Bob W Fri, 24 Jan 2014 13:35:45 -0800
This is a straw man argument, because nobody claims that the whole journalistic
process is objective. It has never claimed to be objective. What honourable
journalists (and there are plenty of them) strive for is to be an honest
witness.
B
--
quot; and it's "harder with a picture" to tell what
is believable.
The only thing I'd say (and have said) is that to believe that an
unaltered image is any more truthful or objective than an unaltered
image, in the context of reporting, and stopping there, thinking the
rules of
oolish
rules.
It's splitting hairs and it's arrogance of the highest order." - Peter
Stuckings.
I agree he broke his contract. I agree he altered an image. Under the
terms of the contract was that wrong? Yes it was.
In the big scheme of things though... ?
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
sleading as an altered one
can.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
n.
At that point to call in to question the integrity of a photograph
that had a minor element removed is duplicitous. Holding photography
to a different standard than the non-visual aspects of the story is
duplicitous as well.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/
ph
that had a minor element removed is duplicitous. Holding photography
to a different standard than the non-visual aspects of the story is
duplicitous as well.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
On 23/01/2014 9:49 PM, Tom C wrote:
The problem I see is that there's a basic assumption that the photons
entering the lens and recorded on the media somehow represent THE
TRUTH. I believe that assumption is flawed.
---
That's because your basic assum
ers the message. In the case of the
image in question, the superfluous video camera was never part of the
intended message to begin with.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
nges the TRUTHFULNESS of the image is
false.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
;t matter.
2. Maybe this is a publicity stunt on the part of the photographer. I
wonder how many job offers he's been receiving since that.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link
anipulation.
>
> bill
Come now, come now. You make me spit my wine out! Mr. Lens Inventory.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
ropped instead of cloned...that's as much a manipulation, as is
cropping in the viewfinder.
I agree with Misere, if words can be edited and changed, to craft the
story, then the same standard should apply to images.
Misleading with an image is obviously wrong.
Photos are not truth and n
able and
at risk. It led to it finally be acquired and becoming non-existent as
a corporate business entity. That of course is different than saying
you can't purchase a new Pentax camera.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
ing on a D4 will get
the Df instead. It would be easy to do at less than 1/2 the price.
On the other hand it's 83% of the price of a D800E, so giving up 20MP
at that price is a bit hard to swallow.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pd
that already'. I can see I
possibly approached the subject starting off on the wrong foot. My
intent was not to insult. I'm sorry if anyone felt that way.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please
hope that was clear to all by my responses on the subject, and that
I was addressing the subject of getting good shots in a more generic
sense.
As Stan summed up, quality vs. quantity. And of course quantity if the
subject dictates.
Tom C.
>
> I shoot a lot of shows along side other photogr
Darren you're a blowhard.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
Darren wrote:
> It is unfortunate that this thread has devolved into the crapfest that
> one can now (apparently) expect whenever Tom decides to post something
> to this list.
ad hominem
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pd
ve you're the most qualified to
answer. That's the smartest answer I can give.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
essentially turn off and it's Ooh!
Ah! Ooh! moments. Then I look at what I captured. Very very often, I
can see that I wasn't really thinking. When I slow down and carefully
take the time to compose, frame, consider exposure, use a tripod if
needed... those are most often the times I g
> From: "Alan C"
>
> Why do fashion photographers take so many shots then?
>
> Alan
Why don't you ask them or read up on the subject? See if they agree
with such a simplistic approach to creating good imagery.
Tom C.
>
> -----Original Message-
> Fr
> From: Eric Weir
>
> My understanding is that the secret to getting good shots is taking a lot of
> them.
Really? Is that the way you think most people get 'good shots'?
To get good shots, one must take shots, but the secret isn't taking a
lot of them.
Tom C.
-
ner?
>
> Regards
> Jens
Why would you start with a bias?
Spock ears on... Define beginner.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
fellow your quoting,
but it's again a blanket statement - Made about specific products by
someone (who I would guess) has not so much as seen them in person,
much less picked one up and used it for any amount of time, has not
experienced how the product handles, or examined the output ima
t; To make it even more general - neither camera has seen the light of day.
