On Sun, 3 Dec 2006, Scott Loveless wrote:
On 12/3/06, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://homepage.mac.com/cottycam/PhotoAlbum4.html
Excellent! Got a phone number for the young lady on the right in C057465?
Yes, but will he share? Will he f...
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
On Sun, 3 Dec 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
.. have you participated in the PDML, in its various iterations.
22 July 2003. I found out about it as I was struggling with the
aperture simulator of my MZ-50 missing and decided to buy a MZ-5n or a
MZ-6. I asked a question about the relative merits;
On Mon, 4 Dec 2006, Dario Bonazza wrote:
All text pictures by me, on shooting live concerts and performance:
http://www.dariobonazza.com/provv/PC200612.jpg
It's been published on december issue of PC Photo magazine in Italy.
Congratulations Dario!
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, John Francis wrote:
Decisions, decisions ...What would you do?
Depending on your attitude to cost you could buy the 16-45 now and
sell it to buy the 16-50. That is not, in principle, terribly
nonsensical, in that the lenses are complementary and you can expect
them to
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, Bruce Dayton wrote:
daylight for weddings and portraits. Problems that I encountered
were that sometimes it would not fire the main flash - it seemed to
do with how bright it was outside - something like the popup wasn't
powerful enough to be seen.
Pentax or Sigma?
On Sun, 3 Dec 2006, Peter Loveday wrote:
Well, I disagree with some of that. I understand what you're saying, but it
seems to make the assumption that choosing MTF is telling the camera to
always use the sharpest aperture for a given lens.
Correct
It *does* already make a choice as to
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, Paul Stenquist wrote:
Thanks Bob. They do have a great relationship. When my mom walks down
the hall with her walker, Grace helps her along. BTW, sorry for
reposting the same shot.
It is incredible, don't apologise.
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Why do I ask? Well, I just woke up curious this morning, but also, I'm
trying to understand why some digital cameras are so big compared to some
film cameras. And, since film cameras have a larger mirror and mirror box,
the firmware/software seemed
On Fri, 1 Dec 2006, Rob Brigham wrote:
Immediate thing that comes to mind here is that the K10D shot has waaay
too much contrast and the mid range in addition to the shadow areas are
dissapearing into blackness. I think you have also gone too far (on my
monitor) away from the red cast and
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Brendan MacRae wrote:
K10D. It seems as though Pentax has gotten it right
in the DSLR arena for those not sold on the ist
cameras. I believe the K10D, and it's brethren the
K100 and K110, were the tipping point for Pentax in
the minds of many a camera shopper. Let's hope
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Jaume Lahuerta wrote:
Why is it more appealing that the K10D?
First of all, I think the K10D (will be) responsible for millions of
grins and gazillions (scientific term) of excellent pictures. It is a
runaway success for a very good reason: it does what the people want.
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, David Savage wrote:
The Tokina is a Pentax lens without the SMC :-)
Not sure about that; I think someone (Ken? Dario?) has mentioned that
the Tokinas also feature SMC.
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Paul Stenquist wrote:
Might as well wait for the new DA* version.
There is a *serious* difference in price between the two lenses.
Without much research, in the order of 10 times.
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Boris Liberman wrote:
By the way, you don't have to smack yourself, really.
No! It was all going so well...
Since I have preliminary permission to shell out for K10D I seem to
have to avoid older lenses...
What would happen if you dialled in the longest length in
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Nov 28, 2006, at 5:22 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:
It appears to me (although I may be potentially wrong) that
photography as a technology has submitted itself to Moore's law. Thus
I cannot be sure if in so many months some kind of breakthrough
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, John Francis wrote:
And those lenses probably won't auto-focus on
most of the Pentax bodies sold after 2025 or so, or whenever it is
that Pentax drop mass-market support for the screwdriver AF.
This applies to all lenses currently available, though.
Kostas
--
PDML
On Sun, 26 Nov 2006, Juan Buhler wrote:
http://static.flickr.com/99/307064768_7764848c1a_o.jpg
Nice one Juan, thanks for sharing. The other three did not feel BW to
me. Can I quantify this? No. Maybe I can try to qualify it further if
anyone thinks they care.
On Mon, 27 Nov 2006, David J Brooks wrote:
I emailed Sigma friday about this, but no answer recieved yet.
James, apologies for answering in a more general than the above way,
but I would not use untried and untested equipment on a shoot that
matters. This could include the K10D as well. Just
On Mon, 27 Nov 2006, cbwaters wrote:
Damn, that's a lot of bugs. I wonder how many calories you get just from
bugs in your teeth.
