If you don't want to add programs unnecessarily, Irfanview generates both
thumbnails and HTML galleries, and the web-pages it creates can be easily
customised by tweaking the templates.
If you don't have Irfanview, it's worth getting anyway as both a fast
picture viewer and a simple image
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 09:54:21 -, Kostas Kavoussanakis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006, P. J. Alling wrote:
More interestingly they have a *ist-DS for $499 while they are selling
a *ist-DL for $569, in the same listed condition...
What I find interesting is that I am not
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 03:13:15 -, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 27 Jan 2006 at 1:36, John Forbes wrote:
I'm not arguing with you, Rob, that they should be available new. I'm
just saying that one can equip oneself quite well by buying second-hand.
If I had the cash
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 17:58:58 -, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
- Original Message - From: Pål Jensen
Subject: Web Page
I plan to set up my own web page dedicated to my photography.
I am a novice in web page design and everything associated with it. I
need to know it
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 20:01:20 -, Lucas Rijnders [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 17:32:53 +0100, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
So who makes the sensor used in the Samsung Pro815?
Good question. I take it noone else could find the answer either?
I certainly couldn't!
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 22:38:21 -, E.R.N. Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
E.R.N. Reed wrote:
Joseph Tainter wrote:
http://www.alphoto.com/images/bummer.jpg
Oh, my. This one comes under the heading of What were they thinking?
In Bluff, Utah, a number of years ago I
Has it gone monthly, now?
John
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 21:48:24 -, Alistair Lax
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Apologies if someone has already mentioned this on the list. This month's
Amateur Photographer (I guess probably only available in the UK) has an
interesting historical article on the
Here it is, and it's still weekly - publication date: 28 January.
http://www.amateurphotographer.com/magazine/current.php
John
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 23:52:51 -, Shel Belinkoff
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's the cover date/month?
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Alistair Lax
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 09:50:10 -, Kostas Kavoussanakis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Rob Studdert wrote:
They may well be able to spit out a sensor in short time, the question
is will
it be as good and as polished as those produced by companies who have
been
optimising
Absolutely lovely, especially the view East. Superb picture.
John
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 07:31:36 -, John Coyle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
A couple of shots taken a few days ago on my morning walk - comments
welcome.
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4061003
I have to say that I'm more interested in the availability of good
second-hand lenses. In the past couple of years I've enabled myself with
all the Limiteds (bar the new DA), and 20mm, 50mm 1.4 and 1.7, 100mm 2.8
macro, 24-90mm, 70-210mm, and 300mm, all of which are F or FA lenses.
Plus a
, and had I so wished (translation: had I had the cash) I would have
bought one.
John
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 00:17:11 -, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 26 Jan 2006 at 23:10, John Forbes wrote:
I have to say that I'm more interested in the availability of good
second-hand lenses
Rob,
I'll be the first to admit that Pentax moves in mysterious ways. Not
having product available for sale when people want it is a strange way to
run a business.
John
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 00:38:53 -, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 26 Jan 2006 at 16:26, Tom C wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 02:14:04 -, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 27 Jan 2006 at 0:57, John Forbes wrote:
With a lot of respect, Rob, I mentioned only two zooms, both of which
are
way above the average quality of consumer zooms. And the two very
expensive f2.8 Pentax zooms have
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:29:38 -, Mark Erickson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Many of us here have spent much more on lenses than bodies, but many
people out there probably buy a pentax camera just use the kit lens.
Anyone know how much Pentax brings in from selling lenses as opposed to
I've already said that Pentax is far too late in releasing this camera.
However, I suspect it might be moderately successful. Many of the people
who used to shoot with the 645 will have held onto their lenses, so their
only cost in switching back will be the new body, and perhaps a new
.
From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: P645D
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:14:52 -
I've already said that Pentax is far too late in releasing this camera.
However, I suspect it might be moderately
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 22:18:39 -, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
David Savage wrote:
On 1/26/06, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What is/are a pair of budgie smugglers? Or do I not want to know?
See Frank Christian's replies ;-)
Dave
Budgies? I thought Aussies would
weekend two days. Now I could be convinced to get a
DA 40 for it. The 31 LTD was a little bulky under my coat.
Tom C.
Yep, the 31 is not exactly petite. The problem with the DA 40 is the AOV
on digital. A 24mm pancake would be just the thing.
John
From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 23:38:08 -, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
- Original Message - From: frank theriault
Subject: Re: PESO - The Big Sniff
Thanks for commenting, Powell (and thanks to everyone else, too). I
believe that the child knew the dogs - I don't think they
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 23:19:21 -, Jos from Holland
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that is the final direction it will go if technology allows:
using the sensor itself for the viewfinding.
