And raving lunatic, assholes use Pentax.
From: Peter Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
That's easy, professional cameras are the ones professionals use, amateurs
use amateur
cameras.
Fuck you!
That's what you get when ho one thinks they have to follow rules of common
decency, dip shit.
BR
From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Now that's nice talk...
BTW, that's MR. Raving Lunatic A-hole to you, Bruce (note: no smiley face
this time!)
have a great day,
frank
I don't think that you personally need a camera anymore either. There was a
collection of photographs in the NY Times Magazine section a few weeks ago
by a photographer that works more like a film director. There's a very
large crew and the person who ultimately pushes the button is only the
What is not being addressed here is that many of the shooters who are
currently buying DSLRs aren't looking for 30meg files. One of the features
that they like about the Kodak 14n is that it can be configured to only
produce 8meg (not compressed) files. Giant files, unless you really need
them,
No. You have to repeately post to a thread that has nothing to do with
photography, without trimming your reply so that your post is 75 lines long
with 1 new line and then you have to claim that you can do this because
freedom of speech is protected under the First Amendment (this really
impresses
If there's makeup involved we need a little conference first.
BR
From: Rfsindg
How about driving down the road, talking on the cell phone, and drinking a
Starbucks
Coffee or putting on make-up while they cut you off. g
I am not needed for this, because the eventual name for this is Darwin.
BR
From: jcoyle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or how about doing 100k on the motorway, holding a folded newspaper on the
wheel with one hand _and_ a mobile phone jammed in the ear with the other?
Sighted near Brisbane two weeks ago.
In terms of resolution, the most that the human eye can resolve is 8 lp/mm
at a distance of 12 - 18 inches. This is the starting point for deriving
what is needed for the resolution of the individual pieces (film, lens,
etc. ) of the imaging system. The short answer is that with perfect
technique
The rules in the USA are that for news/editorial use no release is
necessary. This has not stopped individuals from successfully suing when
their picture was used in a magazine (NY Times Magazine). Nothing that a
minor signs is binding, so a release would have to be signed by a
parent/guardian.
I liked Sal's shot even more:
http://www1.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=99083
BR
From: Len Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The future of event photography?
http://www1.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=516733
TTL will handle the exposure. The bouncer won't do you much good beyond 15
ft, or so.
BR
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks all.
I forgot i bought the Lumiquest pocket bounce last April for the band
photo's.That provided a nice lighting effect.I'll put that in the bag.If i
use the 280T in TTL and
Now every body wants a cool name!...
That's why I opened with In terms of resolution...
BTW, Sharpness has no technical definition, as in it can't be quantified.
There are many things contribute to it. Resolution, and other quantifiable
characteristics, are safer to refer to.
BR
From: Bruce
I am currently using the Stroboframe Press T. It's a nicely made, machined
aluminum flip type bracket that lets you hold the camera, and not the have
to hold the bracket. The only drawbacks to it are that you should really buy
the anti rotation plates/quick release for the body. I used a better
It must also be remembered that without a perfect lens you will not
achieve the max resolution of the film. System resolution is calculated like
adding resistors in parallel. So if you have film that can resolve 100 lp/mm
and a lens that can resolve 1000 lp/mm, you get less than 100 lp/mm when
Popular Photography has some MF lens tests on line. One is
http://www.popphoto.com/pdfs/2002/1002/lenstests/Mamiya.pdf This test
reports resolution (not SQF). Pop Photog if nothing else has been pretty
consistent in their resolution tests over the years. The Mamiya prime has
some pretty good
If you can't mix and match, there is no reason to buy Pentax AF gear.
BR
From: Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED]
you couldn't mix and match and you couldn't use both--which would
it be?
Big surprise! The F100 just about nails all your specs. It misses the
viewfinder by 2% (96%), and I guess makes the weight (27.7 oz). The problem
with Pentax is that what Pentax users wish for, other manufacturers already
make and sell.
BR
From: Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED]
After all, Nikon
How about the FM10? That should fit the typical Pentax Pocketbook. Pentax
mostly sells cheap cameras, because most Pentax buyers are cheap. Pentax
figured this out years ago and then fired their market research department,
because they're cheap too.
BR
From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Try using an AF SLR that doesn't have Pentax on the front of it and you'll
see that you don't have to prefocus to get in focus shots. How much shooting
have you done with something like an EOS 3 with USM lenses?
