if some of the grass is
withering brown
Yeah, it is a bit like the nasty problem that negatives/slides have of
getting/being scratched and collecting dust. After having scanned
about a thousand rolls, I can tell you that the dust on the sensor
feels like a bit less of a problem than the film damage. Both have to
be dealt with if/when
Perhaps Pentax need to do an IR scan of the sensor surface and try to do
some ICE work - LOL!
Man, that would be cool though...
-Original Message-
From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 08 June 2004 20:14
To: Shawn K.
Subject: Re[2]: Samples from DA14/2.8!
Yeah, it
After having scanned about a thousand rolls, I can tell you that the
dust on the sensor feels like a bit less of a problem than the film
damage.
Bruce
Dust ON the film sure is a problem with scaners but has dust inside
the scanner ever been pointed as part of that problem? If so, would
it be
... then Pentax may well sell a half-million.
Even the first year.
Actual production will be the key.
Collin
Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net
I imagine the scanner has something in place to deal with the dust. A self
cleaning mechanism of some sort.
There is a spot in the sky of the first image as well. You'd think Pentax
would use a new istD for the test shots.
-Shawn
-Original Message-
From: Andre Langevin [mailto:[EMAIL
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
I've used old film for a long time with only one issue.
Some old Kodak 25-speed C41 film gave me some really red results.
But all of the 100 200 has been fine. Even 3+ years out.
Collin
Okey, so I bough them. 14 rolls of Superia 200 for about $1.50/pcs.
Hope they
You mean a computer whizz rather than a chemistry whizz don't you?
Nick
-Original Message-
From: William Robb[EMAIL PROTECTED]
So you now need to be a computer whiz rather than a photographic
technologist to be a competent photographer.
Kinda changes the whole concept of
You guys seem just like scientists... Reaching a conclusion and then
attempting to fit the evidence to it.
Tom C.
The seem more like some photographers who make an image and then search fo a
justification of the image.
Lewis
_
Lewis Matthew wrote:
You guys seem just like scientists... Reaching a conclusion and then
attempting to fit the evidence to it.
Tom C.
The seem more like some photographers who make an image and then
search fo a justification of the image.
Lewis
I read a good quote about something similar last
You can't take two pictures with different cameras, different lenses, maybe
different apertures and therefore DOF, and who knows what else is different
post-camera, compare them, and say anything with certainty about the camera
itself!
Tom C.
From: Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I don't call it a test of the camera. I call it a visible demonstration of
the information stored in original image file and how poor and unnatural the
outlines are rendered by the Pentax RAW conversion software (this was
already known).
Should you want to keep your eyes closed, you're free to do
Got back yesterday about 2:30 am and had to get to work early (no
rest for the weary). I had a great time and it was so interesting to
put faces to names. Many turned out to be different than I had
imagined. All were wonderful and the event was great.
I'll try to get pics up as I can. Here is
Does anyone remember who made a camera backpack with front-loading lens
drawers? I'm not talking about the Lowepro Trim Trekker. The interior
was yellow. I thought it was Domke but I think I was wrong.
Amita, still in search of the perfect camera backpack
-Original Message-
From: Tanya Mayer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Oh, and in regards to Norm's pic, I did not need to direct him one
bit - that pose was purely motivate by his love for his boyfriend
Jack...
... was it that Jack Daniels fellow? He is from down
near that neck
On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, Amita Guha wrote:
Does anyone remember who made a camera backpack with front-loading lens
drawers? I'm not talking about the Lowepro Trim Trekker. The interior
was yellow. I thought it was Domke but I think I was wrong.
Amita, still in search of the perfect camera backpack
Sorry, you're just not making sense to me. First you refer to and complain
explicitly about the *istD compared to other cameras and now you're saying
you're referring to the image and the raw converter.
And unless I'm missing something here, you're doing it with an image that
you retrieved
Rob Studdert wrote:
So now I'm confused. Are you discussing lens capabilities, DOF, relative
position of the focus plane, post-export sharpening, print quality or the
*ist
Ds apparent sensor sharpness?
First we have to agree the problem does exist. Then we can try to
understand
which is the
Just a quick note to say that I have arrived back home in England safely
after tv and #7 dropped me at the airport. In fact I got upgraded so had
a very pleasant flight, if only a few minutes sleep.
I didn't unsubscribe so have a few dozen digests to peruse tomorrow
before going back to work on
From: Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I admit I'm a little surprised by some of these comments. I think it's
clear that the Baby D will have:
- a 6 MP sensor
Agreed that this is what is availible and likely. What I meant was that
I'd accept 4. I can get film-quality 8x10s out of 2.77.
What do you mean by front loading lens drawers?
It had drawers in the front that tilted open. I saw it in an
advertisement in Outdoor Photographer.
It sounds like you could be talking about one of the smaller
Crumpler backpacks. They have the camera area in the bottom,
and I believe
You'd need to compare the exact same scene, same time, same
everything including lens, which is impossible...
Tom C.
Isn't it quite possible if you you compare raw data from the cameras
at test, previously fit with (almost identical) medium speed normal
lenses?
Andre
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Waterson
Subject: Tatoos
I am to take some photos of tatoos, on a test run it is
difficult to see them, unless they are new. Any suggestions
to 'bring them out' a little brighter would be greatly
appreciated.
I've found that hitting em with a
- Original Message -
From: Nick Clark
Subject: Re: photography vs cameras
You mean a computer whizz rather than a chemistry whizz don't you?
No.
Photography is not about chemistry.
It is about light.
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: Tom C
Subject: Re: On Sharpness (Confusion) - Bill?
I wish William Robb was a round to give us a refresher on sharpness
vs.
resolution.
GAAAK.
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: *istD unsharpness
Maybe Pentax simply doesn't like sharpness? Most of the really
sharp lens
designs have been replaced by less sharp ones.
One of the things I have noticed is that My Pentax lenses don't seem
to be quite as
- Original Message -
From: Andre Langevin
Subject: Re: On Sharpness (Confusion)
You'd need to compare the exact same scene, same time, same
everything including lens, which is impossible...
Tom C.
Isn't it quite possible if you you compare raw data from the
cameras
at test,
Well, not to me. It's like trying to compare two audio amplifiers, each
with a different set of speakers. Since, IMO, all other things equal, image
'quality' is largely a factor of the lens, using different lenses only says
something about the lens or the lens/camera system, not the camera.
Bruce, where was that taken?
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 5:23 PM
Subject: GFM: pic
Got back yesterday about 2:30 am and had to get to work early (no
rest for the weary). I had a great time and
I suspected as much. :)
Tom C.
GAAAK.
William Robb
Obviously not on the mountain. If you get on the Blue Ridge Parkway
just outside of Boone, you shortly come to what is called Price Lake.
That is the location of this shot. Even though not right on the
mountain, it is certainly part of the beautiful scenery of the area.
I have quite a few shots
Okay, I know where Price Lake is, I just didn't recognize it in this photo.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 6:36 PM
Subject: Re: pic
Obviously not on the mountain. If you get on the Blue
So, is that a good thing or a bad thing - not being able to recognize
it? VBG
Bruce
Tuesday, June 8, 2004, 3:41:39 PM, you wrote:
BO Okay, I know where Price Lake is, I just didn't recognize it in this photo.
BO Bill
BO - Original Message -
BO From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
1 - 100 of 157 matches
Mail list logo