I guess it depends on the gaps between teeth.
But it's mostly protein I guess.
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On Sun, 26 Nov 2006, Paul Stenquist wrote:
length. This seems to work nicely with my A 400/5.6 and A2XS
converter. I shot this at f5.6 @ 1/350th, handheld of course. ISO
1600. It's just a birdbath turned upside down for the winter, but it
made for a good test subject. Gotta love SR:-)).
On Sun, 26 Nov 2006, graywolf wrote:
An accident, as you say, is unlikely; but after 9/11 that does not seem
like an unneeded safety feature.
I think that the impact is so great that, even without the increased
probability, you cannot ignore the risk.
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail
On Sat, 25 Nov 2006, Mark Roberts wrote:
No, no. You've got it all wrong. It's K and M lenses that are now
useless and have to be used as doorstops.
Absolutely not. Although built well, with plenty of metal, they just
don't have that disctinctive doorstop feel of Canon bodies.
Kostas
--
On Sun, 26 Nov 2006, David Savage wrote:
http://www.arach.net.au/~savage/Misc/IMGP5038.jpg
I would see a doctor right away.
http://www.arach.net.au/~savage/Misc/IMGP4979.jpg
Custom-made?
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Sat, 25 Nov 2006, Markus Maurer wrote:
So the main reason to use a grip is not the additional battery for you?
Are you asking in general or for the -D?
I use a grip with my MZ-50 (and used to do the same when I had the
-5n) 100% of the time I use it. It handles better and the AA Lithiums
On Thu, 23 Nov 2006, Mark Cassino wrote:
I played around with my brother's Canon 12 megapixel
camera this summer, just a little, and was pretty
impressed by the improved detail that the extra
megapixels bring in.
Hi Mark,
Great to read you back. Is that the 1.3x camera? I suspect that this
On Fri, 24 Nov 2006, William Robb wrote:
We can no longer discuss certain subjects due to the thread hijacking
that Fuckface insists on perpetrating.
Essentially, we have lost the right to discuss non A series bayonet
lenses, and Pentax backwards compatability.
I know you think killfiles are
On Fri, 24 Nov 2006, Mark Roberts wrote:
How about not only hijacking a thread but combining several topics into
it at the same time?
Here's my attempt:
http://www.robertstech.com/temp/vfr.jpg
It's a photo of my MOTORCYCLE
Which I'll be using today in lieu of my TOYOTA PRIUS
This shot was
On Fri, 24 Nov 2006, Cotty wrote:
On 24/11/06, Dario Bonazza, discombobulated, unleashed:
What about a dog?
Mark's bike?
Bad one Cotters; it would have 2 legs - be crippled - dare-I-say-it.
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006, Dario Bonazza wrote:
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2006/11/21/5079.html
This is reduced-circle, yes?
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006, William Robb wrote:
I have found over the years that we share a taste in cameras and
loose women.
snip
The tension is exquisite, on par with some of my other pastimes.
Filling up the quotation file, are we?
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On Thu, 23 Nov 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
What is unusable about the built-in flash unit? It should operate
just as the *ist DS and other models do: full output, unmetered.
Hi Godfrey! How is the Prius doing with the coal consumption? What?
Hib-what? How do you spell that?
Kostas
--
On Thu, 23 Nov 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Nov 23, 2006, at 6:21 AM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
Hi Godfrey! How is the Prius doing with the coal consumption? What?
Hib-what? How do you spell that?
I'm not sure what you meant by coal consumption or Hib-what in
the questions above.
I
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006, Bruce Dayton wrote:
Along with that, the F version is a two touch, the A is a one touch.
So for the A, you focus and zoom at the same time. For speedy zoom
and focusing, this is much better. But it can cause problems with
zoom creep when on a tripod and hands off. The
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006, John Whittingham wrote:
element. I've had a MIR 20mm as well, neither the MIR or Tokina seemed as
good as the K 18mm IMHO and apparently both are longer than their stated
focal length, although I cannot confirm this.
I think the K18 is also more of a 19; I seem to have
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006, John Whittingham wrote:
Yes, I think you may be right there. To be honest I rarely use anything
wider than 24mm on film unless I need to. Each year I have to shoot large
groups on people at work and occasionally I need something as wide as the K
18mm.
I think it's great
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
OK. I think that on this lens - and a few others - the front filter can
really degrade the image as the front element is strongly curved.
Ah, so this is why some come with built-in filters. Thanks Shel.
