On Sep 19, 2005, at 1:26 PM, Glen wrote:
... They even nag one circuit board for having a "slightly crowded"
layout, which by itself doesn't have any real effect on performance
or reliability at all. ...
This sparks a memory from the early days of Apple's Macintosh. SJ was
riding heard o
Yutz here. I just got these pentax junk without some $5 part in them.
]'-)
Godfrey
On Sep 19, 2005, at 2:18 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
He's a yutz with a semi professional camera, like most of us...
Hey Godders, that you? :-D
some yutz with a snapshot camera.
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 use the DA14 for this kind of thing. It supplies a 90 degree field
of view across the diagonal (traditionally the choice of
architectural interior photographers was a Hasselblad SWC with this
field of view) and has well corrected rectilinear rendering. The
DA16-45 would also work well, wi
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 list:
A view of Arundel Castle:
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/37p.htm
Comments and critique always appreciated.
enjoy
Godfrey
On Sep 20, 2005, at 4:43 AM, David Savage wrote:
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/37p.htm
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.
It isn't obvious from your comment ... Did yo
It is, and was intentionally so. :-)
Thanks for your comment.
Godfrey
On Sep 20, 2005, at 1:21 AM, John Forbes wrote:
This looks rather artificial to me, Godfrey.
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/37p.htm
On Sep 20, 2005, at 1:26 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A view of Arundel Castle:
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/37p.htm
That's nice. No criticisms.
Marnie aka Doe :-) Though seeing color from you is a bit strange.
Thanks Marnie!
Yes, I do color ... only occasionally. ;-)
God
On Sep 20, 2005, at 12:27 AM, Cotty wrote:
P.S. havent you got anything better to do that
count my posts and report to the list?
Godders, the man *has* a point ;-)
After hammering on it 80 some times, I think it's getting pretty blunt.
Godfrey
I'm getting Page Not Found errors, Shel.
Godfrey
On Sep 20, 2005, at 1:11 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
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
I haven't been able to see the photos for some reason, but it sounds
like the second one shows significantly greater exposure even though
the camera was on Manual exposure and the settings hadn't changed.
I have seen this occasionally myself (one proper than one overexposed
exposure at the
On Sep 20, 2005, at 5:34 AM, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
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 eng
On Sep 20, 2005, at 7:16 AM, wendy beard 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
Hmm. Could be element separation inside the lens. Have you looked
through it to see if there's any evidence of that?
Godfrey
On Sep 20, 2005, at 8:24 AM, Jay Taylor wrote:
I have one of the newer (silver) FA 80-200 f4.7-5.6 zoom lenses. I
just noticed over the weekend that the majority of p
On Sep 20, 2005, at 12:38 AM, John Celio wrote:
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
Quite nice, both of them! The larger framing has a sense of
a
Thanks for your comment, Rick.
The copyright watermark is created as a text layer, light gray text
rendering, with a layer style for a drop shadow. It is rendered into
the image data when I set the ICC profile for sRGB on the web
version. You can create an action to do this in a few seconds
Thanks Dave.
It's a little different from other work I've been posting lately.
It's part of a set I'm developing and is probably not strong enough a
statement to stand on its own, comparatively speaking. I liked the
huge range of scale available, from tiny flowers to massive castle
struct
The *ist DS does not have an explicit Auto ISO setting. It does have
ISO Coercion, but only if you've enabled it specifically in the
custom settings. It is not enabled in Manual exposure mode in any case.
Godfrey
On Sep 20, 2005, at 9:01 AM, graywolf wrote:
Was the ISO set to a fixed valu
On Sep 20, 2005, at 9:20 AM, Tom Reese wrote:
I've bought several new lenses in the past six months. I think you
used too
many waits in your sentence.
...
They sold quite a few to me. They're going out of stock as fast as
they're
arriving.
...
That's my experience as well. The most diffi
On Sep 20, 2005, at 8:56 AM, graywolf wrote:
... Also real estate photography does not pay a lot, most of it
being done with a digital point and shoot nowadays. And the high-
end stuff, where there is actually some money to be made, is still
shot with a view camera to the best of my knowledg
On Sep 20, 2005, at 6:41 AM, Charles Robinson wrote:
Back "in my film days" when I shot a lot of concerts, I was quite
fond of my 135mm f2.5 zoom.
