Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
Change never occurs in a vacuum, on its own, without external stimuli.
Hmm.. No one has ever attributed particle decomposition (half life) to
external stimuli.
In fact, because of its Gaussian nature, it appears to happen literally
in a vacuum, or from within...
:)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
EVERY canon AF lens ever made will work on the EOS-10d if I understand
it correctly.
Nope, they just made a new lens esp for the 300D, that only works on
that camera. The 10D mirror would actually hit the optics on that lens.
I have the same lens, macro. What do you think of it?
rg
C or B Waters wrote:
I have a SMC-F 35-135 Macro lens and I think they made another that wasn't
macro.
Cory
- Original Message -
From: Ramesh Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 1:44 PM
Its a matter of coming out of the cave. Haven't you ever seen 2001 a
space odyssey? Technology moves forward, you adjust. Don't worry,
you'll get used to it...
:)
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 7 Oct 2003 at 23:03, Rob Brigham wrote:
Funny thing is, I moaned about not having body control on the
amortized their RD costs so
that they can balance the benefits/costs better and come out ahead.
:)
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 7 Oct 2003 at 17:49, Robert Gonzalez wrote:
A continuously variable, microprocessor operated aperture
control is a much more desirable form of adjustment.
Desirable
-Original Message-
From: Robert Gonzalez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 11:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Old lenses and *ist D
Continuously variable shutter speed was the first big advancement
Continuous variable aperture has always been possible. It's especially
easy to do with a Spot F with an analog needle meter. I've used it many
times when shooting evenly lit scenes, turn the aperture ring until the
needle is centered. It hardly ever happens on a particular f-stop detent.
Mark Roberts wrote:
Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Funny thing is, I moaned about not having body control on the MZ-S - but
I adjusted. Now I have to adjust back and have not found the transition
quite as easy in this direction. No problem though, I will cope - but
then I am lucky I
My 3nd question is what is the standard method of
doing the work today? Back then I supplied myself,
my equipment, and the blank film. I charged a flat price
for those items and turned over all exposed film. That
was it...My clients liked it as they just got standard
4x6 prints as proofs and
How bout:
Toyota - good value, reliable, nothing in the high end
Chevy - inexpensive, gets you there, conservative not innovative
Chrysler - never the leader, good mix of features but never outstanding
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
... which one would it be more like?
Jaguar -- Small, sleek, but not
Peter Alling wrote:
I have three things to say, if simpler is better 1.) Don't use
auto-focus don't use digital neither is simple. 2.) If you insist in
using a camera that sets exposures that are not guestimates then you
have one choice, the LX. Everything else is just that even your best
John Francis wrote:
Peter Alling wrote:
I have three things to say, if simpler is better 1.) Don't use
Actually they *did* have to write one piece of code - the piece that checks
to see if a pre-A lens is mounted, and won't trip the shutter unless the
appropriate Pentax function is set.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Francis wrote:
Actually they *did* have to write one piece of code - the piece that checks
to see if a pre-A lens is mounted, and won't trip the shutter unless the
appropriate Pentax function is set. But that's one small, simple piece of
code. Code to support
Send a note to ebay. There are rules against this.
Dr E D F Williams wrote:
I wrote a careful description for a Leitz Heine Phase Contrast condenser and
put it on eBay with a couple of pictures. I gathered all the information I
could find and did a good job of the text. But I withdrew the item
Very nice. Its good to see a pic from a non-A lens look so well on the *.
Bill Owens wrote:
Taken with a 100/4.0 M Macro in manual at f8, metered with handheld meter.
No manipulation other than resizing
http://groups.msn.com/BillOwensPhotos/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhotoPhotoID=41
Bill
:17, Robert Gonzalez wrote:
Very nice. Its good to see a pic from a non-A lens look so well on the *.
Not that I don't like the pic but hey you can tell jack * about a lens or just
about any other part of the system by viewing a 600x400 pixel image.