It still has some problems, but the advantages would be great like:
Get rid of mechanical things
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 11:01:54 -, Kostas Kavoussanakis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Lucas Rijnders wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 08:30:51 +0100, Kostas Kavoussanakis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, John Forbes wrote:
As for the rest, I think you
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 11:12:54 -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 1/24/2006 3:03:26 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, John Forbes wrote:
As for the rest, I think you underestimate the power of your own
voice.
The person who started
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:14:04 -, Lucas Rijnders [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:39:50 +0100, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Or at least cut back investments. Herb's (and other's) problem was
that he wanted a higher spec body, one even over the *ist-D.
Herb's
I agree with most of what others have said, but would like to add that
both the maple leaf and the staple are subjects with promise, so you're on
the right track (IMO).
The delicate colouring of the maple leaf is very attractive, and the
textures of the staple photo are interesting. As
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:33:34 -, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
- Original Message - From: John Forbes
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Financal Condition of Pentax
Yes, he had quite a valid reason for wanting the higher spec body...
Lots of people would like a higher-spec
them more limited. Sadly.
John
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 23:50:49 -, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 24 Jan 2006 at 22:36, John Forbes wrote:
There is no dispute that Pentax has been slow to produce a high-spec
DSLR. However, following the disaster of the MZ-D, they have not had
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 01:27:38 -, Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message - From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I don't know. It seems crazy to you, and I have to say it seems crazy
to me, too. I am sure it would have been a good thing to have done
three or four
That's good. Thanks for the info.
John
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 12:34:45 -, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
- Original Message - From: mike wilson
Subject: Re: A death in the family
8-( We also still haven't heard from Tom Rittenhouse since before
Christmas, iirc.
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 21:09:46 -, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the middle of being asked a question he spontaneously
for no apparent reason started jumping up down on the
furniture. This I found weird :-)
Dave
On 1/23/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't watch Oprah.
Just being a scientologist (the name is an oxymoron - like Christian
Scientist) is weird in itself.
Of course, weirdness is largely a matter of geography. To be an atheist
in rural Texas is definitely to be odd. To be a Christian in Timbuctoo is
even odder. To be anything and Archbishop
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 21:32:02 -, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Funny, but John Travolta is also a Scientologist, and
while one does
hear about that a bit, he doesn't seem to have attracted
nearly the
same amount of negative press as Tom. I wonder why?
He's taller, a better
' is derived from the Latin word for
knowledge, and '-ology' from the Greek for 'study'. Study of knowledge
seems
eminently reasonable and (to coin a new word) deoxymoronic.
--
Cheers,
Bob
-Original Message-
From: John Forbes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 23 January 2006 21:34
To: pentax
With all due respect both to your good self, and to the facts of the
matter, the entry survived until the author withdrew it.
And furthermore, every word in the entry was true, so there would have
been no cause for a review panel to delete it.
As the said author, I am deeply distressed at
Someone working late on his PUG submission?
John
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:08:08 -, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
here's a photo of mine I just found while rummaging around in the
undergrowth. I don't think I've shown it before. It's part of a
long-neglected series which I work on
They're right, though. If you want good prime lenses other than extreme
telephoto, nobody beats Pentax. And a couple of recent zooms are prety
damn good, too.
John
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:53:02 -, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Interesting perspective.
Tom C.
From: Joseph
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:48:01 -, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: John Forbes
I take your point, Tom. I am guilty of judging you by association.
That's forgiveable John... :-) Not a problem.
Thank you.
To date, 1 brand two different nameplates... depends on the way you look
I concur. I really like it. For me, this is one of the best pics Frank
has submitted for a while. The fact that there are different things going
on makes it work.
John
On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 10:28:07 -, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That makes quite a nice picture in itself, but I
Wikipedia is becoming more and more just a free advertising medium.
John
On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 09:03:38 -, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 21/1/06, keith_w, discombobulated, unleashed:
What? Whose?
This. Mine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF_24-70mm_lens
Cheers,
Cotty
It looks as though somebody has removed the focus limiter switch and fixed
its position.
John
On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 06:40:34 -, Igor Roshchin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sat, 21 Jan 2006 21:07:53 -0800
Boris Liberman wrote:
Hi!
I wonder, why would someone do this type of
modification
I use a good RAW converter, Capture One LE, which gets the image into good
shape. It's not too expensive.
Then usually I find Irfanview can do the rest, though I have a version of
Elements and Picture Window Pro for use if necessary.
John
On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 18:26:07 -, Jos from
Sent this before, but it didn't seem to make it.
