Not only did my first shots disappoint me, but way too many of my current shots do.
And that's not because I'm more critical, AFAIK. On the other hand, sometimes the
PhotoGods are with me and I snag a good 'un. From my point of view, Pentax
Photography
(and there is no other, I AM a Mild Bigot)
Boris,
You worry too much about progress. Digital Cams have a LOT of problems.
Tried them, don't like them. Most are still toys.
Give it 5 years, ok? Grin.
Lon
Boris Liberman wrote:
Hi!
In my personal humble opinion the question of fate of film is more of
philosophical than of
The M 100 4 Macro is a fairly small puppy.
This fact alone is worth keeping it, IMHO.
Got it, love it.
-Lon
Heiko Hamann wrote:
Hi akozak,
on 09 Dec 02 you wrote in pentax.list:
Interesting. According too many users K105 is much better.Maybe you had
bad lens, difficult to say. Even on
This is a long way of saying Win: Good for #$%* databases.
Mac: Good for pix.
Lon, who uses a PC these days, but is getting steadinly feebler.
Is there such a word as feebler?
T Rittenhouse wrote:
Ahh Windows 95 and up ships with Kodak Professional Color Management. In
98 and up it is
You cain't. Some programs read the profile, some can not.
OTOH, I feel like posting pix on the web is kind of like taking
art in 2nd grade. What? Dammit, Lon, you've gone outside the
lines. I'm gonna call your Momma.
Thankfully, my momma had and has bigger fish to fry.
-Lon
William Robb
Boris is cool.
-Lon
frank theriault wrote:
Hi, Boris,
You'll fit in nicely here! vbg
cheers,
frank
Boris Liberman wrote:
snip
Sorry, I am getting wordy again.
---
Boris Liberman
--
The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist fears
Use da old nice K55 with a Kbody and open up the other eye.
About the same thru the lens and in the left eye. I'm sure
some photographers find this useful. I do on occasion, which
is why the 55 is my standard carry-around lens with a KX.
John Daniele wrote:
What are the advantages of 55mm
From what I've heard about panorama stitching, using wides is a _bad_
idea, because edge distortion makes overlapping tough. Use something
like a 100mm. This requires taking more photos, but the stitching is
apparently much easier. Mind, I've not done this, just read about it.
-Lon
Michel
I'd bet the Pentax 100/3.5 macro is the best of the Cosina
rebadges for Kmount because:
a) it focuses the right way
b) it has SMC.
We have three Phoenix 100mm/f3.5 macros in the household
They're sharp, but they focus the wrong way, and flare
is noticable in the viewfinder. Their only advantage
I'm gonna reply, but not about astrophotography.
I have two mirror lenses, both 500mm f8: Lentar and
Spiratone. the Spiratone is much smaller than the Lentar.
I shoot the Lentar a lot. It is not a good lens, particularly
with regard to contrast. But it _is_ a 500 and it was cheap.
I've found
Christian, I've been thinking hard about buying an Optio.
Give us a lenghty considered review, please. I'll be hanging
onto the edge of my seat til I see it! - the review, that is.
-Lon
Christian Skofteland wrote:
I have an Optio 330 and think it's just great. Small size, CF, good optical
Good to have you back, Mr. Owens.
Mark Roberts wrote:
Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We finally got our electric power back late yesterday, after 5 days without.
Thank you Alabama Power, one of the many out of state companies who have
come to North Carolina to help restore some sense
How? Really Big Hammer? I expect not, but share.
-Lon
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
Forget it.
I got it to work.
Collin
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:47:45 -0500
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Collin Brendemuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: KAF forced focus movement
How can I FORCE (by pin
If you do a group shot of two people, shoot twice as many shots
as you think you should. By the time you get to 12 people, a roll
or two is in order. God I hate group shots.
-Lon
Dan Scott wrote:
On Tuesday, December 10, 2002, at 12:00 PM, Michael Cross wrote:
On Saturday evening,
I'm by Gawd gonna name the next cat I find on my doorstep
Wheatfield. I like the sound of it grin.
No offense, Mr. Robb, you are a favorite of mine here.
-Lon
David Brooks wrote:
As far as the PDML goes, Bill,same old,same old:)
However we did get a new kitten.Not sure if we should name
Subject says it all.
-Lon
Greywolf,
I always thought the people who have done it for years
were here to help relative beginners like me. That may
not be true, but I do sense giving back in here, and
it has helped me greatly.