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell
Subject: RE: Fantastic *ist-D and Lenses
Many people have mentioned just using a hand held meter
intead of TTL. That will work a lot of the time, but
not with varible aperture zooms, and macro will also
get tricky
If he does not need the money, offer $300. The 28-80 is usually the kit
lens which is crap by Pentax's standards. I have one from a used
purchase and its noisy, got poor contrast/resolution, and it seems like
there are bearings on the inside that sound like they're going to fall
off any
Yea, I agree that it would be nice to make the aperture and speed dials
more analogish, the fixed position thing is really an artifact of
older technology and historical reference points. Someone is eventually
going to do this.
Juey Chong Ong wrote:
On 7/10/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
Precision camera in Austin. Where are you located?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Robert G posted:
I had my first look at a camera store near me and it looks
like a winner. Very light! But very solid.
Which camera store ...
?
Tell me about it. I buy high density polyethylene (HDPE) for fixtures
and jigs for my woodworking, and its mighty expensive stuff. I buy it
on ebay sometimes and machine it to the right dimensions. Its perfect
for stable, low friction applications though. Plastic comes in many
flavors!
Me and another guy here thought of this very thing as a viable
alternative to manufacturer software. Create open source based
on-camera and off-camera software that completely blows the socks off
the typical offerings. It would be in the camera makers best interest
to let this and make this
Makes you wonder if sooner or later they will probably be driven by a
linear or USM motor, with some type of feedback, like a shaft encoder or
similar. This would make it extremely precise and consistent. It might
actually be cheaper than a mechanical linkage, but it would necessitate
a
Here's a question. There is also noise reduction ala Neat Image. What
would you apply first, the noise reduction or sharpening? They somewhat
act against each other, but they are both useful.
Dario Bonazza 2 wrote:
Jostein,
I always apply USM at 100% magnification.
However, should you
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 13 Oct 2003 at 11:54, Robert Gonzalez wrote:
Me and another guy here thought of this very thing as a viable
alternative to manufacturer software. Create open source based
on-camera and off-camera software that completely blows the socks off
the typical offerings
I way I interpreted the photo.net explanation it sounds like the
magnification factor has an effect on the DOF. Since it takes more
magnification for a smaller sensor to fill the 8x10, the DOF will be
different. In what you are saying, it sounds like M, the magnification
factor is effectively
Dont check them!! The X-ray machines used in the baggage handling area
are *MUCH* more powerful, and will fog your film big time. Its better
to go through the walk through. If you carry them separate, they
usually will give you the courtesy of not passing them through the
smaller X-ray
Its hard to tell while I'm on my laptop, but it looks a tad underexposed
to me.
Cheers,
rg
Bill Owens wrote:
Just went out on the front porch and took this shot with the *istD.
Camera on manual, ISO200, f/11, 1/500 per Gossen Digisix meter.
Swet
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some of you were discussing the Lotus Elise a few days ago and I thought I'd
pass along that the US version is reviewed in this month's Road Track.
It's getting a new Toyota engine with 190 bhp and 133 lb.-ft of torque...
not bad for a car weighing in at 2K
John Francis wrote:
There are competing demands; to shrink the size of an individual sensor,
and to increase the precision of measurement (roughly corresponding to
bits per pixel). We're not at the technologically imposed limits yet,
but getting beyond the next generation or two is going to
Agreed, I meant to add that!
graywolf wrote:
Only if it cost $1500. If it cost $6000. Most of them would not be
bothered at all.
Robert Gonzalez wrote:
If (big IF) Pentax came out with a full frame, 14Mp, K/M compatible
camera next yaar, alot of *istD owners would feel their camera
If it went for the same price then as the aps do today, then maybe...
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Robert Gonzalez
Subject: Re: *ist D makes me cringe (was Pentax 6x7 in the rain)
If (big IF) Pentax came out with a full frame, 14Mp, K/M compatible
camera next yaar
That is incorrect. There are only 3Mp in green, 1.5Mp in Red, 1.5Mp in
Blue. They are interpolated to create 6Mp in RGB. That is why Foveon
claims that they actually have a 9Mp camera, because they have 3Mp in
red, 3Mp in Green, and 3Mp in blue. This is a slight exaggeration, but
goes
Not a Monarch. Would have to look it up though.
Beautiful image BTW, what camera, lens, settings, etc. did you use?
Thomas Haller wrote:
Hey does anyone know what kind of Monarch butterfly this is? It's been
hanging around my yard. I've never seen a wing pattern like this...