J
--- Forwarded message ---
From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Financal Condition of Pentax
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 12:14:15 -
I take your point, Tom. I am guilty of judging you
different if the Philips chip had proved to
be viable.
John
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 00:51:56 -, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 22 Jan 2006 at 23:30, John Forbes wrote:
However, I happen to believe that the message put out by Pentax users
can,
does, and will, have a profound
Sent again, as it again seems not to have gone through.
--- Forwarded message ---
From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Financal Condition of Pentax
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 00:12:38 -
I agree with you that Samsung is likely to aim
On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 18:30:13 -, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
but Capa was, by all accounts, very sexy and something of a babe magnet.
He doesn't seem to have magnetised a babe called E.R.N. Reed. :-)
John
My female friends tell me that Pierce Brosnan is too.
--
Cheers,
Bob
Don't you remember? He thinks it will rise in value when Pentax goes out
of business. That's one reason he keeps bashing Pentax.
John
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:07:32 -, Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Wonder why we haven't seen his Pentax gear for sale?
Kenneth Waller
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:08:57 -, Kostas Kavoussanakis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006, Mishka wrote:
so it is nikon then that's about to go belly-up some time real soon?
Ssshhh!
whisper
Don't tell Herb!
/whisper
Kostas (who actually misses Herb's financial analyses)
If
James,
You've now heard from the two remaining doom-mongers who frequent this
list. A third has gone off in a rage, but we are fortunate that we can
still enjoy Rob's photographic erudition, and Tom's incomparable puns.
Pentax is a company with several irons in the optical fire, which has
You seem to exist in a parallel universe. Pentax made a profit last year,
and expect to make a profit this year.
John
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 19:29:31 -, dick graham
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because Konica Minolta started working with Sony last year to develop
SLR's it makes me
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 20:07:51 -, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Malcolm Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19 January 2006 10:39
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: RE: SV: Tripod Dilemma
mike wilson wrote:
You can have mine for 300 - although I have
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 20:43:17 -, Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Adam Maas wrote:
Nikon is doing 12.4MP in APS-C, that's the sensor in the D2x.
-Adam
Sorry, I always forget about that one. And it is supposed to have
really good noise properties too.
It seems to me that there
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:37:49 -, Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 2006-01-19, at 22:07, John Forbes wrote:
It seems to me that there is no good reason why Samsung, or anybody
else, can't produce a sensor which is half-way in size between APS-C
and 35mm (24x36
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:59:37 -, Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 2006-01-19, at 22:47, Mark Roberts wrote:
BTW: Pentax is rumored to be working on exactly this kind of
in-between-sized sensor, though I'm not convinced of the validity of
the rumors myself.
For me it would
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 22:43:13 -, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With Sony buying the remains of Minolta, I am very glad Pentax got
into bed with Samsung when they did. Nikon must be feeling a little
exposed right now.
John
Nikon: The virgin camera
No kin.
John
--
Using
It's not so easy when some nitwit advertises a lens as having a PKa mount,
and you find (after you've attached it to your camera) that it's actually
a PKR. There's usually nothing on the lens itself to tell you.
It happened to me with a lovely, as new, Vivitar S1 70-210 (the best one -
by
Sssh!
J
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 23:18:56 -, Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
isn't it why we haven't heard from Herb for a while?
best,
mishka
On 1/19/06, John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You seem to exist in a parallel universe. Pentax made a profit last
year,
and expect to make
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 23:49:21 -, Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Forbes wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:59:37 -, Sylwester Pietrzyk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2006-01-19, at 22:47, Mark Roberts wrote:
BTW: Pentax is rumored to be working on exactly this kind of
in-between
Perhaps we've reached the point where most of those who want to go digital
have done so, and there now remains a hard core
of film afficionados that may dwindle gradually over a longish period.
But there is one question to ask. Bill, are you aware of other labs in
your vicinity which have
for 50 years. In the US Kodak is still a
top brand in many consumers eyes, maybe that's the connection.
John Forbes wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:40:54 -, William Robb
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message - From: keith_w Subject: Re: Samsung
DSLR announced
Hi
Bentley? Is that a German car?
John
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 10:14:00 -, Kostas Kavoussanakis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Ralf R. Radermacher wrote:
Sorry but the Schneider label on this lens to me is like putting a
Bentley badge on a Sang Yong.
Just like sticking a
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:40:54 -, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
- Original Message - From: keith_w Subject: Re: Samsung DSLR
announced
Hi John.
Not to be contentious, but... what *is* Schneider supplying, ?
Apparently, just a name.
What's strange is that even
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 14:02:48 -, Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Dario Bonazza wrote on 17.01.06 11:08:
Thanks Sylwek. Hmmm... lens mounts not yet announced there.
