On Sep 19, 2005, at 8:32 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
YOUR spamming- please stop posting posts with
absolutely no relevant content to the list...
P.S. havent you got anything better to do that
count my posts and report to the list? that's sad...
What I'm posting is extremely relevant to the
As usual in these cases, he was back in the government faster than you can
say 'revolving door'. There is now speculation that he will soon return as
Home Secretary (Minister of the Interior). He was the most illiberal,
authoritarian Home Secretary I can remember. For the sake of administrative
In a message dated 9/19/2005 7:55:04 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You must not have had the pleasure
of owning and using these K/M lenses
and are playing some selfish game where
you think your $5 savings is more important
than continued support of perfectly working
A view of Arundel Castle:
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/37p.htm
Comments and critique always appreciated.
enjoy
Godfrey
It's a tough job but somebody has to do it. I'll accept the burden for
the good of the PDML community. :-)
Way to take one for the team, Godfrey. (: Personally, I'm tired of his
close-minded, self-righteous ballyhooing. Lucky for him I'm not a
moderator, or I would have taken the hint
On 19/9/05, J. C. O'Connell, discombobulated, unleashed:
P.S. havent you got anything better to do that
count my posts and report to the list?
Godders, the man *has* a point ;-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
On 19/9/05, John Francis, discombobulated, unleashed:
Once the ordure came into contact with the rotational air circulating
device they screamed for help from the engineers, who were able to
come up with a reasonable workaround.
What, and they didn't see it coming? Come on John, companies that
We know that Pentax have lost one sale, so far. Not a lot, really. And
all they have lost is the sale of a body. It is quite clear that the
person in question won't buy another lens if he lives for four hundred
years. I'd love to know what car /cart he drives, and I'm surprised his
old
On 19/9/05, Scott Loveless, discombobulated, unleashed:
If the job pans out
AARGH :-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
In a message dated 9/19/2005 8:21:42 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Count: 78 green button messages from JCO in 27 hours.
Bloody slacker. That's only three per hour. He needs better spam-
generating software.
Godfrey
=
I am tired of this, so I am going to say
In a message dated 9/20/2005 12:28:24 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What, and they didn't see it coming? Come on John, companies that
actually stay in business just don't do things like that. It's not being
cynical, it's just covering your bases
Cheers,
Cotty
On 19/9/05, J. C. O'Connell, discombobulated, unleashed:
Now do you get it?
Plain and clear this end!
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
Been meaning to post this for a while:
http://www.neovenator.com/special/flower-2-big.html
and a very tight crop, just for fun:
http://www.neovenator.com/special/flower_detail.html
I shot this with my MX while my D was out for repair. The flower itself is
no more than an inch and a half
In a message dated 9/19/2005 7:48:27 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This particular cattail was intriguing because it looked so much like
a hot dog to me.
Pentax *istD, K 200/2.5, Handheld
ISO 200, 1/1000 sec
http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_2173.htm
Comments welcome
--
On 20/9/05, John Forbes, discombobulated, unleashed:
He makes the Amish look positively groovy.
Mark!
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
From: John Celio [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/09/20 Tue AM 07:23:11 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: green button wars (again)
It's a tough job but somebody has to do it. I'll accept the burden for
the good of the PDML community. :-)
Way to take one for the team,
In a message dated 9/20/2005 12:39:17 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Been meaning to post this for a while:
http://www.neovenator.com/special/flower-2-big.html
and a very tight crop, just for fun:
http://www.neovenator.com/special/flower_detail.html
I shot this with my MX
Thank God for that. Then perhaps you can move on from your obsession with
Pentax's financial downfall.
One down, one to go.
John
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 01:56:18 +0100, Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
unless it is available in 2 weeks, it's too late.
Herb...
- Original Message -
In a message dated 9/19/2005 4:38:31 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Several people have recommended IrfanView. They're right :-)
Lots of other free stuff out there, too:
http://www.robertstech.com/pixel/software.htm
--
Mark Roberts
Hey, nice page, Mark! Very handy
On 9/19/05, Fred Widall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for all the comments - good to see such a level of unanimity on the
list for once VBG
I was trying for the supermodel/barbie look but guess I overdid
things.
Funnily enough Leah thought it was a beautiful image, ah well.
This
And if Pentax don't sell more lenses, they'll go to the wall. Very clever.
John
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 03:39:14 +0100, J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
EXCUSE ME, arent you forgetting one little thingy?