The AF speed on PS cameras, film or digital, sucks. Any time I use a PS to
take a
Tried it out in a store. The AF was a real thing of beauty... a random
number generator determines which AF sensor is used for focusing, unless you
force it to use a single AF sensor. If you want to select a different AF
sensor, for a moving subject, you'd be better off with a gun and shooting
the
Welcome to the Pal University of Accounting. He personally trained an entire
division of Arthur Anderson.
BR
From: Dan Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pål,
I just looked at Pentax's lenses on BH, are there more lenses than
they list? They show 8 pages of lenses for Nikon, 6 pages each for
Canon and
They are not the same shutters. I still have a pair of Program Pluses and
one of their strong points is their hand holdability.
BR
From: Simon King [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You seemed to get a sharp one here http://pug.komkon.org/01nov/2Rotties.html
with a Program Plus (same shutter config. as Super
AF speed isn't simply how fast the lens can be driven from its close limit
to infinity. You can drive the lens with a 5hp motor and still not be able
to get something in focus any faster. It's a rather complicated closed loop
feed back system with lots of variable that effect performance (how fast
Uh, at last count he was the great Pentax loyalist that had to switch brands
to get what he wanted. That has been my point about the Pentax line, or what
there is of it.
BR
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bruce,
Game, set, and match to Mustarde.
I think it's time to leave the field gracefully...
or at
Absolutely. I had a Super Program and it looked good, felt good and had nice
features. The problem was is that I got as much blur shooting it at 1/60 sec
(with a 50mm lens) as I did the Program Plus at 1/15 sec. For what they go
for on ebay they are probably the best value of the MF Pentaxes.
BR
The best thing about Nikon shooters is that so many of them are real
gentlemen.
BR
From: John Mustarde [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Let this one fade, please. I got no quarrel with Bruce or anyone else.
Nope. On just about every used camera that I get I change the mirror foam to
a home made custom one that slows down the mirror more gently.
Neither my subjects or my style usually lend themselves to tripods so hand
holdability is important to me.
BR
From: Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is there
133 sprocket holes sent none returned
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
sigh...
--
Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas.
Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape!
http://shopnow.netscape.com/
I bought myself Get the Picture, by John G. Morris. It's a wonderful
look at photojournalism, from the inside, of the last 65 years.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Picked up a copy of Creative Elements: Landscape Photography --
Darkroom Techniques by
Eddie Ephraums, and a copy of Creative
It is obvious that you can understand nothing outside of the perspective
of an amateur nature photographer. Professional
studio/commercial/wedding photographers are the market for MF cameras,
including 2 1/4. Companies that make these cameras don't care about
hobbyists.
In a studio,
Have you ever been in a studio? Most photographers already have their
gear it's 2 1/4 square and says Hasselblad on the front. Why would they
buy a 6x7 to replace it? They certainly aren't going to buy a Pentax
6x7, because it doesn't have a removable back. Regardless of what people
here think
Unless it was Rocks and Reindeer Monthly, Pal doesn't care, and knows
more than you do anyway. Don't try to confuse the issue with real life
examples.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In practice, it's not particularly easy to anticipate a particular crop in
the viewfinder. In the studios I've
The photographer I've been working for uses a Fuji 618 as his main
camera. It's native format is 6x8. It can be changed to other formats
(6x7, 2 1/4 and 645) by changing inserts in the film back. Since the
camera has lots of electronics it knows, based on the insert, which
format it is and how
It was US occupied Japan, at the time, we wouldn't let them ship a non
standard film format camera out of the country. This was what actually
forced them. (read it on the internet I think it was Nikon's history site).
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
It's been done. Nippon Kogaku and a couple of
My suspicion is that how things are done is dependent on the specifics
of where one works and the type of client. This is due in large part to
the apprentice system in getting into professional photography. The NYC
studio school may well be different than where you are. The shoots I
have been
Because they're hand holding the camera, genius. Maybe you though Capa
set up a tripod on the beach, under fire during the D-Day landing. I
know that's what you would have done for the best quality shot, so you
didn't waste any film on a blurry photo.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wonder why
It's a good thing you've never shot 35mm. You'd have slit your wrists
long ago from having to crop all that film to fit standard aspect ratio
rectangles (for 8x10, 5x7, 11x14), or magazine covers.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... it is fact of life that most people don't want a format where
I did a Pal and picked and chose categories as I saw fit. I responded to
one of the things you listed. If you want to make an example with one
thing then pick one thing. You never mentioned 600/4 lenses.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Huh? Wildlife, or even sportshooters without a tripod? Ever
I have a couple of Minolta 7sII's, and these meter fine with 1.5 v
batteries. They are the same size as the Konicas. The shutter has a
lighter spring than the Canons so they are a bit easier to hand hold at
very low shutter speeds. The viewfinder is not nearly as good as the
Canon though.