Your posts, included.
-Lon
T Rittenhouse wrote:
There is something to be said for what you
GreyWolf is BACK, dammit. lol
-Lon
T Rittenhouse wrote:
As I recall, we went though this what is a professional camera thing about a
year ago, and hashed it out pretty thorouhly. Then I asked how we define an
amatuer camera. No one was interested. So I will give the definative answer
to
Good FOR YOU!. We all know that EOS really stands for
Elitist Other Snot. Grin. I've never cared to air my boogers in
public. The SMC 135 is a gem. So is the M 50 1.4. They
are both better lenses than I am a photographer, and I pack
both of these lenses most of the time.
-Lon
Pascal
I'd go Olympus, or mebbe Nikon.
This thread should flare on for a while.
-Lon
Mark, I've been called damned in the past,
but never lovable.
I like this group. grin.
Mark Roberts wrote:
Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark wrote:
...via Mike Johnston's column, of course:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-12-09.shtml
A pity though that
Get two AF280s and the wide telephoto attachemnts.
Covers 90 percent of what you need once you strap on
flashes and become a point/shoot person. Just my opinion,
and you should know I've been known to study an available
light photo on a tripod for 30 minutes and get a crappy shot.
lol.
Lon
I have an iteresting isertion here. My wife does not contribute
to PDML. When she has a technical question, she asks me, and I supply
for the most part, a PDML-approved answer. She's good. She doesn't
sweat the details. She does, however, work hard at composition and
decisive moment. She
Rubenstein has long been a thorn in the side to those folks here,
me included, who happily shoot Pentax. I don't kill-file him because
he's an outside force. Mebbe an outside farce. Can't make up my
mind. But, the prevailing winds here obviously rub him the wrong way.
I think he's prolly
Scott, I don't have a good 2xTC, so this is the opinion of
the poor folk. I do have a Tamron 2x (4 element) and a Tokina
2x (7 element) and the Vivitar. I'd pick the Vivitar any day
of the week. The built-in extension is useful, and it's well
made, and it gives me pleasing shots.
-Lon
Scott
I wrote in Access for a year or two.
It started me drinking.
Cheap.
Anyone got some MD20-20?
Herb Chong wrote:
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is a long way of saying Win: Good for #$%* databases.
Mac: Good for pix.
it's not even that good for databases, at least
Blobs are for idiots. I should know.
I'm a blob and an idiot.
-Lon
Kevin Waterson wrote:
This one time, at band camp,
jcoyle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Herb, which program is that? I have written one using the Jet engine and it
is lightning fast on it's data management: loads new
What's the trick?
I've been belaying purchases of Epsons because
of the smart carts.
Mark Roberts wrote:
Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ann, I've been using an Epson Stylus Photo for about 4+ years and run the
printer till it will no
Show me a place that cannot be beautiful to photograph, and I'll
eat my shorts.
Herb Chong wrote:
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The trick is not to get so burned out doing the stuff that pays that
you have no motivation to do the stuff you love.
tv
editorial stock
The lever on the front does DOF. Looking at the front, from the front,
a counter-clockwise twist cocks the timer and exposes the little pin that
starts the timer buzzing. But twist that lever clockwise and the lens will
stop down.
Steve Pearson wrote:
I have read that the MX has a depth of
Pentax has almost all manuals for bodies
on the US site in PDF format.
Steve Pearson wrote:
Lon:
It works! I knew somebody out there in Pentax land
would know the answer real quick. Now if I could only
find a manual, online or to purchase?
Thanks
--- Lon Williamson [EMAIL
Scott brings up a point that puzzles me mightly, having invested in
a scanner and a low-end inkjet: Print longevity. Just visited
Wilhelm and they have an article about the new HP 5550 ($149, 6 ink,
8x10 no bleed): Wilhelm claims this thing, on HP premium paper and
behind glass, is good for
I could always cribble on this: I tie flies in there
for flyfishing, so a nice macro of a bluegill bug
might be in order. Fly shots are boring, though...
-Lon
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
Herb Chong wrote:
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Smells like a challenge has been
If anyone needs to use a small extension tube, note this:
the Pentax K tube set is cheaper than the KA, and the smallest
tube on the K set is smaller than the smallest tube on the KA
set. The K tubes do not couple aperature, but my guess is this
doesn't matter on a bellows.
-Lon
[EMAIL
Well, I finally submitted my first shot ever to PUG.