...
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
On Sep 20, 2005, at 9:39 AM, Mark Roberts wrote:
The *ist DS does not have an explicit Auto ISO setting. It does have
ISO Coercion, but only if you've enabled it specifically in the
custom settings. It is not enabled in Manual exposure mode in any
case.
I just want to say that I've never h
On 9/19/05, Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Pentax *istD, K 200/2.5, Handheld
ISO 200, 1/1000 sec
http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_2173.htm
I like the essential simplicity of shape and texture in this photo a
lot. Great work!
Godfrey
On Sep 20, 2005, at 9:32 AM, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
...you have to make honest posts, not fake ones, this isnt a place
for practical jokes.
Oh, come off it! I nearly blew my coffee into the keyboard laughing
at that bit of pretension.
Thank you for the excellent comedy. :-)
Godfrey
I would suspect that these specialty lenses (like the hyper-expensive
80-200mm f/2.8, etc) simply sell in such small quantities that
they've set production to be very limited. They might sell one of
those for 1000 of the less expensive, slower models, and make 10x the
profit margin that way
On Sep 20, 2005, at 7:30 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, I don't think so. Someone said once that they read the list
sometime. But
if one goes by what is said here and what Pentax does, I don't
think Pentax
pays much attention. :-)
...
In one of my former positions, I was to participate i
It's a tough job but somebody has to do it. I'll accept the burden
for the good of the PDML community. :-)
As follow up:
From Sept 17, 8:54 pm to Sept 20, 10:07 am, JCO has made 98 posts on
this topic, and none on any other topic.
Most other posters to this and related threads have made 10
I haven't experimented with it extensively, but I seem to recall it
setting intermediate ISO values, stepping a stop at a time as needed.
I might be remembering incorrectly, however. You've piqued my
interest now ... I most often use Av mode so I'll set Coercion on
with a 1600 limit, set th
I neither care enough about you nor have the energy to participate in
ad hominem attacks. I'm responding to the thread in progress. I was
not responding to you.
But your behavior is typical of why these forums have so little value
to the manufacturers. That's a fact, whether you choose to b
On Sep 20, 2005, at 10:38 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As follow up:
From Sept 17, 8:54 pm to Sept 20, 10:07 am, JCO has made 98 posts on
this topic, and none on any other topic.
Most other posters to this and related threads have made 10-12 posts
in the same time period, and have commented on
On Sep 20, 2005, at 10:24 AM, wendy beard wrote:
The question I have is whether there's any real value to be had in
using Focus Fixer now that Photoshop CS2 has a deconvolution blur
removal tool built-in. Does FocusFixer do a substantially better job?
Is it more configurable? $60 isn't a huge a
On Sep 20, 2005, at 11:06 AM, Toralf Lund wrote:
.. No real conflict here. So there, all you have to do now is to
shake hands, or better still, go out and have a beer together, and
stop this silly argument.
I agree that there's no real conflict here. And aside from, perhaps,
pushing JCO w
While it's a great idea in principle, and I will be happy to proffer
my items for such a petition, the success of such efforts always
depends upon some of key things:
- How credible is the source of the petition?
- How influential (in terms of profit success) are the items?
- How did the peti
On Sep 20, 2005, at 9:55 PM, Boris Liberman wrote:
I like the photograph a lot. The rendering seems a touch flat on
my screen, however, and lacks a bit of sparkle. It looks better
when expanded to view with a black matte.
Godfrey, it just occurred to me that it was "designed" to be viewe
On Sep 20, 2005, at 9:49 PM, Boris Liberman wrote:
A view of Arundel Castle:
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/37p.htm
... it seems few of your latest PESOs are made with 14 mm lens...
Liking it you are ;-).
I think it is a good picture though it is different from what
you'v
On Sep 20, 2005, at 11:12 PM, Boris Liberman wrote:
Yes, it needs a BIG print. 8x12 is the smallest size I've printed it
that it works, and I don't have a color printer for larger than that
right now. Dang. Yet another excuse to buy that Epson 4000.
do you *still* need excuses such as this on
On Sep 21, 2005, at 2:36 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Is anyone using the A20/2.8 on the D or DS? Any comments/pics on
the image
quality?