PENTAX CANT SELL MORE NEW REPLACEMENT LENSES if they support
the K/Ms - that’s
lol,
there are times I wonder why I am still subscribed to this list (I use
no pentax gear anymore, sad but true).
Then threads like this remind me the reasons why...
cheers,
Danilo
This posts brings an old story to mind.
Proud mother, who has just watched her son marching in his first parade:
They was all out of step except our Freddy!
John
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 03:13:25 +0100, J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
For your information it was the spotmatic list
and
Yes, this isn't the first time he's made a complete fool of himself on
this list.
John
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 04:10:43 +0100, P. J. Alling
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
JCO is one of the old timers here. Bob Sullivan wrote:
Brian,
JCO was on the Yahoo Pentax Screwmount Lens list until last
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 05:58:45 +0100, J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
...I have got better things
to do than waste big time on things like
thatSorry I cant accommodate you but
it isnt going to change...
Mark!
John
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client:
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 08:44:02 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, I have a great deal of trouble photographing flowers myself because
of
wind.
Marnie aka Doe
Lots of us have this problem, and not just with flowers or photography!
John
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client:
In a message dated 9/20/2005 12:20:36 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A view of Arundel Castle:
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/37p.htm
Comments and critique always appreciated.
enjoy
Godfrey
=
That's nice. No criticisms.
Marnie aka Doe :-) Though
In a message dated 9/18/2005 4:12:39 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I suspect this never made it to the list. I never saw it. If it's a
dupe, please accept my apologies.
Fridayt saw another gallery crawl in Birmingham, Michigan. The gallery
that has been showing some of my
This looks rather artificial to me, Godfrey.
John
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 08:19:19 +0100, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
A view of Arundel Castle:
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/37p.htm
Comments and critique always appreciated.
enjoy
Godfrey
--
Using
I seem to recall some people saying that, when using manual exposure,
and/or manual focus lenses, the DS (and maybe the D as well) has had some
exposure problems. Today the DS was sporting a K28/3.5 - as manual as you
can get - and I was making a few exposures of some wooden bears on a
friend's
I seem to recall some people saying that, when using manual exposure,
and/or manual focus lenses, the DS (and maybe the D as well) has had some
exposure problems. Today the DS was sporting a K28/3.5 - as manual as you
can get - and I was making a few exposures of some wooden bears on a
friend's
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/09/20 Tue AM 08:11:01 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: istDS Exposure Problems
I seem to recall some people saying that, when using manual exposure,
and/or manual focus lenses, the DS (and maybe the D as well) has had some
between April and June 2005, KM sold 10K, Nikon sold 330K, Olympus sold 40K,
Pentax sold 20K, and Canon sold 500K DSLRs. everyone else was enough under
10K not to matter.
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Monday,
I like the wider version. Nicely composed with pleasing colors. With
the focal point on the tips of the stamen, the limited DOF works well
here. I would clone out the other petal or leaf that's visible between
two petals at lower right to preserve the geometry of the composition.
But then
Zeiss and Voigtlander can appeal to the retro market as they have done in
the past. they will release new film cameras with small changes from their
basic chassis. most of the differences will be cosmetic.
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
since it is on a tripod, one handed makes little difference.
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 11:15 PM
Subject: Re: green button wars (again)
For you maybe, I find I'm a lot steadier if I
given that Pentax hopes to sell 120K DSLRs this fiscal year, all of which
are low profit margin, what do you think?
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: Mark Erickson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'pentax-discuss' pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 1:27 AM
Subject: Camera
It's probably a hiccup. The only possible logical explanation would be
the slight reframing could change exposure if you were using the spot
meter. I've had that happen to me. But I've also encountered situations
where my *istD just seemed to get confused and go slightly bonkers.
Might you
and irrelevant. that is the part he doesn't get.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax list pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 3:34 AM
Subject: Re: Rename request
On 19/9/05, J. C. O'Connell, discombobulated, unleashed:
Now
It looks rather as though the aperture didn't stop down fully. Sticky?
John
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 11:12:50 +0100, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/09/20 Tue AM 08:11:01 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: istDS Exposure Problems
On 9/20/05, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 19/9/05, Scott Loveless, discombobulated, unleashed:
If the job pans out
AARGH :-)
HAHA!
--
Scott Loveless
http://www.twosixteen.com
--
You have to hold the button down -Arnold Newman
you haven't figured it out yet, my position represents the same as that of
people who manage hundreds of millions of dollars of Pentax stock. Pentax's
camera business is in serious trouble, not the company. if Pentax pulls out
of the camera business, then all the money have i have put into
No metering, Paul. It was all in manual. Camera in Manual mode (M on the
dial), aperture set manually, shutter speed set manually.