Did NOT shoot something in my computer room, apologies
to Herb. Decided the first one should be with a Pentax
body and Pentax 50mm lens, a standard setup.
Lordy lord, this is the first time my stuff's been seen
outside the family. I'm
And, gathering from what I read here:
Flash will not fire if the LX thinks it can do
the exposure without flash.
Sticky mirror would not have been a complaint
when the LX was released, at least, I hope not.
-Lon
Pål Jensen wrote:
Mark wrote:
It's a pity the PDML didn't exist when the LX
If I had to guess, I'd say the average USA Pentax enthusiast got the
camera and lens as a gift and uses it 3 times a year. I don't think
that fits this group.
Lon
frank theriault wrote:
Even if they do monitor us once in a while, or even all the time, I can't
believe that they put much
Focal was a re-marketer back then. I remember this
brand, as until recently I has a Focal table top
tripod. The ballhead finally disintegrated on it.
-Lon
Kevin Waterson wrote:
I just picked up a few lenses from a sale..
Sigma Zoom Auto Focus 75-300 f4.5-5.6 Multi Coated
PK mount 28mm
I've had good luck with the Pacific Image 36000Pro,
but I have not used any other scanner. Apparently
much that's in my scanner was used in the Kodak
36000. The Pacific Image is typically below $500
mail order. One plus: The SilverFast folks make
a driver for the PIE unit, but I've not
The Pacific Image models do whole strip scanning,
and I do NOT recommend this option, at least on
PIE units, for two reasons:
a) dust collects on that large part of the roll left
dangling out of the unit for a long time while the scans
are made.
b) I've not seen my unit deal with a roll keeping
And, Brad, these contacts can sometimes fail to work.
Cleaning them by rubbing briskly with a clean cloth,
therefore doing a gentle burnish, might help.
Shaun Canning wrote:
Brad,
All 'A' series lenses feature the contacts to transmit lens information
to the body of suitable cameras
I've been working on a theory the last few years that digital technology
has only 3 widespread effects:
a) slowing things down for the consumer or hands-on worker
b) making things unnecessarily complicated for the consumer or hands-on worker
c) saving corporations money
And mind you, I programmed
I _like_ it, but that fly is about as big as a turkey buzzard.
-Lon
Cotty wrote:
I'm spending this week working in a lab that has digital to
photo paper printing capability.
What a gong show.
First, there seems to be no standards in the industry, and we
are being asked to support 3
Christian,
I use the third party cord others have mentioned and a gizmo that
tilts the flash. I mount the cord on the hotshoe, then the gizmo,
then the other end of the cord, then the flash (usually a TTL lighter
than the AF280T) on the gizmo.
This puts the flash higher and you can tilt the
How rare is this particular zoom?
I've got the A 35-70 F4, and third party
zooms that handle 70 to 300, and am thinking
about buying this particular M series lens
to round out the zooms.
Is it seen regularly on Ebay?
Comments as to quality?
Thanks,
Lon
If you want just macro, the 100-ish lenses that go
to half life size are _much_ smaller and lighter than
their f2.8/full-life-size equivalents.
If I'm in a roaming macro kind of mood, my 100mm f2.8
full-life-size macro stays home!
-Lon
Ivan Prenosil wrote:
Hello Pentaxians,
I desperately
I think my Gossens are the regular Pilot: don't need batteries.
Despite being old, they're all within a half-stop of each other,
and meter about like my TTL meters do.
They're not good in dim light. Didn't Gossen market some Pilots
that required a battery and were more sensitive?
-Lon
frank
I've heard of people cutting diaphragms of black paper
to increase DOF on mirror lenses. Ain't something I'm ever
going to mess with, though. And I used the built-in ND filters
on one of my mirror lenses for exactly _one_ shot so far; I
could certainly live with a mirror lens that left this
It is also _very_ hard to do. That guy had a magic finger.
How to see the approach of a composition is beyond me.
I have found that motor drives don't help; that revelation
didn't surprise me much. Using a motor drive is like using
a shotgun to hit a BB.
-Lon
T Rittenhouse wrote, in part:
Message
From: Lon Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:34:22 -0500
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: What will i need for this
The Super Program does have a PC socket, located in roughly
the same place that KX/KM/K1000 do.