BR
Finger exercises are for developing good technique so that your fingers
will do what you want them to do. It doesn't give you any
musical/artistic sense, but it will enable you to make good music.
Exercises, in general, are for developing conditioned reflexes. For
photography it also helps to
Music and scales were brought up by Mike: his bogus point. If you're
going to manually follow focus a football player (their's or our's) with
a long lens, you need some real well honed motor skills. Any skill can
be improved with practice.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know, I see a
There was an article in the NY Times several years ago about a study
done by some art historians. A large number of portraits were analyzed
and it was discovered that a vast majority of them painted with one of
the subjects eye's on, or near, the vertical centerline of the picture.
It wasn't a
Most people take snap shots (this is the entire universe of people with
cameras). The vast majority produce a visual effect like a poke in the
eye with a sharp stick. A handful of guidelines would help immeasurably.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...Of course, I can certainly think of a set of
That's because Pentax gear is like Chinese food; you're hungry again a
half hour after you've eaten. Since I've switch to a stick to the ribs
brand, all I bought last year was a used 50mm lens, a flash bracket and
a off camera flash cord.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I used to be happy with
It would be if you didn't need another hardware bon-bon to tide you over.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hmmm ... picked up a 6x7, 105mm 150mm sometime early
spring, would that be meat potatoes enough ???
Suck it up guy! You were the one who stated that there weren't any
rules: prove it! Be the first one to prove a negative. I know your ego
is up to it.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I will concede that I've been outpointed in this debate by the estimable Mr
Walkden, but as for the rest of you,
When you won't address the content, throw sand. Chump tactic.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...it?
Try to pick and sentence structure and write to.
--Mike
--
Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas.
Experience the convenience of buying online with
Perhaps, but I would suggest pissing on the strawman's leg.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think *all* the so-called rules are examples of pure empiricism at work.
That's why in my earlier post I used the term technique of thirds rather
than rule of thirds.
Perhaps I was, ahem, barking up the
Yes. Some pictures are interesting and evoke a feeling, and others are
dull and boring.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been enjoying Mike Johnston's antinomian approach to photography
and the discussion it's provoked.
Two questions:
Are some photographs better than others?
If so, why?
So that's my problem. I always tried for more betterer.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
My personal rule: if your pictures aren't good enough, get gooder!
---
Bob
Then every painter has to rediscover perspective and vanishing points to
be original?
Do you even think about what you're writing, or do you have a quota of
absurd things to post per day?
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh, but it does. It's the difference between derivative and original.
I already knew that about you.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not aware of the laws of physics so that gravity doesn't apply to me!
Pål
It's not semantics. It's simple logic. How can one consciously interact
with something they don't know exists? (break a rule) Only the person
who knows the rule exists can know that the rule has been broken.
Example: You come into my house and walk through the living room. You've
just broken
Talk to Mikey. He's the one who's too special to reply to a thread that
he doesn't title.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agreed. I enjoy going OT more than anyone else, but barring major topic
change can we stick with the subject line, or at least refer to teh old
subject line with the new?
As I recall from the NYT's piece, it was on the vertical centerline.
This would make it possible to put the eye(s) a third of the way down
from the top, following the nonexistent thirds rule.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When you say center, do you mean horizontally or vertically? As was
The way that the brain processes visual information is based on a highly
evolved organic substrate (biology). We are much more sensitive to some
patterns and colors than others. What happens in an infants brain is
that with age is that they learn to create order out of chaos so that
important
It works fine on electronic bodies. In fact, some of the electronic
bodies support DOF preview even in AE modes like Tv and Program.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dunno, but it's indeed a sad thing lots of cams come without DOF preview... That's why I love the older manual cams like my K2 and
No shit.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Whud he say?