If the A20/2.8 is the same optical formula as the FA20/2.8, it's
probably a winner. Two of the regulars on the DPReview forum bought
the FA20 recently a
On Sep 21, 2005, at 3:48 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Any suggestions on how to rid an image of purple fringing ...
In Photoshop:
- Make a color selection of the offending areas.
- Create an HSV adjustment layer, which will automatically generate a
mask for that selection.
- Choose magenta/pur
You can't correct purple fringing with CA adjustment. CA adjustment
affects green-red and blue-yellow channel alignment. I've tried and
the results don't look very good.
Godfrey
On Sep 21, 2005, at 4:32 AM, David Savage wrote:
G'day Shel,
If it's not too bad you can try the chromatic aber
Most of the purple fringing I see is a sensor effect, not lens
related, on high contrast boundaries where one side of the boundary
is at saturation and the other is underexposed.
Godfrey
On Sep 21, 2005, at 4:33 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
Hi Shel,
Sometimes it's a result of red and blue chr
On Sep 21, 2005, at 6:16 AM, Pål Jensen wrote:
Sure, but most don't want old lenses.
Yes. Even though I like using A lenses, I generally prefer the AF
series lenses because they provide the focal length information for
the EXIF data. I actually use that data for some things, it's absence
On Sep 21, 2005, at 7:22 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anyone as yet compared the A, M, & K
200/4 lenses on a digital body?
Are results available to view?
I did some comparison tests including the A70-210/4 Macro and A200/4
on the DS but haven't posted them. It works well: the A200/4 pro
Sorry JCO ... I should know better than to contribute any further to
these threads. I don't mean to provoke a response from you at all.
But don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say anything about camera
metering or lack of AE. I said that I prefer to use AF lenses over *A-
series* lenses be
On Sep 21, 2005, at 9:36 AM, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
Not to say its unimportant to you because
you are the one doing it, but I don't
understand WHY its important to you.
what are you doing with this EXIF data
that you find the lack of with KM lenses frustrating
or pain in the neck?
What I'm doi
That's a lovely shot, Shel.
I did the correction I mentioned earlier and put this composite
together to illustrate it.
Photoshop Tip of the Day - Removing purple fringe
-
In Photoshop:
- Make a color selection of the offending areas.
- Create an HSV adjustment layer, which will automatical
On Sep 21, 2005, at 10:04 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Whenever I have prints made on the Lightjet or the Frontier, I use
300ppi
to 330ppi or so for the resolution (is that the term?) which gives
me a
nice, big, richly detailed print from scanned negatives. Using the
same
resolution with the
Sorry, PJ. I don't have a ZX-5n but I have an MX as well as the DS.
There is no way that the mirror or shutter in a 35mm film SLR will be
the same size as the mirror in a DSLR with a 16x24mm format.
Here's a picture:
http://homepage.mac.com/godders/MX-DS-mirror-comparison.jpg
The mirror box
On Sep 21, 2005, at 11:24 AM, Scott Loveless wrote:
... I started to think about what I would really WANT
in a digital camera. ...
Throw caution to the wind. Don't even consider what is feasible or
marketable. Just let us know what your dream digital camera looks
like. ..
For most intents
It would help if you didn't pose your response as intimating I was
stupid, PJ. That's uncalled for.
No need for apology; I'm not offended.
As I said, I don't have a ZX-5n. However, "oversized mirrors" in SLRs
are typically longer to preclude image cutoff with long lenses, not
wider. If you
Cotty seemed to think it worked well enough that he adapted the mount
to fit on a Canon 1Ds ...
At least I *think* it was the 15/3.5 he was waving around in Oxford. ;-)
Godfrey
On Sep 21, 2005, at 12:21 PM, Jim King wrote:
I would be very interested to hear about PDML members' experiences
w
BTW, have you tried comparing its results on film to what you see
with the digital camera?
Godfrey
On Sep 21, 2005, at 12:21 PM, Jim King wrote:
I would be very interested to hear about PDML members' experiences
with the 15/3.5 on a DSLR. Several months ago I bought a used
A15/3,5 primar
On Sep 21, 2005, at 12:37 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
The increasing lack of Pentax fixed length lenses is one of
the lesser reasons I haven't drank the *istD/DS Kool-Aid.