> We had some previews from DPReview and the likes and that's it. We
> honestly don't know anything about real use of these cameras, so how
> could we honestly produce blanket statements such as K-3 is
e A7's appear to be ground breaking.
In the end it's about IQ and usability. Affordability as well.
BTW have you got a chance to listen to Paul McCartney's new album
entitled "New"? It was released in US on 10-15. As usual, I love most
tracks.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-
idence, and denying the
advantages of FF as if they are irrelevant simply because one does not
have them or may not be able to afford them at the moment goes to my
first point .
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
at one intends and how much effort one is
willing to expend to be prepared for their intentions.
Yes it does take extra effort to carry a heavier kit. If I don't plan
on using the D800E, I take the NEX-7 kit which is 1/8 the weight and
1/5 the size. So basically I agree.
Just thinking that
>>
>> I'm not here to argue the merits of a K-5 vs. D7000 Larry. Why would I?
>
> But then you do:-)
That's BS Paul and you know it. :)
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the
Larry wrote:
> For whatever it's worth, the one time that I had a chance to compare
> a K-5 side by side with a D7000 in a low light situation (in the -2EV to 2EV
> range), the K-5 vastly outperformed the D7000 in every regard.
I'm not here to argue the merits of a K-5 vs. D7000 Larry. Why would
ur beer. :)
You seem to take my statements as a personal insult and they're not
intended that way.
I think it's great that Pentax has the K-3. There's nothing wrong with
liking Pentax products. After 13 years in film and then 10 in digital
I got tired of waiting for them to catch
is largely a case of 'what' was available 'when'.
> Where did you get the impression that I don't think it is "among the
> most important" components?
Really now Darren. :)
[Rereads the message that I was replying to.] Yep. The higher
resolution sensor
g with the resolving power of the lens at X
aperture, and yes noise characteristics, etc.), then you're missing
something.
Your use of the word 'only' was presumptuous and mistaken.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml
ree with much of what you say, but leapfrogs???
It's still a 24MP camera that's a year and a half to two years late.
It's amazing that 3 months ago the K-5/K-5II fulfilled everyone's
needs and 'why would one want more resolution?', and now it's goo-goo
ga
ve to wait, and it seems it is not that much time to wait
> anyway.
My thoughts as well Boris. At this point in time all we know is that
the difference between Prime II and Prime III is I.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to
> From: steve harley
>
> on 2013-09-22 22:23 Tom C wrote
>> Here's where I coming from on this. To say one's images wouldn't or
>> couldn't benefit from increased resolution is like saying they
>> couldn't benefit by using a finer grained film
inciple is start out with the best achievable first gen
image and the end result will be better as well.
There's tradeoffs of course in price, weight, flexibility, and each
person is different.
I have a lot of 6MP captures I like too, but if I wanted to display or
print large I'd be far happier
that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Can one capture pleasing images with just about any digital camera at
any resolution? Yes. No argument whatsoever.
That is not the same question as: Will one's images likely benefit
from increased resolution? The answer to that is also yes.
Tom C
return the
defective one. That was a fairly high priced item especially with next
day Fedex.
I received a 25% off discount code just today. SALE2013
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the
ected in post, and sample images I've seen are quite good.
There's a whole sub-culture of NEX, 4/3, and Fuji users that are
producing wonderful images with legacy lenses.
Not everyone eschews them.
How was your trip to BC, Bill?
Tom C
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.n
g with the idea, other than to
prove they can. One of the desirable attributes of the mirrorless
ILC's so far, has been the ability to carry a compact and light kit. A
FF ILC, sort of negates that in some ways.
I would hope, if it exists, that it would have an integrated EVF, not
an attachm
view. I suspect in Continuous Shooting mode, where
the shutter is depressed constantly, that it it automatically turns
off image review and one simply sees the normal EVF view, unhindered.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSU
most feel like a
new pair of glasses.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
Well not really looking through... looking at.
Tom C.
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 7:15 AM, Tom C wrote:
>> Years ago somebody bought a digital P&S with a digital viewfinder.