I guess as usually - first C, N, S, then K-M and P mounts :-)
I suppose this order suits Pentax. While
Agreed. Lovely. But the place name is unfortunate. Reminds me of a
certain camera name.
John
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 14:41:58 -, Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Tom C wrote:
We went skiing Saturday at Bogus Basin. The weather turned for the
worse with heavy blowing snow late in
The prospect of a huge increase in the number of K-mount bodies sold means
that the prices of scarce lenses will probably rocket again over the next
few months.
I'm glad I bought my F* 1:4.5 300mm when I did. Whew!
John
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client:
Nice set of pics, Gonz. I think there are several good enough to hang on
the wall, and will leave you to make your own choice.
I have a niece studying at UT at the moment, so it was interesting to see
where she hangs out. :-)
John
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 21:08:37 -, Gonz [EMAIL
These puns tend to be tiring.
John
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 19:08:34 -, Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Mark Roberts
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My understanding of English food is that old tires are an ingredient
in
most
It's interesting to see a famous old German optical company rebadging
Japanese lenses.
It's also interesting to speculate what Pentax will get from this.
Presumably Samsung are going to put some considerable marketing effort
into the camera, and Pentax will as a result be able to make a
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 00:38:19 -, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know we tangle up good-naturedly in this stuff, so let me preface my
remarks by saying I hope your are right.
You're very kind to use the words good-natured. But I do usually try to
be.
I see the Samsung name carrying
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 00:31:16 -, John Whittingham [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
.. Times and languages evolve, not always for the better!
The technical term for that is under-statement.
John
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 01:32:08 -, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
And for you, Tom, this is surely the answer to your prayers. A
reasonably assured future for the K-mount.
I don't see it as that, but then I'm not omnipotent like you John. ;-)
Oi
This is the problem with letting the camera choose the AF point. It's not
going to work every time because the camera can't read your mind.
John
On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 21:55:36 -, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The AF point was covering the subject in all shots.
But if the AF
- Original Message - From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is almost certainly going to be a 50-200ish f2.8. Quote me in a
few months if I'm wrong and the beer will be on me.
Collection in person.
A deal, John. :-)
Wouldn't mind buying you one if you're right, either
Frank's right. When a deranged individual does harm to somebody, there
may be some excuse or explanation. When the state does harm, through
incompetence or malice, there's no excuse. The damage done by a wrongful
conviction is enormous, and the damage is done to the victim's family and
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:22:20 -, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
John
PS: I only seem to be getting about 50% of messages. Never saw this,
'til Dario responded to Paul's response.
Maybe your ISP is automatically filtering the V/BM thread. You lucky
bleeder.
THe V/BM thread
, though personally I think it
is unlikely that Pentax will produce another slow zoom in the 50-200mm
range.
And comparing primes to zooms is not germane to the argument. We are
discussing what Pentax called a high-performance zoom.
John
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:09:22 -, John Forbes
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:57:40 -, Kostas Kavoussanakis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, John Forbes wrote:
to be a good performer in all respects, and that includes speed.
However, Pal, you're entitled to your view, though personally I think
it is unlikely that Pentax
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 15:38:53 -, Kostas Kavoussanakis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, John Forbes wrote:
You're right. Like the FA* 80-200/2.8 ED [IF]. It's been done before.
And it's a modern lens so why redo it? For the extra 30mm on the wide
end, maybe. How well
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:23:03 -, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 10 Jan 2006 at 16:32, Jack Davis wrote:
US justice system is far from perfect, it's only the best one in the
world.
Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too. ;-)
Rob Studdert
He's quite the humourist, this Jack Davis.
] wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, John Forbes wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:23:03 -, Rob Studdert
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 10 Jan 2006 at 16:32, Jack Davis wrote:
US justice system is far from perfect, it's only the best one
in
the
world.
Yeah, Judge Judy airs here too. ;-)
Rob
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 20:59:08 -, John Whittingham [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Yes, something like that will appear this year. And it was
announced by Pentax here:
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/lens/roadmap.pdf
From this roadmap I'd rather say it will be something like 50-220
with
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 23:59:38 -, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know about you, but I'm getting worried about being turned in
for dead horse abuse. :-)
Tom C.
Necrofillyphilia is the legal term.
John
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
As I understand it, many paedophiles were themselves the victims of sexual
abuse when young. When they grow up they act the only way they know.
So the victim becomes the perp, and thus is a victim twice over.
Justice has a difficult job to do. Children need protection, and
incarceration
film thread.