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, John Francis wrote:
On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 08:40:51PM +, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
What these in particular do have is a 1.5x magnification, . . .
They don't, you know.
Ooops! Thanks John.
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
Newer cameras dont have magic finders that
change the laws of physics...
What these in particular do have is a 1.5x magnification, which should
change your perception about what you are argumenting on/trying to
focus. Sure, an 105 may be easier to
On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, frank theriault wrote:
mode. A similar situation is when body is bought as a kit with a
consumer zoom, and that zoom is never taken off the camera. Why buy a
camera with the ability to change lenses if that feature's never used?
Bigger negative, better flash, better
On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, Bob W wrote:
I rather like the allergy information printed on bags of nuts: Warning
- may contain nuts.
Yes, and underneath that a warning that it has been produced in a
facility that handles nuts...
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On Mon, 6 Nov 2006, Bruce Dayton wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0611/06110601nikond40.asp
It's really been designed for people who want to say they have a
Nikon, but don't really want to take any pictures. So anything that
can be removed, has been - lowers the
On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, Thibouille wrote:
Why not?
D70/D80 use electronic shutter (sensor) to achieve those speeds AFAIR...
Is that different to the technology employed by Pentax?
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, Adam Maas wrote:
Yes, it's a hybrid shutter
[explanation deleted]
Thanks Adam.
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Sun, 5 Nov 2006, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Re: Another Pentax Story
Well, I can't shoot underexposed to get darker images and darker
shadows as I've done in the past without incurring gobs of noise
that ruin the image.
A couple
On Mon, 6 Nov 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I posted a shot here a while back - Bette's Diner - in which I shot so far
to the right to the right that I literally had to paint in some highlight
details, yet the darker areas of the photo were still very noisy. This may
have been the result of
On Mon, 6 Nov 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I took the pic down but, for you, have just put it up again. You can see
all the noise in the dark apron and pants of the waitress, and the
muddiness in Zones 1,2, and perhaps 3.
http://home.earthlink.net/~ebay-pics/bkfast_at_bette's.html
Thanks
On Sun, 5 Nov 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
I'm interested in that psychological rift and how it affects the
experience and expression of photography. This says that I will most
likely dust off a couple of my remaining film cameras sometime soon
and explore the Rift.
Not sure you will
On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Brian Walters wrote:
Came across this on the Digihack site. Ugly but interesting. It even uses
an old Pentax AF 280T flashgun (think I've ot one lying around, somewhere)
http://www.dennisonbertram.com/hackmaster/2005/02/build-your-own-ring-flash.htm
Disconcerting
On Sun, 5 Nov 2006, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis
Subject: Re: Home made ring flash
http://www.dennisonbertram.com/hackmaster/2005/02/build-your-own-ring-flash.htm
Disconcerting weight on the mount...
Its a couple of peices of cardboard
Many thanks Ken. I am going through them slowly.
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, K.Takeshita wrote:
Dropped dust would be gathered on the adhesive tape placed below the
SR unit.
ANy idea if this will be (user) replaceable?
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, K.Takeshita wrote:
Q: What happens on dust gathered on adhesive sheet?
Oops, spoke too soon.
Specifically, in sensitivity priority mode, the sensitivity can be set at
either 1/3 step or 1/2 step by a wheel on the grip, and aperture and shutter
speed change accordingly.
On Thu, 2 Nov 2006, Amita Guha wrote:
On 11/1/06, Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Amita, as long as will *keep* posting *your* pictures to *this* list, I
shall not flame or blame...
Even if they're made with a Nikon? ;)
I don't think there is a limitation on the PAWs and PESOs. The
On Thu, 2 Nov 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Nov 2, 2006, at 1:46 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
The obvious difference between digital and film bodies is of course
with a digital body you are stuck with the sensitivity/capabilities of
the sensor for the lifetime of the camera whereas for
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006, Paul Stenquist wrote:
135 Kodak TMZ 3200: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=800895
Extemely interesting picture, but I have to concentrate on the subject
at hand. How much (if any) of the grain comes from the scanning? How
much (if any) from the
Thanks Ken!
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006, Markus Maurer wrote:
Will I be able to use an Pentax AF280T or AF400T flash in auto mode only on
the new Pentax digital bodies or should TTL work? The same question for my
Metz flashes with 372 module...
The story is a bit complicated and I should not get it wrong.
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, K.Takeshita wrote:
Imagine what might happen if BH (i.e., the U.S.) are allowed to sell the
new products one month earlier than anyone else. There would be a lot of
unhappy/angry importers, some of whom might even refuse to buy Pentax in the
future?