Shel
Am I paranoid or perceptive?
[Original Message]
From: Paul Stenquist
It's probably a hiccup. The only possible logical explanation would be
the
Of course. That's a logical explanation.
Paul
On Sep 20, 2005, at 6:44 AM, John Forbes wrote:
It looks rather as though the aperture didn't stop down fully. Sticky?
John
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 11:12:50 +0100, mike wilson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi John,
Not that I can tell, but I did exercise the lens for about 100 cycles after
seeing this just to be sure. The aperture is certainly working fine now.
My concern isn't so much that the lens may be at fault so much as that
there may be some odd behavior that's an issue with these cameras.
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005, mike wilson wrote:
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/09/20 Tue AM 08:11:01 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: istDS Exposure Problems
The camera was set at the same aperture, shutter speed, and
ISO for both of these shots, made within a minute of each
why? please enlight. what's gonna happen @Q1 2006 or shortly thereafter?
mishka
On 9/20/05, Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
it. anyone who is not profitable in the digital camera game by 1Q 2006 isn't
ever going to be.
most were surprised to see F6 from Nikon and Ikon from Zeiss too.
so? life is full of surprises.
mishka
On 9/19/05, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would be surprised if we see another new film camera from Nikon.
Leica, perhaps if they manage to stay in business. Wouldn't know about
Herb,
You are a photographer. You know less than nothing about finance, or
about marketing, or about how large corporations operate. You read a few
handouts and come on here posturing as an expert on Pentax and the
business world in general.
As you yourself concede, Pentax as a company
my point was, they released new (and in Zeiss case, designed from the scratch)
film cameras when the film is dead was pretty much a given. i am not sure
exactly what's the deep meaning of that, except that, maybe, they know
something we don't? like, how to make money staying in camera business?
Shel,
The simple explanation is usually the one to go for. The aperture is set
by the lens. The camera's only input is to activate the stop down lever,
and I would guess that that is something that either works or it doesn't.
The camera of course has to fire the shutter at the correct
I'm starting to think that it may have been a sticky aperture. However,
I'm going to pay careful attention to the situation over the next few days.
I just made about seventy shots with the aperture fully open, and didn't
see any exposure differences.Thanks!
Shel
Am I paranoid or perceptive?
Mark Erickson wrote:
[ ... ]
s
Anyone here with manufacturing engineering background care to actually make
some estimates? Say in the number of engineering hours, broken down into
design, development, integration, and test?
I guess I have *some* relevant experience, but I don't think I
We'll be even more surprised to see any more Nikons, but if there are,
they'll be very expensive, and hand-built to order. Same with Zeiss.
John
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 12:17:48 +0100, Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
most were surprised to see F6 from Nikon and Ikon from Zeiss too.
so? life is
Don't worry Frank. You didn't sound artsy at all. Overblown
pretentious well...
VBG
BTW. After initially looking at it, it didn't do anything form me.
After your explanation I had another look, and I can see where your
coming from, but it still doesn't do anything for me.
I quite often like
I agree and no, it was not a sudden change in the light. I'm gonna go
for the simple explanation for the time being ;-)) Thanks!
Shel
Am I paranoid or perceptive?
[Original Message]
From: John Forbes
The simple explanation is usually the one to go for. The aperture is set
by
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/09/20 Tue AM 11:13:53 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: istDS Exposure Problems
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005, mike wilson wrote:
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/09/20 Tue AM 08:11:01 GMT
To:
Sorry Godfrey, this, IMO, just doesn't seem to be up to your usual standard.
It looks a bit flat, and at this size not particularly sharp.
Dave
On 9/20/05, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A view of Arundel Castle:
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/37p.htm
Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I may have a line on a job taking photographs for a company that does
interior and exterior work for real estate companies. While I don't
know the details of said work just yet, I do know that they provide
those interior panoramas that are quite popular
From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/09/20 Tue AM 11:20:47 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: How Pentax Could Survive (was:Re: Pentax K 2.5/200mm)
Herb,
You are a photographer. You know less than nothing about finance, or
about marketing, or about how large
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/09/20 Tue AM 11:32:27 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: istDS Exposure Problems
I'm starting to think that it may have been a sticky aperture. However,
I'm going to pay careful attention to the situation over the next few
Jack Davis wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4099581.stm
And, in all the new news about his leaving office, not a sentence about
the food and lodging fiasco he so blithely perpetrated!