-Lon
William Robb wrote
Well, Lon has read all the drivel on all the websites
he could find about inkjet printers and decided to ask
Santa for an HP5550 for Christmas to augment
the Lexmark, which has taken a sound trouncing from almost
all reviewers regarding photo quality. And, Wilhelm
slams Lexmark longevity while
Welcome to PDML, where the men are particular, the women are strong,
and the lenses are all above average.
-Lon
Altaf Shaikh wrote:
I just wanted to introduce myself and say happy holidays. I noticed a
great many of you signing up to http://www.usefilm.com, where I am the
moderator and
Lon.
No cap but no big deal.
I found on Henry's web site the F and FG adaptor for Pentax.I assume
i'll need one or the other.I remember some posts stating a P5 or
something like that for the sync cord.Am i close.?
Dave
Begin Original Message
From: Lon Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED
And here's what's wrong with it: It's a knuckle-bruising
finger bleeder. The centerpost is too long. I use mine,
but prefer the Slik 300 DX (not the flimsier 330) for
everything but telephoto work. If I were 5' 2, eyes
of blue the 300 would be my only tripod. -Lon
Jostein wrote:
Cotty,
The MX may have this problem, but remember it is a fully
manual camera. Use a brimmed hat to set exposure, and then
do anything you want. Nothing will change once you set
aperature and shutter. Not a big deal, as far as I'm
concerned.
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From:
Ummm, are you shooting at a speed faster than a 60th of a second?
That's your top speed for flash on a K1000.
william Donovan wrote:
HELLO- I AM NEW TO THISWELL BEEN 25 YEARS OR SO AND THIS PENTAX K1000 IS
CAUSING ME A PROBLEM ONLY WHEN USING FLASH, IT CUTS OUT-OVER EXPOSES THE
LEFT HAND
Then your shutter needs a CLA. It's no longer accurate.
Try 1/15 or 1/30 and see if they work.
william Donovan wrote:
hI- IT WAS SET ON 60X--LOOKS TO ME LIKE A LEAK SOME WERE. A STRAIGHT LINE
AND BLACK ON ONE SIDE OF PRINT LIKE OVER EXPOSED---THE PIC I UPLOADED WAS
SCANNED ON A SCANNER AND
Sorry about the MX. The general feeling around here is
that used MXen have often really been USED... a lot.
-Lon, who has been luckier buying MXen but will not buy
them sight unseen. I like to fondle before purchasing.
No smart remarks, please grin.
Bob Keefer wrote:
Hi folks:
Well,
Birdees with a mirror lens is a crap shoot: Them critters twitch
and bounce too much. A mirror lens, is, however, workable on bunnies
and critters like them that tend to freeze.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 12/24/2002 6:49:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Boris, there is no discernable mark on the eyecup. I purchased
it from EBay, and just looked through my EBay mail folder and
was unable to find the seller's name. I _seem_ to recall that
the seller was a photo dealer, not an individual. The eyecup
is round and came with a built-in rectangular
Respectfully disagree. The web is huge, learning what's available
and what's not is a frightening waste of time. Seeing what you
need on Ebay for a few bucks can be worthwhile even if free elsewhere.
-Lon
Gary L. Murphy wrote:
On Wed, 25 Dec 2002 22:07:15 -0500, Paul Stenquist wrote:
:
G'day,
Alright thanks for sharing that bit of information. One question though, since it's
round, doesn't it block the back-cover?
Rod.
- Original Message -
From: Lon Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2002 4:33 PM
Subject: Re
Hey! I don't remember BR annointing you with that title!
Doug Brewer wrote:
Sorry I took a couple days off for Christmas. I'll try to do better next holiday.
Doug
useless bastard list guy
The KX manual makes no mention of this, but since the metering
is center-weighted, one function of that circle may be to point
out the center that is weighted. I have also noticed that paying
attention to that outer circle helps focus when the center aid
conks out in low light, especially with
I've certainly seen paper make a difference.
Spent yesterday trying to find HP Premium Plus paper
to no avail. I'm not going to give up on the HP. It
wasn't awful, I'm just surprised the Lexmark held its
own. More evaluation awaits HP paper (which the Lexmark
does cheerfully print on, but I'm
Mark, I've found that covering the print with copier paper from
the middle of the pack is a good way to keep dust from binding
to a print that comes out wet. I take it off after about 15
minutes.