Sometimes that is due to the curvature of the slide itself. I have run
into this with some slides that were quite curved.
Fred wrote:
Sometimes the lens defects in the slide projector's lens can make
a good slide (taken with a good camera lens) look bad. So, do
you know for sure that the
Mark Erickson wrote:
All,
I was doing some still-life and macro shooting with my MZ-S this morning
with a couple of big lenses. I wanted to do some aperture bracketing to
experiment with different depths of field, and I caught myself wishing that
my MZ-S had an aperture wheel! Nutty, huh?
In
be able to do something. Hopefully the visibility of these
types of aberrations in digital will force manufacturers to produce
better lenses. :)
How bad have these aberrations shown up on your starkist?
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Robert Gonzalez
Subject: Re: What
It may be that CCD TV cameras can operate so fast because:
1. The res is not so high (800x600 or less)
2. It sends out the analog signal directly to the output without
conversion (A to D conversion is slow if you want good quality)
Since digital camcorders have to do a A/D conversion (lower
The ISO 800 and 1600 ones look worse than the 10D or *istD samples at
those ISOs I've seen. But they are different samples, so its unfair to
compare.
Alan Chan wrote:
Here are some SD10 samples I think are pretty good.
http://www.pbase.com/rickdecker
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
They produce their own, so they don't have to pay Sony any profit. Plus
its CMOS, which is a cheaper process.
J. C. O'Connell wrote:
That cant be right or CANON couldnt be selling
the 6Mpixel rebel digital for 999.99 retail.
JCO
Its about time. At least it got the highly recommended rating, not
that people pay that much attention anymore. The reviews have been
accused of being biased towards Canon.
Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote:
You should check dpreview - it's there!
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxistd/
Wow! My *istD just arrived. Got it plus FAJ 18-35 and the AF360FGZ
flash on eBay for $1575. I don't know how the guy could do it, but he
had overwhelmingly positive feedback, so I took a chance.
Will probably sell the 18-35, since I already have the Sigma 15-30,
which is fantastic. If
Where did you find the IR remote?
rg
alex wetmore wrote:
I'm getting a remote release for the *ist D and oddly the IR remote
seems to be less expensive than the cable remote. How does the IR
remote work with long exposures in the B mode? Is there any reason to
get the cable remote over the IR
envied LX owners, they're such nice cameras.
Cheers
rg
frank theriault wrote:
Congrats, Robert.
Ain't new toys fun?
vbg
cheers,
frank
The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer
From: Robert Gonzalez [EMAIL
Sorry if someone already answered this, I couldn't find it through a
quick search.
Anyone know of what file format the *istD supports? Any CF card 2Gb
must be backed up by FAT32 support.
Thanks,
rg
Thanks Cotty. I think I'll pass on the underwater idea, but I might
take it to a semiconductor fab room, I'll have to put on an Intel bunny
suit and all. ;)
rg
Cotty wrote:
On 5/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
I'm so freaked by the possibility of getting dust on the sensor that I
have
Or along graywolf's lines:
D'Hood, like I'm from D'Hood
John Francis wrote:
I still think it should be called, D'gang.
Full-starr'd knights? (with apologies to Walt Whitman)
I remember noticing this maybe 15 years ago. I just thought that I was
getting old, or that one eye was irritated. Apparently everyone has a
dominant eye, mine is my left eye, and it appears cooler than my right
eye, which does seem to have a noticeable warmer tint to it.
rg
graywolf wrote:
Do we know this for sure, i.e. times for individual events like
auto-focus, sensor-clear, etc., from some technical spec, or are we just
speculating?
John Francis wrote:
It keeps dust off the sensor during lens changes.
I expect point and shoots use non shutters, but their response times are
I like the Balveine double wood also, and the Cao'Ila (spell?) although
I haven't had that one for a while, its hard to find here. I definitely
have more bottles than camera gear. :(
John Francis wrote:
Oh yeah!
I agree on the Oban...