I said two cameras, one with a 8Mpixel sensor of 24x36mm dimension and
one with 8Mpixel sensor of 16x24mm dimension. Sensors equal digital
cameras, not film.
Godfrey
On Jan 9, 2006, at 4:44 PM, John Forbes wrote:
Godfrey,
All else being equal, the 35mm will look sharper
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 21:42:19 -, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/1/06, Rob Studdert, discombobulated, unleashed:
Because it's true ;-)
Glad you qualified that with a smiley. ;-)
But it is
Cheers,
Cotty
Sometimes Macphilia approaches religious fervour, with an equally rational
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 21:43:55 -, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/1/06, Christian, discombobulated, unleashed:
Some poor bastard in Virginia was executed. They are doing DNA testing
now to prove his innocence (sorry haven't followed up; don't know if was
completed or not). Sometimes
the deterant effects of the
death penality, but decided not to.
Jack
--- Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/1/06, John Forbes, discombobulated, unleashed:
Which is why we don't have the death penalty. Execution is too
drastic.
Chopping nuts off is fine.
Cheers,
Cotty
As long as they're
I don't think such a site exists.
Others will no doubt correct me if I am wrong, but there does not seem to
be any overwhelming evidence to suggest that older lenses in general work
badly with digital.
Because of the crop factor, the following is true (of APS-C DSLRs):
1 Lenses with poor
On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 21:39:16 -, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frank wrote:
cheers,
frank (wimpy liberal guy)
Don't go making me get in the same boat with you just because we hppen
to agree on this topic! :-)
Fact is, Tom, you have been talking a lot of sense on this topic!
John
Godfrey,
All else being equal, the 35mm will look sharper. Assuming both media are
able to do justice to each lens, and that each lens is able to resolve N
lpmm, and that the 35mm lens will fill the frame as much as the 50mm (it's
too late for me to work that out), the 35mm image will
cameras, one with a 8Mpixel sensor of 24x36mm dimension and
one with 8Mpixel sensor of 16x24mm dimension. Sensors equal digital
cameras, not film.
Godfrey
On Jan 9, 2006, at 4:44 PM, John Forbes wrote:
Godfrey,
All else being equal, the 35mm will look sharper. Assuming both media
are able
I apologise for breaking the rules regarding Ebay auctions, but it seems a
shame to deprive members of the opportunity of getting a tremendous
bargain on a very desirable piece of equipment.
http://tinyurl.com/8j74d
Don't be fooled by the paucity of bids so far. There are no doubt many
When the board runs out of ideas, they change the logo. It's one of the
signs of impending doom.
John
On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 12:05:08 -, Bob Shell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 6, 2006, at 11:48 PM, Perry Pellechia wrote:
I suppose this reflect the current state of the company.
I love American property prices. 4 bedroom, 2 garage house for $65k.
Where I live, that would go for nearly a hundred times that figure.
That's the problem with small islands.
John
On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 13:54:19 -, Collin R Brendemuehl
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyone in the area
You should see the people I live next to, now!
John
On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 16:11:42 -, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/1/06, John Forbes, discombobulated, unleashed:
I love American property prices. 4 bedroom, 2 garage house for $65k.
Where I live, that would go for nearly a hundred
And it now does *ist D PEFs without a strong pink cast.
John
On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 21:29:03 -, Peter McIntosh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Dario Bonazza wrote:
Confirmed! I've purchased and installed RawShooter Premium, and the RAW
files of the DL work fine too.
Dario
Irfanview 3.98
On Fri, 06 Jan 2006 12:41:21 -, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
From: keith_w [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/01/06 Fri PM 12:31:15 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: From Cottyland
Cotty wrote:
On 3/1/06, keith_w, discombobulated, unleashed:
Home reno?
Instead of
For some inexplicable reason, they didn't consider cricket. Or perhaps
they did, and could detect no perceptible movement in the excitometer.
And I presume they didn't count the cheer-leader interludes in American
Football either. That might have raised the score a bit.
John
On Thu, 05
On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 23:08:06 -, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 5 Jan 2006 at 7:59, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Many of the better photogs shoot several rolls of 35mm per day just for
practice. I know of one who religiously shot three rolls a day just to
keep his eye and reflexes
Of course, I meant practise.
J
On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 22:17:22 -, John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 23:08:06 -, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 5 Jan 2006 at 7:59, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Many of the better photogs shoot several rolls of 35mm per day
I wouldn't like to try and rewind one of those motors by hand.
John
On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 11:04:32 -, Dario Bonazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/SR01.jpg
http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/SR02.jpg
http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/SR03.jpg
Enjoy!
Dario
-
701 - 800 of 1855 matches
Mail list logo