Is all that forgotten so quickly?
Seems so...
keith
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005, John Forbes wrote:
bodies you want. As it is, your wholly negative and destructive attitude is
designed to do the opposite. You are a sad and unpleasant person, and I wish
you would go away, or at least restrict your contribution to subjects you
know something about.
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005, mike wilson wrote:
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/09/20 Tue AM 11:32:27 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: istDS Exposure Problems
I'm starting to think that it may have been a sticky aperture. However,
I'm going to pay careful attention to
I wanted to eliminate the aperture from the equation, Mike, and see if it
was something within the camera. After your comment I did the test again
with the aperture @ F8.0. Exposures were erratic. I guess the lens needs
a CLA :-((
Thanks to all for your suggestions.
Shel
[Original Message]
It's threads like this that make the PDML interesting.
Dave
On 9/20/05, danilo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
lol,
there are times I wonder why I am still subscribed to this list (I use
no pentax gear anymore, sad but true).
Then threads like this remind me the reasons why...
cheers,
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/09/20 Tue PM 12:01:40 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Re: istDS Exposure Problems
I wanted to eliminate the aperture from the equation, Mike, and see if it
was something within the camera. After your comment I did the test
if Pentax pulls out of the camera business, then all the money have i have put
into Pentax
dead-ends.
Well. I've got a Bronica SQ-A with a very good PS 40mm, PS 180mm and an OK
80mm and some more equipment. The lenses were bought new, so they represent a
large investment for me. Now
Mark Erickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyone here with manufacturing engineering background care to actually make
some estimates? Say in the number of engineering hours, broken down into
design, development, integration, and test?
I have a little background in this area, having worked in the
Hi Shel,
To test the aperture mechanism, stop the lens all the way down,
hold the aperture open with your finger via the lever on the
back of the lens, wait a few minutes and then release the lever
as fast as you can while looking thru then lens.
The blades should close _way_ faster than your
Mike makes a good point, I've had a couple lenses that the
lever was bent out slightly and rubbed on the lens mount.
Look for slight rub marks on the wide side of the lever.
Don
-Original Message-
From: mike wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 7:15 AM
You don't need to be a camera engineer
to see that in the overall cost of designing
and building these cameras that this INCREDIBLY
simple and cheap part removal COULD NOT
result in any signifigant cost savings due
to the much more massive engineering costs required
for the rest of the camera and
On 9/18/05, Juan Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just got email about the September issue of photoblogs magazine, and
inside, found a writeup with photos by PDML's own Albano Garcia:
http://www.photoblogsmagazine.org/magazine/sept2005/septalbano.php
Congratulations Albano!
If I didn't
YES WE CAN- there is a long history
of these parts in bottom of the
line PENTAX cameras that sold for only $150
FOR THE WHOLE CAMERAHow much
do you think that parts maximum cost could
have been for that to be possible?
jco
-Original Message-
From: Gonz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
STOP the personal attacks. It is irresponsible
behavior for you to continue classify my
posts as inane or religious or wasted bandwidth without responding
to them directly. In other words if you cant
refute what I am saying then you don't have the right
to make those kind of personal insults
From DP Review:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0509/05092001s3pro256.asp
Fujifilm Japan has today announced that it will make available an
upgrade for the S3 Pro digital SLR which will increase the camera's
internal buffer from 128 MB to 256 MB.
I don't know about anyone else, but *I'd* pay a
NO - I didn't state this before because its so obvious
that I didn't think it needed stating. I am huge
fan of the K/M PENTAX lenses. I really like them
and I really enjoy using them. Some of the best
lenses they ever made are in this series. There
is no sense is disabling them over a $5 part
ditto.
On Sep 20, 2005, at 8:56 AM, Mark Roberts wrote:
From DP Review:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0509/05092001s3pro256.asp
Fujifilm Japan has today announced that it will make available an
upgrade for the S3 Pro digital SLR which will increase the camera's
internal buffer from 128 MB to
I am sorry but you are grossly mistaken
on the entire issue. This isnt about
things lasting forever. This is about
compatability vs support. The K/M lenses
are in NO WAY incompatable with the
current mount (FA). What they are doing
is DISABLING the features of these lenses
even thought there are
JOHN - STOP THE PERSONAL ATTACKS ON ME-
reply to my posts and on-topic or don't
reply at all. that's basic netiquitte.