Of course, Dalwhinnie is right up there with the best, as
. :)
Herb Chong wrote:
you don't need to speculate and you don't need to read any specs. use a high
end PS digital camera and measure. everything other than AF time is too
small to measure reliably by a stopwatch run by a person.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Robert Gonzalez [EMAIL
cleaning. as for AF delay, take a picture in AF mode
and take picture in MF mode. that's all you need to know. anything else is
pure BS.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Robert Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2003 12:42 PM
Subject: Re: *ist D
of the delay. that is before even knowing that my
Nikon Coolpix 5000 can set exposure and take a picture in 55 ms after it has
focus locked.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Robert Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2003 4:08 PM
Subject: Re: *ist D and Flash
I'm not questioning anyone's measurements, as you pointed out, I get the
same thing. My original question was whether or not we had actual times
from some factual source or whether the times were being deduced,
hence speculation.
Here is an example of what I mean, taken from one of your
I've noticed that a few AF lenses that I was looking at in ebay went for
close to retail. Has anyone noticed this recently? I'm wondering
whether the release of the *istD is responsible for some of this.
For example, a recent auction of an FA* 80-200 2.8 went for almost
$1100, when you could
John Francis wrote:
Ah, but we *do* know for a FACT that the sensor is being cleared. The
sensor is used to provide live preview on the LCD display, and needs to
be cleared before being used to capture the real image.
Interesting. I know that it must clear the sensor array, that is a
given,
Dang. Where are you located? I'll take the Caol Ila and the Laphroig,
thank you. I can almost taste the briny sea air in the Caol Ila!
How 'bout Armagnacs, ever try those? Love them for a little relaxing
after dinner slow sipping drink.
rg
John Francis wrote:
I definitely have more bottles
:
On 10 Nov 2003 at 20:35, Robert Gonzalez wrote:
I asked about this in an earlier thread, and someone thought it came
with the camera. But I have not found anything like this either. I did
a test myself however, and was unable to find any hot or stuck pixels
on the sensor in the *istD sample I
Unfortunately, Pentax doesn't have the resources that Canon does, to
fabricate their own chips. Pentax is at the mercy of Sony. Since Sony
also provides the 6mp chips for Nikon, and Nikon is also creating their
own line of APS dedicated lenses, it appears that they also believe that
APS
in their
marketing plans for the 300D.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Robert Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 11:25 PM
Subject: Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
And Pentax may have made a mistake by not pricing the *istD more
aggressively
the caveat at the end.
graywolf wrote:
Ah yes, Pentax should sell the camera at a loss. A couple of hundred
dollars a camera is nothing to worry about. After all they can make it
up in film sales.
--
Robert Gonzalez wrote:
And Pentax may have made a mistake by not pricing the *istD more
graywolf wrote:
.Using the close focus portion of
my glasses gives me a crick in the neck (grin). The +2 also allows me to
focus with contacts.
And the nursing home guy can't help you with that?
;)
Exactly. And the main thrust of the current discussion centers around
getting the best possible image, which apparently Pentax's photo lab
does not deliver. Dario's comparison with the 300D proves that. The
Genzo Raw convertor's images look much sharper. I can't seem to find it
anywhere
Those IR shots are inspiring. I've gotta try one of those filters on my
*istD. Did you use a ring flash for the bug or just a regular flash?
I agree with you that the instant feeback is one of the greatest things
that digital has to offer. I played with the lighting setup for an ebay
sale
Great work on the *istD. I also have the epson 925. Had a little
trouble with it producing streaks. I think it gets clogged easily. I
like your review of the 3200 scanner. I'm looking for a scanner right
now to scan alot of Kodachrome slides, which seem to be really difficult
according to
For 21 pounds, I would not complain about much. The description lists
it as a 'Kiron'. So buyer beware...
Good luck :)
rg
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
Just bought this off ebay:
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
After lng negotiations with my wife (now I know why corruption
statistics in Poland are so bad ;-), I can finally go *istD too. Just before
I go and buy it, I would like to ask some questions to *istD brotherhood, as
I noticed some strange things testing *istD:
Herb Chong wrote:
well, i bought a Nikon 4000ED and i have done about 1000 scans with it so
far. every now and then, i wish i had bought the mounted slide feeder, but i
haven't, so i have to do it the hard way, one at a time. it takes about
40-50 mounted slides at once. i experimented some
Hi Tom,
I like your shots you posted here. Can you share the specifics so I can
learn a little? Were these shots with the *istD? What lens/aperture?