Mark D. wrote:
One thing I noticed is that the prints take a while to
dry and with gather dust in
Dec 2002 at 10:05, Lon Williamson wrote:
And here's what's wrong with it: It's a knuckle-bruising
finger bleeder. The centerpost is too long. I use mine,
but prefer the Slik 300 DX (not the flimsier 330) for
everything but telephoto work. If I were 5' 2, eyes
of blue the 300 would
dust from it?
You don't weigh it down at all, just cover it, right?
Good idea.
keith whaley
Lon Williamson wrote:
Mark, I've found that covering the print with copier paper from
the middle of the pack is a good way to keep dust from binding
to a print that comes out wet. I take
Damn Gfen, you're too OLD to learn anything, as am I.
LOL. Merry Christmas (post) to you and yours.
-Lon, who ain't learned nothin useful in years.
gfen wrote:
On 27 Dec 2002, Heiko Hamann wrote:
The Optio 330RS/430RS are the successors of the Optio 330/430 and are
very similar. The GS
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: Lon Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 8:52 AM
Subject: Re: OT: Tripod recommendations please
Rob, do you find using the plate a pain?
I do. I asked at my local store
Yeah, most of what I've read says to let them dry 24 hours
before framing. But I find that the wetness that attracts
and glues down dust is purty much over by 15 minutes on
most paper. Your milage may vary
-Lon
Mark D. wrote:
--- Lon Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark, I've found
I remember an article in Sci American spoofing numerology.
The author investigated the Washington Monument, had phun
with numbers, and ended up proving it an alien spaceship
direction marker of some sort
-Lon
Keith Whaley wrote:
Regardless of who said it, or who believes it, I propose the
If 35mm is so dominant, why don't we see paper readily available in the same
1:1.5 proportions?
frank theriault wrote:
Hi, Keith,
I agree with both you and Dr. Williams.
But, (it must be that I'm a Libra - hey aren't the zodiac signs Greek?) let me
play devil's advocate here.
The
I thought that RC in Bogen speak was resin coated or resin composite =
the ball doesn't look like metal.
Cotty wrote:
I'm not keen on the RC facility though
(308RC) as I tend to mount the camera on the sticks and that's it - it
stays like that until I'm done for that session. I guess
By all means, Boris
Grin. I find I can help so rarely in here that
when I can, I go overboard. Wifey, BTW, _loves_
her ZX-L. Even the complications (lotsa stuff for
a mid-to-low-level cost).
Listen to Boris. He SHOOTS with it.
Boris Liberman wrote:
May I say a word, though you turn
Sigh. Wrong again Robb.
We see, therefore we SMC.
On topic to boot. HAR!
Grin. -Lon
William Robb wrote:
We see, therefore we describe.
The list is embroiled in Math, Ratios, and Golden Waddayacallits
at the moment, but I have a suggestion about your Spottie.
Find some ole guy in your area that knows mechanical cameras,
and thinks that the invention of Aperature Priority was the beginning
of insanity.
In Cincinnati, there are two
Ummm.. nevermind.
-Lon
John Coyle wrote:
Which is exactly why, a couple of years ago, we had a thread on the utility of
DOF and I said then I thought it a waste of time on 35mm cameras. If you think
you can judge depth of field accurately when you're stopped way down, as one
usually is shooting macro, I believe,
Sandmann, Silke wrote:
Is it right, that the 28:70 is adviseable? What about the telephoto lens?
I am grateful for any advises of you experienced Pentax user. I mean,
everybody has started ..
Any coments are appreciated.
I suggest, if you're going with prime (not zoom) lenses, to
David Hatfield wrote, in part:
Shel - I don't care what anybody says, I don't think you look anything
like Hannibal Lecter.
Damn straight, Dave. Shel does not look like Hannibal. Rather, it is
Hannibal who looks like Shel. grin.
-Lon
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.
Chris Brogden wrote:
snip
I'm not condemning zooms... I'm just thinking about the style of shooting I
tend toward when using them.
Tom C.
There is a practical money side to zoom vs. prime,
particularly PENTAX.
If you own any K-mount body except a few (ZX30 and 50?),
you have a treasure
Bill Robb wrote, in part:
Outback is a desciptive term of anywhere in Australia where there is -- err
u, well nothing really. If you can find a big city (any city will do) on the
map of Australia, that aint the outback. Pretty much everywhere else is. We've
got it in spades, your friends
Karasch, John wrote:
What's the PDML Handbook?
The PDML handbook is an edited version
of Bill Cassleberry's posts here.
You must be willing to use Spotmatic
lenses, on, say, a SuperProgram to
understand it. It helps if you know
what a BOW WOW lens is.