At last count, there are 12 Pentax brand primes between 14mm and
135mm listed at B&H Photo:
DA14
FA20
FA24
FA28
FA28 Sof
On Sep 21, 2005, at 1:01 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
Just out of curiosity, has anyone tried screw mount lenses with the
*istD/DS? After manually stopping the lens down, does the green
button workaround work?
This has been repeated here many times:
Screw mount lenses fitted to the D/DS/DL work
On Sep 21, 2005, at 1:22 PM, Toralf Lund wrote:
At last count, there are 12 Pentax brand primes between 14mm and
135mm listed at B&H Photo:
I think we have discussed this before: Different distributors and/
or importer's versions of the lens lineup seem to differ quite a
bit. For instanc
On Sep 21, 2005, at 2:03 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
At last count, there are 12 Pentax brand primes between 14mm and
135mm listed at B&H Photo:
29 from Nikon, 16 from Canon, and 24 from Leica (not that I can afford
anything they currently offer).
I dunno, Scott. I only need one lens each of
now. The mirror is considerably larger than the focusing
screen on the *ist-D, it is infact approximatly 3/16 of an inch
narrower than the mirror box. This measurement is replicated in
the MZ3 and the mirror box in each seem to be exactly the same size.
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
It would h
Won't focus close enough?
I took the photos of the MX and DS with a DS fitted with a 35mm lens
at 2-3 feet away, cropped them to the size I wanted. Any 3-4Mpixel
digicam should be able to do that, it's not necessary to produce a
macro masterpiece. ;-)
thanks
Godfrey
On Sep 21, 2005, at 2
On Sep 21, 2005, at 2:55 PM, Cotty wrote:
Cotty seemed to think it worked well enough that he adapted the mount
to fit on a Canon 1Ds ...
At least I *think* it was the 15/3.5 he was waving around in Oxford.
yessir but not a 1Ds, a 1DmarkII.
Well, I knew it was a Canon and that it was big an
On Sep 21, 2005, at 4:06 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
I tried a 77 ltd and
really liked the feel and build quality. I remember thinking "I could
get used to this"
Same here on that one. I don't use that particular focal length range
very often or I'd push up its priority, but that's probably t
This is funny. One of the things that sets the better fixed lens
digicams apart from the crappy ones is the availability of a manually
controlled zoom on the lens... ;-)
Godfrey
Those of you with the HP 7960 series printer ... Have any of you
experimented with other than HP papers?
I'm not particularly fond of glossy surface and have been looking for
a good matte paper. HP's "matte" surface is more of a semi-matte ...
kinda speckly. Epson Enhanced Matte and Heavywe
On Sep 20, 2005, at 11:16 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I played around with the feature some more, and golly gee whiz, the
camera
finally will chose different ISO settings, although I've yet to
figure out
what it uses to make the decision.
I set the DS to ISO Coercion at 1600 limit, set the Fn
Another PAW up for viewing:
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/38.htm
Comments, critique, flames always appreciated. Flames are ignored. ;-)
enjoy
Godfrey
On Sep 22, 2005, at 2:29 AM, Frantisek wrote:
JK> According to the lens barrel DOF markings, everything between 3
feet
JK> and infinity should be in focus at f5.6. The DOF at 15mm is
Don't count on DOF markings. They are useless because they are
computed for 3-4x linear enlargement _only_.
Thanks for the compliment, Jay! Haven't got time to look at pictures
right now, but I'll take a look later on.
Godfrey
On Sep 22, 2005, at 2:37 AM, Jay Taylor wrote:
After admiring the awesome photoblog of Juan (Water Molotov) and
great images from Godfrey, I have been wanting to explore di
I think I like my ist-DS. Here are the first of my new pictures
http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=529887
Nice work, John. So are you going to join us in the Pentax Pixel
Party on the 8th of October?
Godfrey
lol ... I just wonder what Bill has against iPhoto.
Godfrey
On Sep 22, 2005, at 3:38 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
I like IPhoto slide shows. They're easy to make and with music,
they can be a hoot.