How did you do the lighting in this case, was it bounced or
direct/semi-direct? What flash if any?
Thanks,
rg
Hmm. I throw out 2/3 of
Bruce Dayton wrote:
Hello Pieter,
One thing you are not factoring in to this issue is the output side.
When the output is digital, you have the same basic problem. Each
pixel is only one color. What you are really referring to is a
dithering pattern. All inkjet printers do this, monitors do
Mark Roberts wrote:
Robert Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
is a 3Mp or so chip right now with I
think a 1.6 factor.
It's a 1.7 factor, which is just too much for a lot of people, myself
included.
Dang, that IS pretty bad. I can live with 1.5, but 1.7 is too much.
Only time will tell
Check this out. I've never heard of this before...
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=2973230044category=4688
I agree there is information there. What's esp intriguing are the new
35mm (non-aps) lenses. Its a stretch, but me thinks that it might be a
hint that there is potentially a full frame dslr in pentax's future.
Pål Jensen wrote:
Dag wrote:
It is old news, and can be translated into some
Sometimes its great, my 300mm 2.8 becomes an incredibly fast sharp 450
2.8! But many times its a pain in the a$$; at the wide end, I'm having
trouble with a good walking around lens. I have a gap between very wide
(15-30 zoom, 15 fisheye) and med wide (28 ) and then to normal (50). My
28
, at band camp, Robert Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, I was thinking of getting either that (FA35/2) or the 16-45 DA
lens. My 28 50 mm are M lenses, so either I have to use them in
manual mode, which means a little more hassle and less spontaneity, or I
have to use my 15-30 or 85
Definitely the 308, cant tell if its the GTS or GTB though.
David Mann wrote:
Hi all,
I think my first PAW was Saturday so this one's a few days early.
The recent car discussions reminded me of some slides I shot a few years
ago. This week's photo is a mystery - try and guess which model car
Hmm.. that adds up to 100.1%. That doesn't leave much room for the rest
of us. LOL!
rg
graywolf wrote:
99 and 44/100ths talk. The other 0.66% are scared. And the rest of us
are too old. (grin)
Tanya Mayer Photography wrote:
OMG - no wonder my poor hubby worries about me and that bloody
Ft. Worth is about 5 hours or so from San Antonio. That's quite a
visit. LOL.
rg
Cesar Matamoros II wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 10:47 PM
From: Collin Brendemuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cord tells me that
I bought this lens some time ago on ebay for a paltry $50, thinking I
could get a good walking around lens with a fabulous focal range, but it
is worth about that much. It is quite soft. I guess it has its uses.
I used it to take my PUG entry for Feb, but only because I happened to
have
don't think I had a camera that night. I may have to look back and see if
I did...
Cesar
Panama City, Florida
-Original Message-
From: Robert Gonzalez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 6:49 PM
Thanks Frank, I love your commentary. It was a fun...hiccup party! I'm
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 2 Mar 2004 at 14:42, Robert Gonzalez wrote:
Does a CCD suffer from reciprocity failure also? If so, are the curves
published anywhere?
I believe that they are pretty linear from their minimum exposure time
(determined by the matrix read speed) out to lengthy
...
- Original Message -
From: Robert Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2004 3:42 PM
Subject: Re: Film Reciprocity failure and high/low shutter speeds
Does a CCD suffer from reciprocity failure also? If so, are the curves
published anywhere?
LOL. Since when has Pentax had any marketing savvy? I wouldn't be
surprised if they had no one in marketing at all.
Andy Chang wrote:
Or probably just want everybody gagging for it this may be a
marketing plot.
-Original Message-
From: Joseph Tainter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
.
Bluebirds by Robert Gonzalez
Great shot! Hard to get, I've tried many times. The ability to clearly
see the pilots makes it even better.
Thank you Tom. I tried several times, and with this one I got lucky. I
can enlarge it to the point where the pilots are very clear. That 300
A* lens
.jpg
frank theriault wrote:
Hi,
I've determined that I'll comment on each entry this month. I'll likely
do it 1/2 dozen or so at a time, over the course of the next day or so.