Esp. with the
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Adam Maas wrote:
It also focuses much closer (28cm instead of 50cm).
Yes, of course, it's a 45, not a 90 at the long end.
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006, Markus Maurer wrote:
Maybe I can disable Preflash on the Pentax D to be able to trigger some old
slave Osram flashes with the build in flash,
Check the manual very carefully. I would absolutely *not* take such
functionality for granted.
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006, Bob W wrote:
Try coke some time. It's the real thing.
Nah, too many bubbles...
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Cotty wrote:
XXX may be a nutty distant cousin to the devil, but YYY is no angel
IMO.
Come on folks, what kind of crap is that.
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, John Celio wrote:
They had money to burn, but the
way I saw it, they were too greedy to pay for the services I/we provided.
How many of them used the service? How many had already done the
research, asked for specific items then asked to pay?
wanted to punch them in the
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Scott Loveless wrote:
Give Kostas a break. He's good people. ;)
Thanks Scott. Forbes goes straight to /dev/null anyway.
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, mike wilson wrote:
If you can afford a holiday in Switzerland from America, the last thing you
will worry about is saving $100 or so on the price of a camera.
Gentlemen,
Two words: business trips.
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On Tue, 24 Oct 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
A 35/1.4 is such a perfect focal length/aperture combination. I've wanted
such a lens from Pentax for years.
Well, you had that (if we are talking FOV). It's not going to be FF,
so, if it happens, it's a direct replacement for the K/M/A/F/FA
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, David Savage wrote:
Wouldn't work for me, Switzerland is land locked so I wouldn't imagine
it has a big shipbuilding industry.
Let me entertain you: they even have military navy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Switzerland#Naval_Patrol
Kostas (as the article
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, Lucas Rijnders (Priv?) wrote:
More to the point: Boz lists details for an M35/1.4. When compared to the
M50/1.4 you see three more elements, two more groups, more complicated
construction, much larger and almost twice as heavy...
Things have moved on since then, I am
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, Jack Davis wrote:
Appreciate it, Ken. My slight concern has been that it makes the scene
somewhat heavy on the left.
I like the tree on the left. Framing and another piece of information.
Kostas
Jack
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A wonderful capture Jack, but I
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
The Canon 85/1.2L is a superb lens ... not that I think it's better
than the FA77, but it is quite comparable at least in sharpness from
my short experience using one.
What is the open-aperture difference of these lenses, 1 stop (at
1.2!)? Can you
Got them both :-)
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Tue, 24 Oct 2006, P. J. Alling wrote:
At about $1.25 to to the euro, that's not that amazing a price. Once
you add in the taxes...
The comparison is with France (cheapest stated so far) for us
Europeans (830 vs 650+taxes Euro). But I think customs come into play
when buying from
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, J and K Messervy wrote:
They should have anticipated the demand. Anyone could see a body with those
specs for that price would be in high demand.
Their problem was that they *had* to announce at Photokina. The
development slipped a little, so everything slipped a little.
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, Jaume Lahuerta wrote:
So, regarding your latest coments on the K10D, don't forget to take
it with yout in your next visit to Barcelona...
Err, I am well pleased for Pentax and for all you happy people
with preorders and intentions to buy it. The K10D is going to be
one
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, J and K Messervy wrote:
have it in my hands before 13 Dec as I'll be going with a bunch of mates to
a local racetrack where I'll be using it to take shots of them circulating
on their motorbikes. The DL's autofocus will be hopeless for that.
Being conservative by nature,
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, P. J. Alling wrote:
How many people
actually wade through the entire manual, except for the anal retentives
on this list, that is.
What a load of bollocks. So (forget Pentax, K lenses and the rest for
now) it's the company's fault that the user can't be arsed to read the
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, Toine wrote:
You probably also want matrix metering with M lenses?
Yes, it actually is possible, or at least it was with the film bodies,
with the modification Mark Roberts and others have made to their
lenses. But, as we have said in a different thread, Pentax won't tell
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote:
I suspect you are pretty close to accurate. I also suspect that Pentax
will, if this scenario plays out, make a larger throated mount with the
same registration distance to allow adapted K mount lenses to function
via a non optical adaptor.
Or maybe
On Sun, 22 Oct 2006, P. J. Alling wrote:
William Robb wrote:
Use A series lenses or later rather than 30 year old outdated equipment.
Simple.
Once again, why?
Because money (which makes the world go round, lest we forget) is no
issue.