I don't call you an idiot but you are
one if you continue that behavior. this
is a discussion list about pentax. if
you cant discuss pentax and would rather
prefer to personally
UMMM, excuse me this wasn't just a cost reduction, this was
a feature reduction...Cost reduction
in itself is always important to remain competetive
no doubt but this was more than that because key
functions were removed so its basically a bottom
of the line model at the top of their line at the
I just gave it your test. Darn and shucks, if that's not what's happening.
Sluggish diaphragm. I think I'll send it off to Don's House of Lens
Repair, Storm Door Company, and Bagel Bakery. LOL
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Don Sanderson
To test the aperture mechanism, stop the lens all
JCO,
The thing that you seem unwilling to concede or admit is that these
legacy lenses CAN still be used, ARE still being used, and still
take fine pictures.
Your point about them doing away with the metering coupler, or
whatever it's called, has been made already. Pentax chose to do away
with
Double ditto.
Dave
On 9/20/05, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ditto.
On Sep 20, 2005, at 8:56 AM, Mark Roberts wrote:
From DP Review:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0509/05092001s3pro256.asp
Fujifilm Japan has today announced that it will make available an
upgrade for the S3
Make it triple.
--
Boris
I'm looking for something that may not exist.
Back in my film days when I shot a lot of concerts, I was quite
fond of my 135mm f2.5 zoom. Not the sharpest lens on the planet, but
the combination of reach and speed seemed to work well in combination
with the 28 and 50mm lenses.
These
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Why is that so hard for you to understand???
Why is it so hard for you to accept that Pentax has f***ed you in the ass
and move on? Face it, and I know other pdmlers have already stated this,
it's a goddam conspiracy for
There's not much choice in the 70mm~90mm range except for the various 85mm
lenses, both in screw mount and in K mount. They all tend to be a bit
spendy, more or less. If you can live with it, a Super Takumar 105/2.8 may
be just the thing. Comes in a K-mount as well. There's also the M 100/2.8.
On 9/20/05, John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
He makes the Amish look positively groovy.snip
Is it okay to make fun of the Amish on the internet, because they
don't have electricity, let alone computers? g
-frank
--
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 15:41:22 +0200, Charles Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Seems like I want something in the 70-90mm range, that is no slower
than about f/4. Doesn't have to be autofocus, or even an A lens as
I tend to use them wide open in these situations anyways. Is there
something
I am sorry but you certainly can not have been
reading or comprehending all my posts because
if you had read them you would know I was forced to say
it repeatedly, possibly for the third time
now, this is totally different than NIKON
OR CANON FD situations.
With CANON FD- they
lost FD mounting
On 20/9/05, Charles Robinson, discombobulated, unleashed:
Seems like I want something in the 70-90mm range, that is no slower
than about f/4. Doesn't have to be autofocus, or even an A lens as
I tend to use them wide open in these situations anyways. Is there
something reasonably-priced
On 9/20/05, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A view of Arundel Castle:
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/37p.htm
Comments and critique always appreciated.
I like it. The angle, with the flowery hill, makes the castle look
quite imposing.
cheers,
frank
--
On two occasions I've had a problem with stuck
stop-down levers. In one case (A*-300mm f/2.8) it was
sent to Pentax Colorado. I had it 'handled' by a local
camera shop with which I've been closely associated
for many years.
When returned, I opened it in the presence of the shop
owner. First thing
I am only responding to these lame
attempts to somehow prove that Pentax's
decision **wasn't*** a screwing of not just
me but millions of other pentax customers..
And if you are conceding that Pentax has
indeed screwed their customers, what exactly
makes you think you wont be next in line???
Quadruple, it's my only major issue with the D.
-Adam
Boris Liberman wrote:
Make it triple.
On 9/19/05, Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i've been using it since it came out. it is one of the true deblurring
Photoshop filters. until Smart Sharpen came out in Photoshop CS2, there was
no real deblur function in Photoshop that allowed modifying any settings.
Unsharp Mask is not a
On 20/9/05, John Forbes, discombobulated, unleashed:
You are a sad and unpleasant
person, and I wish you would go away, or at least restrict your
contribution to subjects you know something about. Photography, for
instance.
I think that's a compliment ;-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
||
On 9/19/05, Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This particular cattail was intriguing because it looked so much like
a hot dog to me.
Pentax *istD, K 200/2.5, Handheld
ISO 200, 1/1000 sec
http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_2173.htm
Yes, it does rather.
Aren't these the things we
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 11:09 PM
Subject: RE: green button wars (again)
as for reasons to switch from PS digicams to DSLRS
are DSLRS actually quieter? Why?
Bigger sensor/photosites
1 - 100 of 338 matches
Mail list logo