Just stay away from iPhoto.
However i order the ibook before this discovery.
Its not going back
what were the failures?
Godfrey
On Sep 21, 2005, at 10:16 PM, Kevin Waterson wrote:
Seems to me the digital offering from Pentax is just not going the
distance.
I have now had to send bodies back on 3 occasions (not the same body).
On Sep 22, 2005, at 6:18 AM, P. J. Alling wrote:
I'm coming to the conclusion that no good dead goes un-punished.
Wonderful. Almost as wonderful as the original, "No good deed goes
unpunished." :-)
Godfrey
I'm keeping my eye on the recently announced Ricoh Caplio GR digital.
Teensy, f/2.6 prime lens with 28mm equivalent field of view, wide
adapter for 21mm FoV, accessory shoe for a *good* optical finder, and
the ability to save exposures in RAW format. If it does a good job at
ISO 100-200, I'
I have no idea on the Nikon D70 durability. My use counts thus far on
several cameras:
Sony DSC-F707 - 13,000 exposures - gave to friend and still going
(2002-)
Sony DSC-F717 - 8,000 exposures - sold (2003)
Canon 10D - 18,000 exposures - still going (2003-)
Panasonic FZ10 - 9,000 exposures -
I have to admire a list administrator who sticks to his principles.
Thank you, Doug.
Godfrey
On Sep 22, 2005, at 5:44 PM, Glen wrote:
It's a close call, but a full-frame sensor takes first
place in my wish list.
I slightly prefer an in-camera anti-shake system, over the full-
frame sensor. Of course, having both would be wonderful. The full
frame sensor should also have a lot more
On Sep 22, 2005, at 1:44 PM, Cotty wrote:
Woo Hoo.
I was out in the field the last few days on some pipeline work
east of
Toronto,and i quess
my laptop
was delivered to the office yesterday.
Now the fun begins.:-)
Great news. I'll alert Godders that he needs to up his state to
bi
On Sep 22, 2005, at 2:37 AM, Jay Taylor wrote:
... This one involves dual Hue/Saturation adjustment layers. Not
even close to dynamic range shown in Juan's work, but here is an
example:
http://i.pbase.com/v3/87/63987/1/49629765.DuwamishBW.jpg
Very nice! The rendering is well done with exc
On Sep 18, 2005, at 12:55 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Since there are over 100 photos, the web page for my Loire valley bike
trip necessarily involved a lot of batch processing in RawShooter
Essentials, IrfanView and Photoshop. For the most part this all worked
out well but a few of the shots really
LOL ...
If you have any questions, send me a note.
Minis are cool. First time I saw one, I thought it was an Apple candy
tin. ;-)
Godfrey
On Sep 22, 2005, at 8:49 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
I finally drank the Kool-Aid. The Mac Mini arrived today. It's
currently disguised as a birthday pr
tree
light
shadow
in such stark symmetry
... with apologies to e. e. cummings
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/38p.htm
comments, critique, flames all welcomed
enjoy,
Godfrey
On Sep 22, 2005, at 10:36 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/38p.htm
Hmmm, at first I didn't like it much. Not much there there. Then,
well, they
look like eyes. So it sort of grows on one. Still not sure if I
like it, but
it's a more interesting than
On Sep 22, 2005, at 11:13 PM, John Celio wrote:
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/38p.htm
I think I'd like it a lot more without the car. As it is, meh,
it's okay. Since I know you're local: where is that?
Thanks John. it was taken on The Alameda, near Race Street, in San Jose.
On Sep 23, 2005, at 5:38 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
Godfrey, Panasonic's Mega-Optical Stabilization is a lens-based
technology, not sensor-based.
Really? Hmm, didn't know that. I know they use variants of it in a
several of their cameras. I've not seen a lens diagram, however.
Godfrey
Hi Rob! Nice to see you back!
Godfrey
On Sep 23, 2005, at 6:12 AM, frank theriault wrote:
You wanted _more_ input to that thread??
No, I wanted ~intelligent~ input...
" ... full of strength and fury, signifying nothing."
Godfrey
On Sep 23, 2005, at 6:34 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... I stick to Pentax because I think compact, good primes with
large aperture are more important to my photography than full
frame, many pixels and pictures per second. If I though anything
else I'd have another trademark on them. ...