--Dumb Guy
This is a lot like asking if you need black shoes and brown shoes. It is
all a matter of subject and taste.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi again all,
I just acquired the SMC-M 28mm F/3.5 lens. I will
also soon be acquiring the SMC-M 35mm, F/3.5 lens. Do
you think it is worth keeping both
Minolta has recently come out with a Dimage Scan III which is selling
here for around $300, and is probably a much better scanner. I wouldn't
pay more than $100 for it, nor would I invest in Vuescan for it: not
worth it.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Finally, I've got myself a film scanner.
It is in fact, just as bad, just as rehashed and just as irrelevant to
photography (no matter how they are used).
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike,
I fear that this could be just as bad as the gun thread.
There are also owners of other scanners that need replacing (HP S20),
and are interested.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Would you care to share your impression on the ScanDual III? There are
quite a few owners of the SD II on the list and I'm sure most if not
all would be interested.
Do the scans look sharper than from the HP? I assume the Minolta is much
better than the HP for slides. Have you tried manually adjusting the
focus? Was the Minolta softer than the Nikon (which model?) with the
Minolta dust removal turned off? Do you find the much difference is the
noise when
A logical extension of this argument would be that all people who use
Pentax 35mm SLRs, and have professional aspirations, should switch to
another brand, since virtually no working professionals use Pentax 35mm
gear.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree that this is generally a useless,
Look, Johnston initially made the argument that the Mac is the preferred
platform because it is used by professionals. This implies that if you
want to work like professional you should use a Mac. Since the computer
is now a photographic tool, the same premise would apply to the most
basic
I'm glad someone found it useful. I wish that he had an Athlon based
system in there.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bruce:
Thanks for the link to the Rob Galbraith link. I plan to replace my PII 350
this winter and the Dell 8200 is one of the computers I'm looking at. For my
use
Back up to my original post. It said, virtually no professional
photographers use 35mm Pentax SLRs. I never stated that it was
impossible to use both.
You have proved nothing. Stick to being an Artiste.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How good are you at logic? Viewed from a logical
Don't you read anything? Or did you fall off the wagon?
Shipping: Buyer pays $6.00 for postage, handling, packaging, mental
anguish, etc.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=3000553578
Mark,
The only problem with this as it stands is that
One of the more obvious, but difficult to always do because it takes
some discipline, is: Don't take bad pictures.
It doesn't take long to learn what things produce the kiss of death for
a picture: bad light, bad background, junk in frame, subject out of
position or time, etc. You have to get
In PS, using Channel Mixer, output to Gray, you can get any typical BW
filter effect you want. A little work with Curves and you can get just
about any look. There will always reasons to shoot BW film, but they
won't necessarily be to just get a BW image.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cotty,
Yes, now do yourself a favor and go here:
http://www.photonews.net/forums/forums.html
and search in Photo Digital.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyone heard of the Monaco system? Or are there others that are
recommended to investigate? Cost is a consideration as is Laptop/flat
panel display -
I guess that explains why they had been selling so much gear on ebay.
BR
You left out one of the big ones: I just got a new camera/lens/roll of
film/tripod-bipod-monopod/cable release/filter/lens cleaner...and have
to try it out.
BR
All that counts is whether it is a bad/broken/malfuncting lens, or it
performs like every other Cimko 70-200. If it is not working as designed
then make mention of that fact. If it has typical performance, for that
lens, it's a case of, you get what you pay for and would not say
anything more.
There's a reason why there has been all those good deals on MF gear on
ebay starting last year.
The empiricists don't give a hoot about what the theorists think on the
subject of.
BR
is that aside from wedding/affair work,
most photographers have their work viewed after it comes of a printing
press. While MF reproduces with more pop than 35mm, the difference
isn't as important when making large prints.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bruce Rubenstein wrote:
The empiricists don't
I think one loses a bit of the overall impact of a picture when viewed
with a 40x microscope. How much difference can be seen in a 8x10 print,
viewed from 18 , with 20/20 vision? People just can't see more than 6-8
lp/mm at 18. They certainly don't see much at all when they look at a
picture
In an attempt to save some money on consumables I recently bout some
Epson compatible cartridges from Inkjetart (www.injetart.com). Well, the
ink doesn't work so well with Epson Photo Paper or Premium Glossy Photo
Paper. They do, however, work very well with JetPrintPhoto Professional
Photo
There are forums that only pros participate in
(http://www.photonews.com/forums/forums.html). You can go there and draw
your only conclusion about what they really think about digital. Very,
very few pros are given equipment or sponsored by camera companies.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let's
I didn't mention it first: Mike did. The D1 was a typical Red Herring
thrown in by Pal.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Was it?