>> I was instantly turned off by the lines on the screen.
>> Tell me it's better now???
>
#x27;s being imaged, where with
optical, one is almost blind.
Take a look through a NEX-6 or 7 EVF. It's a 2.3 million pixel image.
That's more than twice the pixel count of the LCD monitor.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml
with a normal optical
viewfinder.
As Boris suggests, you may be pleasantly surprised.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
so successful it disrupted
> them too.
>
> G
I'd agree with that argument. Nothing like being a victim of one's success.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
re conveying, but I'd argue
it's not the first thought that comes to mind.
I guess since they had a huge chance of disruptive innovation with the
advent of digital imaging and blew it, they're going to try again.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
> On 5 Sep 2013, at 18:22, Bob W wrote:
>
>> On 5 Sep 2013, at 16:17, Tom C wrote:
>>
>>>> I don't know... If you go to kodak.com and click into the site you will
>>>> see that two of their three main goals are "disrupting product goods
ing different now than it did when I got
> sent to the principals office for doing it.
>
> Mark
That's pretty hilarious. I can see them wanting to disrupt, like
shaking things up in the market, but that's still an odd choice of
words. As you allude to, it has negative connotations
ity is
>> as good as anticipated. I find the 12/2.8 interesting. I have a 50/1.8
>> but the 32/1.8 is likewise of interest due to the 1.5X crop.
>>
>> These aren't cheap lenses, but a sign the E-mount is being taken seriously
>>
>> Tom C.
>>
> It&#x
ren't cheap lenses, but a sign the E-mount is being taken seriously
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
not
benefiting Pentax. The lack of a 24 x 36 body will turn anyone away
from Pentax that wants a visible upgrade path.
I'm not dismissing APS-C. I'm saying Pentax needs a 24 x 36 body if
they hope to maintain any relevancy in the marketplace, which after
all is the raison d'
se, and I know I don't need
to explain the benefits of a FF sensor to you.
If/when Pentax releases a FF body, and you purchase it, I'll pose the
same question back to you. :)
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE
> From: Darren Addy
>
> Yeah, well, that may be your rationale but it also comes with a heft
> price tag that has to be factored in for anybody wishing to make a
> similar evaluation involving chucking their PK & m42 glass.
>
> What I particularly like about this particular bit of kit (the
> origi
ely my rationale for changing brands. :)
John probably drinks jug wines (some of which are actually OK). :)
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
> From: Bill
>
> On 19/07/2013 2:01 PM, Tom C wrote:
>> I also agree that the legacy lens advantage is pretty much non-existent.
>
> It's interesting that you should say that, and kind of ironic in a way.
> The reason why legacy lenses are not an advantage is because
uphill climb... and even I, when
purchasing the PZ-1p, looked at upgrade paths. I went with Pentax
because I simply was too cheap to spend an additional $800 for a Nikon
8008s with an add-on flash. I thought I'd use my manual focus lenses
on it. That was next to never. I thought I'd fo
rs to deliberately misunderstand
things and then pontificates.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
>
> How long has it been since I called you a fcuking idiot?
>
> bill
Thank you.
Who's the idiot that can't spell fcuking correctly?
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML,
> I've found that the combitation of having met a number of the members of
> this list combined with the fact that anything I send will be read by
> them tends to keep some of my less savoury posting habits in check.
>
> bill
You have savoury posting habits also then, I
t Buy, or
Wal-Mart, and hit themselves in the middle of of the forehead with the
heel of their hand and say "I think I'll go with Pentax?"
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
omething private you meant public).
>
> (I'm not at all pushing to change, just figured it might be worth
> revisiting, haven't seen any mention in the ~6 months I've been here.)
Maybe for the simple and obvious fact that it's a list?
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discus
lsewhere
because they're not getting what they want from Pentax. Pentax loses.
There's nothing wrong with any of those actions and all are
justifiable. Still - Pentax loses.
So collectively, many of those people that love their Pentax gear
because of the perceived value are the same peopl
gy, it works now, so why try to
do it better?
To me it's about the patient, not the technology.