-ok ok ok ok, a little more accurate:
Rob Geraghty wrote, in part:
So far, the Pentax f3.5 100mm lens and the Pentax f1.7 50mm lenses look like
good value. Maybe for wide angle, the Pentax f2.8 28mm or f2 24mm?
I have the Phoenix-labled 100mm f3.5, and consider it quite good for the
money. You might want to know, should you
Knut Knut wrote:
Looking at the availlable prime lenses I noticed that these are extremely
closely spaced from ultra wide to 55mm, but then there is a jump, for most
producers (Canon, Nikon) straight to 85mm, Pentax to 77mm:
Availlable for PK:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello All!
You go away for a little while and...
*You actually retire ( take Social Security because you're finally 62).
*You stop taking assignments of any kind-from anybody.
*You decide to sell all your manual gear because you simply can't see to
focus
David A. Mann wrote:
I wonder how much the stability problems depend on drivers, hardware etc.
The thing is, nobody knows. We've had a pile of anecdotal evidence
about
Windows the last 24 hours or so.
I've been programming PC's since before the original IBM-PC. The only
thing
my brain
John Mustarde wrote:
Nah, I can't stand wide angles like 2400mm. I hook up the 1.4 XL, Viv
Macro, and Kiron to the 600/4 for a moderate telephoto of 3360mm, then
go to the edge by adding my Tokina 2x to get to 6720mm.
Problem is, even with my tripod cemented to bedrock, there's too much
Mike Johnston wrote, in part:
As Mike Perham points out, the longer the focal lengths, the less difference
a few millimeters makes. So nobody who shoots with a 400mm, for instance,
feels a burning need to cover the 450mm focal length.
Thoughtful post. On the other hand, I ain't paying a
Ed wrote, in part:
-- by light falloff you mean that the light is more intense
at the center than the edges, correct?? What causes that and
how do you correct for it?
As mentioned already by Shel, yes this appears as a hot spot in the
center and less light at the corners. Of course,
Michael Perham wrote:
I would try at least an 800 ASA film or even Fuji's new 1600 Superier.
I tried a roll over the weekend but think I will stick with the 800
which seems significantly less grainy. Also I find a monopod much more
versatile than a tripod for this kind of thing ...I
I shoot mostly negative film, and I've been using exclusively
Kodak Gold, in speeds 100, 200, and (Max from here to end) 400,
800.
The folks I take my film to print on Kodak paper, and they tell
me they generally see better results with Kodak film. And yes,
it's a one hour place.
What did
William Robb wrote:
I think upgrades in equipment are inevitable. When I
started out in photography, I bought Olympus, then upgraded to
Nikon, then upgraded again to Pentax.
Nice couple of sentences there. Mr. Robb has his upgrade
ducks in a row. -Lon
-
This message is from the
Cotty wrote:
Can anyone tell me what 'Second Curtain' sync is when referring to flash
gun technology? I've seen it readily advertised with new units - however
not with mf LX/MX and AF280T mutant.
Second curtain synch means the flash is fired just before the second
curtain
closes. The idea
Paris, Leonard wrote:
I don't doubt it a minute. My lame little example used two identical flash
units and a neutral density filter along with a camera that had a basic TTL
flash capability that triggers both flashes at the same time and then
quenches both of them at the same time, when
Mick Maguire wrote:
Well, I have tried pretty well every thing I can think of, scanning at
different resolutions, adjusting the dpi of the image from everywhere
between 150 and 1200 dpi and the results always seem to be about the same.
The printer driver is set to Best quality and the paper
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, let's try this. By the time I actually reretired, I was shooting 28-30
keepers per roll. In my business, maybe 2 of them would be chosen: one for
newspaper/magazine publication, the maybe the writer (if not myself).
Keepers to us though is just so much trash to
aimcompute wrote:
I find that I usually need to print more than once or twice, before I get
something decent. So it's sort of like printing everything anyway by the
time I get done. I have one of those two-year old antiquated Epson 800's.
Anybody want to make a blanket statement about
William Robb wrote, in part:
The Max 400-7 and 800-3 has cured a lot of the problems that the
Max film exhibited.
Regarding price point, where I am, Fuji and Kodak cost the same.
I suspect that in the USA, if Fuji tried to sell Superia for
significantly less than what Kodak is selling Gold
1 - 100 of 881 matches
Mail list logo