Must have missed the post you first mentioned it in, then.
The issue brought up to Pål was, if you noticed, not considering Canon D1s specifically.
Jostein
I don't think that you need different flashes flashes for the Canon. The
problem with the Nikon is that the flash TTL meter measures the light
reflected off the film, which no longer exists. Interestingly, the Fuji
S2 can do TTL flash with any of the Nikon TTL capable flashes.
BR
[EMAIL
Look, go download some full size files of images taken with these
cameras (Kodak or DPreview) and see what you think instead of telling us
why everyone is wrong.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This part of the problem. Some of the owners says dynamic range is better than film, others say it's
How big is your wallet? How big depends on how close you're going to be
standing to it (this is always the case). I think you could print one of
these 30x20 and have it look very good from 2' away.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How large a print can be made from a 14 MP camera?
Peter
Make covers a lot of ground. The term assemble is closer to what you
are asking. A company has to balance how much they want to tie up in
stock vs. costs for starting and stopping production. (I once read that
Minolta came up with a figure of how many cameras they could sell of a
particular
If you want to do a digital age revival of the scholastic era question
of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, be my guest.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I've said previously, this is a valid view from a pragmatic point of view.
The January edition of the Digital Journalist:
http://digitaljournalist.org/contents.html
For the gear grunts, The advantages of film over digital...:
http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0301/nutsandbolts.html
BR
Pal didn't directly respond to the case presented in the original post.
He responded to what Pal thinks about what Pal does. If we stick to
granny, then we're talking about 4x6 prints, and a $500 PS digital will
be adequate until it wears out. A computer isn't even needed for doing
your own
Thank you.
I used a different program to make a better looking album, but it
doesn't seem to work right with Netscape.
http://home.att.net/~b_rubenstein/isr_test/index.html
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bruce,
Nice work. I enjoyed them all. My favorites are the candle lighting, the
woman
Thanks. That's why I count on AF for those quick grab shots.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Very nice photos, Bruce. I especially like the one with a small bird
sitting on a tank gun barrel with the flag behind it.
TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Thanks.
That picture once again shows that sharpness isn't everything (it's very
soft even though I had the high speed (ASA 100 long time ago) film loaded)
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some very nice work there BR. I particularly like the Arab in the
Marketplace. The shaft of light makes it.
Pick some candidates, put them on the web and let us vote.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are a couple of juried shows in Pittsburgh I'm hoping to enter
this year but that raises the question of picking submissions. I have
so many shots, from last year alone, that I'm at a loss when it
If you want to sell that lens at a major loss let me know.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hmm, either way I will miss that fine Nikon AF-S 300/4 with full-time
manual focus, and that excellent Nikon matrix balanced fill-flash.
Rats.
All the shots but the Druze Woman were only available light. The Droze
shot had fill flash (BIF of the ZX-5).
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, I too like Arab In Market. Church of the Holy Sepulchr has a nice glow
to it. This was taken in available light?
Just as soon as I get some new page creation software to play with.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We would even look at pix taken with Nikons too!
Regards, Bob S.
I only visited twice: 1983 1998. For many reasons it's a special place
to go to.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you live in Israel?
There is a bit of it, but not at all bad. I've seen pictures with two
very distinct images. You really need bright, specular highlights before
things get objectionable even with bad bokeh lenses.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Notice the double-image background?
1/10 the time is only 4 years, and that is not a long time to be in
production except for bottom of the line entry level SLRs. % years is
very common for mid range cameras and high end ones are even longer.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Film slr's didn't really change much after the first
They probably are already to some degree, but that's to ease
test/assembly/manufacture/repair; not upgrade. Cameras are just not
computers. Changing things like sensors in a DSLR is like changing the
chipset (VIA, Intel, etc.) that's soldered to the motherboard, and not
the CPU.
BR
[EMAIL
The MB-15 grip gives a vertical release and a command dial. It also
increases the max FPS rate a little. The F4 was much more expensive when
it was new and that's the reason why it's only a little cheaper used
than a used F100. The F4 is supposed to have very marginal AF. It is
very rugged and
The look of a fast, longish (180/2.8 wide open) lens. The beach was in
San Diego, and until I printed the picture I didn't realize that there
was an owl there. Weird.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nice. I particularly like the beach scene - excellent 3-D feel to it, a
combination of the focus
1 - 100 of 690 matches
Mail list logo