;-)
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
/www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
That's a wonderful image Ken and deserves recognition. Nice, color,
light, composition.
I was in the UP over Memorial Day and went to Pictured Rocks National
Lakeshore. I found the UP quite intriguing. I think the last time I
was there was when I was 15.
Tom
> From: Bob Sullivan
>
> Ain't that the truth...
> Where in California Is Hotel Pentax.
> Regards, Bob S.
Larry's house.
>
> On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 2:00 AM, David Mann wrote:
>> On Jul 3, 2013, at 8:17 AM, Walt wrote:
>>
>>> Just keep in mind that switching away from Pentax and moving on from
> From: Bipin Gupta
>
> Tom you missed some facts and misquoted some. I read your article with
> great relish and did find it enlightening though.
Hi Bipin,
I wasn't trying to write a corporate biography. I know that PENTAX
released the K-5 while being under HOYA's banner.
II believe (with litt
, and have no grounds to suspect. However, the last thing I
would expect to see is a company announce that they're 'blooie' BEFORE
they had a chance to unload their inventory at the highest possible
price. Yes they WOULD stoke demand on something they plan on killing.
Tom C.
--
PDM
ket conditions, etc.,
have changed and Ricoh is adjusting their stance,
While I feel it hard for Pentax to be considered seriously w/o a FF
24x36 system (for Paul... smile), I also feel it hard for them to turn
that into a large profit, given where they've positioned themselves as
a bargain b
etime. I'm typically near
DTW around 2 PM on Friday, though this is a work from home week.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
> It's important to note that you were shooting with a Pentax K-7, by my
> estimation the absolute worst of all the Pentax DSLRs I used, which would
> include all the top models. Even the istD was better in some ways. The K-5 was
> a huge upgrade.
Worst how? 2X+ the resolution of the *istD, better
ommunications company you partner with.
The government believes they have the right to monitor it, they
believe you don't have the right to know they're doing it, and they're
mad as hell that someone told their dirty little secret.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@p
ke the 70-200/2.8...Internal focusing (zoom
does not extend), whisper quiet, instantaneous, almost imperceptible
time to focus.
Tom C
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
gt; the frame rate "satisfactory? Are you truly blown away by the resolution?
> Do you, still covet the K-5 and secretly take along as a back-up. (shh)
Funny Jack. :)
No
No
No
No
No
Don't know
Yes
No
HTH.
:)
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/ma
Ricoh are
arrogant bastards and want their old name back, 4) maybe nothing at
all, or 5) something completely different (a Monthy Python camera
perhaps)... couldn't resist.
Since cause and effect is a universal rule, option 4 is unlikely.
Only time will tell.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-
> "Pentax is history." "Pentax is dead." ?"We're all doomed!" ?If I had a
> dollar for every thread along these lines I've seen here, I could be retired
> rather than working about 70 hours this week.
>
> Rick
> ?
> http://photo.net/photos/RickW
Well facts are: (you of course know already)
1. P
everyone except the extremely wealthy. Both are
important to me. Switching brands, lens acquisition is gradual, but
then the same was true when purchasing Pentax.
I care about IS on long lenses more than wide angles. If I can afford
an IS lens I'd buy it. If I couldn't, I'd plan on using
Aahz Maruch Tue, 02 Jul 2013 12:26:12 -0700
On Tue, Jul 02, 2013, Tom C wrote:
>>
>> Size and ergonomics is quickly adapted to.
> Nope, and I speak from lots of experience. Maybe for YOU that is true.
> However, if you truly want to argue the point, I suggest that you see
&g
#x27;s and lot's of variables there that having nothing to do
with the model camera or the brand.
Size and ergonomics is quickly adapted to.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
n by all means get the most
BANG you can for it.