So, in order of appearance, here goes:
Mushu by Robert Gonzalez:
I like this tight shot very much. Really emphasizes
I've had alot of trouble with the AF360FGZ. It underexposes. I have to
compensate *ALOT*. As much as +2 sometimes. Its really bad when I use
it to do bounce flash, which I prefer. I took some family portraits
recently and I had to play with it for a long time before I got the pics
with a
Heiko Hamann wrote:
Hi Frits,
That makes me wonder, too. Any physicists here to explain? I simply
can't imagine, why the CCD's reflectivity should change with the ISO
value.
I'm not a physicist, but I am an electrical engineer by training, and
the CCD's sensistivity/ISO setting does
Stay out of addictive photograpy discussion groups and get out there
taking pics:)
rg
Wow. I don't care if I have to hit the button 5 times. It now
basically meters with M K lenses and I don't have to sell mine.
Woo hoo.
rg
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
OK, now for the $64,000 question:
Once the ap and shutter speed have been set,
will the camera remember them for subsequent
files stored per card. I'll test it anyways to see how they
stack up against each other.
rg
Mark Roberts wrote:
Robert Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, I knew that FAT16 wasted more space than FAT32 for lots of small
files, and of course it had a much smaller limitation on max file
Welcome to the list Rebekah. I may be wrong, but I don't think there's
a whole lot of young blood in this list. Occasionally, you might
feel like fresh blood in the midst of sharks, but its usually not mean
spirited. Folks here are pretty passionate about Photography in general
and Pentax
Are there any scanners that work well with Kodachrome? I posed this
question to Kodak and they sent me this lame list of old Kodak scanners
that are no longer made.
rg
Alan Chan wrote:
My Minolta Scan Elite F-2900 does a terrible job on scanning Kodachrome,
and it uses cold-cathode
I love the display in the hallway. His water going up hill trick was
amazing.
rg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark,
Doc Edgerton was an early electrical engineer, in Dynamo Engineering I
believe. He developed the flash to help freeze the spinning machinery for a good
look. In the hall outside
They list the lens at $429, so if thats the real price for the combo,
that would put the body at sub $1K. Must be an error.
rg
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
Just 1324$ in such a fantastic set... It's a steal!
http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=detailssku=IPXISTDK
Well, first of all, I am amazed at the subjects that get discussed here
in pdml. Somehow the list got onto a thread a very short time ago about
taxing British citizens to finance the BBC.
As if the list is all prescient, all of a sudden the BBC is big world
news due to the scathing commentary
I was just browsing BH's site pricing the popular Pentax 28-105 zoom.
But wait, there's three of them:
Price: $ 199.95
Zoom Wide Angle SMCP-FA 28-105mm f/3.2-4.5 AL IF Autofocus Lens
Price: $ 357.00
Zoom Wide Angle SMCP-FA 28-105mm f/4-5.6 Autofocus Lens
Price: $ 189.95
Silver Zoom Wide
Thanks everyone for your input. Sounds like the 24-90 will work best
with the *istD, which is what I'm looking to get a general purpose zoom
for. I have the F 35-135, but I'm not too thrilled with the image
quality and will probably sell it after I get a better zoom.
rg
Dr. Heiko Hamann
Thank you. Very much appreciated. Its a fabulous month.
rg
Adelheid v. K. wrote:
Hi *,
the February PUG is ready to go.
Another month with great pics.
Cheers
Adelheid
URL:
http://pug.komkon.org/
--
About resizing your pics:
To make the procedure easier I am going to
The results look great. I cant help but feel that this picture has a
50's look to it. I wonder what it would look like if you modernized
it a bit, perhaps by bringing back the rose in color?
rg
Tanya Mayer Photography wrote:
Ok, so you all know that I'm not shooting digital with Pentax, but
Very interesting. Makes me realize that there's alot more to all of us
here than the impressions left through PDML messages! Esp liked reading
your journal and your meanderings. I'll have to drop you a note
sometime on my thoughts around these.
rg
graywolf wrote:
Been finally doing things
1 - 100 of 146 matches
Mail list logo