Thanks to everyone who responded on the printer paper question.
My Epson 1270 is definitely giving up the ghost. I looked for a way
in to clean it, per mike wilson's comment, and there is a way to
dismantle it and get to the bits required, but it sure is a total
pain in the butt. Reflecting
On Sep 23, 2005, at 7:34 AM, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
You'd better check their repair rates before you go with HP. ...
http://www.hp.com.pl/strep/
... Look for exploatation costs too - AFAIR HP uses one colour
cartridge while Epson has all separated...
...
For me nice thing is that Epson
now use
On Sep 23, 2005, at 1:39 AM, Toralf Lund wrote:
I like aperture rings, too
I was very used to controlling aperture from an on-lens ring with
generations of Nikon and Leica gear. Moving to a new control
paradigm, with control of all exposure related elements on my right
hand adjacent to t
Thanks graywolf.
I've debated the value of continuous flow ink systems for my needs
several times and come to the decision that I as yet don't print in
the daily volumes that would make such a system economically viable.
When I do, it's probably time to swap to a pro-grade printing system.
opefully we can get a few more who haven't been to one of these
before - Jack Davis and Barry Rice - you are on the radar!
Shout out if you're not on this list and would like to be!
Current possible attendees:
Bruce Dayton - Confirmed
Marnie Parker
Shel Belinkoff
Godfrey DiGiorgi
Juan
On Sep 23, 2005, at 10:47 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Well, there IS ANOTHER WAY to work with these LENSES, but I'd
suggest that
MOST people using a Pentax DSLR will not choose to use it for any
NUMBER of
reasons. The heck with using the camera's BUILT IN meter. Take
time to
understand the
On Sep 23, 2005, at 11:03 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
The Hassy experience is pretty similar to a TLR, as long as you're
using the waist-level finder. Shorter and a little heavier though.
Love the feel of them.
My first adjustable camera was a 1949 vintage Rolleiflex TLR that
belonged to my gran
I wouldn't park by the ferry building.
If we're meeting up in the Union Square area, or anywhere in the city
really, I'd park in the city at the Fifth & Mission garage (by
Moscone and the Sony Metreon). Arriving around 10-11 am, it will be
mostly empty and you can leave a car there until 11
The problem as I see it, ~for me~, at this point,
is that there are too many steps for metering - "green button",
setting
exposure lock, recomposing - I really need to practice more with
the camera.
On the istD, I don't need to set the exposure lock, I just meter,
compose and shoot.
Did the
A photo from another project I'm working on...
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/38q.htm
Comments, flames, critique per your predilection. :-)
enjoy
Godfrey
On Sep 23, 2005, at 12:35 PM, Adam Maas wrote:
E.R.N. Reed wrote:
But what I'm wondering is --
On the PZ-1 in Hyper Manual the IF button, and on the *istD in
Hyper Manual the green button, works like an exposure lock only
without the time limit imposed by actual "exposure lock" buttons.
On Sep 23, 2005, at 11:41 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mawz/45390767/
A little experiment in low-light B&W.
*istD, SMC-M 50mm f2 at f2, 1/25, ISO 3200. Av mode.
Nice. The skin tones are just a hair too flat for my taste, could be
easily corrected.
Godfrey
There is no way to disable the 'flash required' warning arrow, just
like there's no way to disable the green focus indicator. Just ignore
them. ;-)
Godfrey
On Sep 23, 2005, at 1:32 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
OK, I'm lost ... how does one turn completely off the flash arrow from
showing in t
The DS default is to lock AF but NOT exposure, John. There's a custom
setting that will allow both to be held instead.
Godfrey
On Sep 23, 2005, at 2:02 PM, John Forbes wrote:
If you keep your finger on the trigger (sorry, shutter button), the
camera will hold the exposure (and the AF, if it
On Sep 23, 2005, at 1:58 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote:
On the *istD, the arrow only flashes when using a mode where the
camera set the shutter speed - to warn you of hand holdability. So if
you are in Program or Aperture Priority, it flashes. If you are in
Shutter Priority or Manual, the camera figu
401 - 500 of 17548 matches
Mail list logo