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Oct 20, 2006, at 8:52 AM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
On the ethical side and comparison with Canon that we discussed
yesterday, the bottom-line is that Canon users got something from the
change of register (let alone mount). Pentax users got
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, P?l Jensen wrote:
If it cost $5 and you sell a million cameras thats five million.
Wow! So if they sold 2 million cameras it would be 10 million! Think
of all the savings they could make if they did not manufacture
cameras!
This feature, like all others, has been and
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, John Celio wrote:
P.S.: It's my birthday today, JCO, so be nice.
HB John. Hope a nice job comes your way real soon now.
Kostas (whose good mate's bd is also today :-))
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis
Subject: Re: The JCO survey
Are you suggesting that you are using all the features of each of your
cameras? If not, please don't isolate the particular artifact in your
(non) quest
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Gasha wrote:
Yesterday i mounted my old screwmount 300/4.5 lens using M39-M42-K
adapters...metered 1/15 shutter speed wide open. And did some tests,
while watching TV.
Wow! Results are impressive. I got 1 good shot, and 1 very sharp one.
Others were blurry. I noticed
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote:
Why do you think Pentax should cater to people who don't buy new
product, thereby supporting them and their dealers?
Because by buying your used lens I am giving you money to buy a new
one. Isn't this why you are selling?
You say they have removed
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis
Subject: Re: The JCO survey
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote:
Why do you think Pentax should cater to people who don't buy new
product, thereby supporting them and their dealers
On Wed, 18 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote:
Truthfully, it's like asking Pentax to put an aperture cam follower onto
a DSLR. The big difference between Canon and Pentax regarding this is
that it's recent history with Pentax.
I cannot see how an aperture cam removal is the same as a register
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote:
Had Canon so desired, they could have left the register distance alone,
and it should have allowed adapting FD lenses to EOS cameras, though the
lenses themselves may have needed modification.
It's a pretty simple concept to get ones head around.
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, Vic MacBournie wrote:
K100 f2.8
K105 or M100?
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, Joseph Tainter wrote:
What I mean by Pentax guys is the employees of the national/regional
importers, like Pentax USA. The ones from Pentax USA usually disclose
little, but others are not so reticent.
What this means is that Doug's statement below does not highlight an
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006, Joseph Tainter wrote:
This moire business is starting to get my attention. Four K10D images
downloaded today, four images producing noticeable moire. I don't see
such problems with images from my *istD.
Are you shooting JPG on the -D? I am not a digi-man (because I don't
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006, P. J. Alling wrote:
I think you're being too complicated. How about this. Call it auto
stop down compensation
A very good use of the information already there (open-aperture
metering is happening anyway, I presume).
Nice one P.J.
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
No extra dials or buttons to press. If you change the aperture you get
instant exposure compensation.
I hadn't thought of it being used like that. It's pretty slick
though... set a baseline aperture and then +- a little could be done
with
On Wed, 18 Oct 2006, Jan van Wijk wrote:
I have this lens for sale now (225 Euros :-) and got the Samsung 50-200mm
instead (just 149 Euros) which does a lot better sofar (just got it this
week).
Interesting! Why the Samsung?
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
Of course it's academic since it's not an option with the current
firmware, but I don't think it would be too bad. The +-EV only works
within 3 EV from wide open, and even then you have to do the math of how
many stops you are from wide-open.
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
I still think that's more confusing than what I'm thinking.
All I am saying is that what you are thinking is confusing
(user-unfriendliness is what I have experienced) and will not solve
the problem.
How exactly do you get 6 EV?
The
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis
Subject: Re: K1D aperature simulator survey, part Deaux
I haven't read a workaround from either of you that is as workable and
user freindly as what is implemented now.
Don't know about Cory
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
Seriously though... like I said before, these could be added in
*addition* to the GB hack.
In terms of economics, how would your suggestions stack up compared to
putting the bloody thing in?
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006, Cory Papenfuss wrote:
Then it would be equivalent to Av mode on an 'A' lens. You'd just
have to remember to change the in-body set aperture with the aperture ring
if you changed that.
To me that would be an improvement that could be added in addition
to the
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006, Digital Image Studio wrote:
The 22 bit ADC will
primarily be resolving random noise in the 6 to 7 bits, in other words
when combined with this sensor it's sheer overkill.
What is the penalty to the user from the overkill?
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006, John Celio wrote:
This is a call for everyone to just shut the f*ck up
Since you put it so nicely, I will go out of my way. You are such a
motivator.
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
101 - 200 of 2070 matches
Mail list logo