If one's more concerned about the BANG, then get the most BANG and
realize it'll take more BUCK.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
> From: Boris Liberman
>
> On 4/18/2013 7:31 PM, Tom C wrote:
>> I wouldn't really want to limit myself to a single focal length lens
>> on any camera. It's very limiting and the flexibility offered by a
>> zoom or interchangeable lenses is too great to be
wfinder would be far better. I love my Sony RX-100, but
the one thing I really really wish it had is a viewfinder. I wouldn't
consider an accessory viewfinder. One more thing to carry, attach,
detach, and it would interfere too much with utility of the camera. I
suspect the RX-100 is the last camera
> From: Bill
>
> On 14/04/2013 12:14 AM, Tom C wrote:
>>>> That's half-true, at best. My Nikon P7100 just isn't good for low-light
>>>> photography (although it's considerably better than my previous Canon
>>>> A710). Similarly, no c
> From: Bill
>
> On 14/04/2013 12:14 AM, Tom C wrote:
>>>> That's half-true, at best. My Nikon P7100 just isn't good for low-light
>>>> photography (although it's considerably better than my previous Canon
>>>> A710). Similarly, no c
y camera is capable of
producing a pleasing and decent image, unless it's downright
defective.
Tom C.
On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Tom C wrote:
> From: Aahz Maruch
>>
>>> I should add, following the line of thought, that any/every camera is
>>> capable in the hands
considerably better than my previous Canon
> A710). Similarly, no camera is good if you hate to use it (you can argue
> that it's capable, I suppose, but that smells of "wrong question").
Really?
You show me one camera that cannot produce a pleasing image and I'll
show
and adapters. He's going to school for
graphic arts, and is into drawing mainly, but is being forced into the
world of technology even there... which he didn't expect. :)
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Tom C wrote:
>> From: Bill
>>
>> I want a camera with a fast stan
ou think and
see images after purchase. I'd love to see Fuji succeed and continue
their retro mirrorless line. Competition is good.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
wish I
did, but I find it easier to send a file to a printer.
I don't know about it being a trend. I think prices have dropped to
where it becomes within the realm of affordability for more people,
especially if there current brand is not giving them what they need.
Tom C.
> From: Geor
ommon
man.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
> From: Rob Studdert
>
> http://vimeo.com/61083440
Thanks for sharing that Rob. It was wonderful.
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
g open of a canister and inhaling the smell of a
fresh new roll of film.
Tom C.
>
> On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Tom C wrote:
>> A few weeks ago I threw some Outdoor Photographer magazines that were
>> in the garage onto the backseat of the car, planning on taking them
>> with
sman: That one only has 16MP. That's 8 MP less than a 24MP
camera. The more MP the more detail you can capture. Several years ago
the top of the line digital cameras a normal person could afford only
had 8MP, 16MP is twice that. 24MP is 3 times that. All the other
manufacturers are producing came
> From: John Celio
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Pentax-Capsule-Mini-Camera-Keychains/dp/B006YY3YRM/
>
> I'm actually thinking about buying this set just for the silver MX and
> 40mm, which I used to own (the life-size version, of course). I love
> that the lenses are interchangeable, too.
>
> John
T
> From: Darren Addy
>
>> That's precisely why when someone comes
>> around saying/implying that if one changes from brand A to brand B,
>> that one was a non-thinker and therefore one must rationalize their
>> choice after the fact, pisses me off.
>
> Speaking of "words that were not mine", I said
> Whereas if one does *not* change from brand A to brand B, it's because
> one is a non-thinker who is mentally confined to a ("dead") brand. Got
> it.
Your words not mine. That wasn't what I wrote or meant. You don't get
it Matthew. I was encouraging people to think beyond Pentax, I wasn't
implyi
rand A is
better than Brand B for me, and it assumes the person knows what's in
MY head. It's arrogant and condescending and the unwritten subtext is
'I'm more intelligent because of my choice and your less intelligent
because of yours'.
I find that offensive. Especially
that if they do move away from Pentax it must be because they
fell prey to a whim, and not for valid reasons. Why? Because you've
chosen Pentax and therefore your choice must be the best choice for
all?
I call bullshit on that,
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml
Why? The steering wheel's on the wrong side. What good would it do you?
:)
Tom C
> From: "Steve Cottrell"
>
> On 7/2/13, Tom C, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>>Buying the newest Corvette Stingray wouldn't make Paul Stenquist any
>>more desirable
1 - 100 of 6504 matches
Mail list logo
