I have the information that a pre-production DA16-45 just arrived at
Pentax Europe (Hamburg), so I guess that it will be available soon.
Arnold
Rüdiger Neumann schrieb:
Hallo infos on the coming DA16-45 are on http://www.aohc.it/pressrelease/lns0308e.htm regards Rüdiger
I have been asked to do some low light (ballet) shots.
I normally do this with a 800 film pushed to 1600,
anyone done anything with the istD in low light or
can point to some examples. I need the shots to
be sale quality.
Also, I would want to use a fast lens, 1.4 85mm.
Kind regards
Kevin
--
I was just wondering if anyone else agrees with me that the new DA lenses
seem like a bit of a backward move. Shouldn't they be working toward
incorporating full frame CCDs and reducing the cost of that technology
first? Doesn't this new DA lens reduce the optical sweet spot (and isn't
that bad?)?
Yay! it's something I can answer.. I think your tripod (I assume you were
using a tripod to catch fireworks..) head was loose and your camera slipped
during a bulb exposure. And the reason I can say this is because I've done
it before ;) It was my 5n on a Velbon mountain chaser tripod (I think
William Robb wrote:
I'd like to add that now lens designers have another medium to keep in
mind
when they design optics, that being the computer monitor.
Of course, mostly because it's a powerful way of inspecting pictures.
NOT because it can drive to grossly wrong information as recent
I looked at the Pentax PEF file and noticed that it starts out
directly with what looked like EXIF information. To see if this
is true I wrote this simple perl script: . . .
Actually, as has already been noted on the PDML, a PEF file is
simply a TIFF file.
It looks as though it starts
Hi Cotty,
on 12 Nov 03 you wrote in pentax.list:
Ah, zooms. I never considered a wide zoom when I wanted my wide angle.
Honestly - with my MZ-5n I was very satisfied with the 28mm of my 28-
105PZ concerning wide angle. But it took only one day to change that:
When I tried this preproduction
Interesting shot.
I think the broad red and white reflections looks like traffic. The narrow
reflections look more like camera motion. Or maybe the reflecting glass was
moving?
Jostein
Quoting Greg Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi Everyone.
It looks cool, but I have no idea what happend to cause
Quoting John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
But, in any case, that's not the right formula to use. The correct way
to ask the question is, roughly speaking:
If defects show up approximately once every N square mm of silicon,
what is the chance of getting an error in a component that covers
Ryan wrote:
RL I was just wondering if anyone else agrees with me that the new DA lenses
RL seem like a bit of a backward move.
RL ..
RL I wonder how
RL much resources this direction takes away from moving towards full frame
RL (maybe Pentax isn't even considering it!).
Well Ryan, I
Quoting Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
There are four young German women who run the whole campaign. We met them
at Photokina 2002. They got into the picture after photokina 2000, and
blamed Pentax for not targetting their real market with their
ultra-traditional and un-trendy marketing. They
Welcome back, Tiger.
Congratulations on the new camera, and welcome to the...
...Now what was the name again...
*isthood...?
Cheers,
Jostein
Quoting Tiger Moses [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Been around...always shooting the Pentax (or my Russian cams),
but I joined back tonite because I got my new
Otis Wright rusty.@att.net writes:
Have seen statements suggesting NiMh batteries lose 1%-2% of their
charge a day. Can't remember how good the source was. Maybe
someone else has more accurate numbers.
Compared to NiCd, NiMH pack a bit (30% to 50%) more capacity into the
same volume and
Hi Alin,
And so they sat back and waited for a miracle.. Not that I'm regretting
buying into languorous, apathetic Pentax.. and surely not like Pentax
doesn't have a wide range of decent optics for most purposes. I'm beginning
to suspect that the perfect sensibility in the mz5n's design,
On 12/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
I can understand using medium wide mostly, and then not being wide enough
and needing to zoom out as wide as possible (say, shooting a group in a
confined space / small room etc). But if you had the big wide already,
you could simply move forward to
On 13/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
I'm a manual sniping kinda guy :-)
It's kinda the thrill of the hunt, isn't it?
Well it's funny you say that. When I first started out (the hard way) and
figured out all by myself that driving up the price of something days
before close was a waste of
On 13/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
IS ??? I might be having a blond moment here, but I'll bite...what or who
is that..lol.
Image Stablization (sp?) Has to be experienced to be believed.
Unfortunately not a Tamron option.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places,
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Cotty wrote:
As you know, I'm a manual focus guy. I do us the AF on my AF lenses
sometimes, though rarely. Mostly on the 70-200 with my lad's football or
whatever. I personally think AF on 14mm lens is a complete and utter
waste of time and I never have it switched on.
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Cotty wrote:
On 12/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
I can understand using medium wide mostly, and then not being wide enough
and needing to zoom out as wide as possible (say, shooting a group in a
confined space / small room etc). But if you had the big wide
I did the same thing with the same results from them. The only thing I
guess we can hope for is that .PEF is very close to .NEF and, maybe, even
identical. I'm not ashamed of using software written for Nikon if it works
well with my Pentax.
Len
---
* There's no place like 127.0.0.1
From:
Truthfully, I too prefer a proprietary rechargeable battery. As long as it
is a Lithium ion rechargeable with capacity equal to (or better than) the
BP511 that Canon uses in the D30, D60.
Len
---
* There's no place like 127.0.0.1
From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL
Wendy , you wrote:
Sigh. Can't get the staff these days.
Wondering if I can get away with a dye sub print from the olympus instead.
Dave - what do you reckon? Will it pass muster?
Hi Wendy
Well if the oh'sss and ha'sss from the lads at the last
- Original Message -
William Robb wrote:
For me, it was a decision based on looking at pictures, not charts or
spec sheets.
And =THAT'S= what it's ALL about or at least, it's supposed to be
Well thats was the most
Just wondering if i'm going to experience problems at my venue Sunday.
Location is the Royal Winter Fair in Toronto,indoor venue in the horse palace(yes they
have palaces
for them.lol)It was and still is after reno's, a hockey rink but with some new seating
and
upgraded
graywolf wrote:
Oh? That's the problem! MXen tend to sulk when they have to compete for
affection against an LX. (GRIN)
jmb wrote:
I'll have to test it against the meter on my LX.
Do the black MXen have better self esteem? I'd like to get one.
Hi,
Ryan wrote:
I was just wondering if anyone else agrees with me that the new DA lenses
seem like a bit of a backward move. snip Whole thing kinda reminds me of
APS.. Could it be this is another Pentax nail in the pro coffin?
I've been wondering for some time whether the present DSLR
Hi,
Kostas wrote:
You're kidding me.
Fisheyes?
No, he's just suprised.
mike
graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OTOH, I have hear persistant rumors of an upcoming Nikon F6.
Yeah, it'll come out around the same time as the Autofocus LX.
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com
I suspect that Pentax just can't even begin to compete with Canon
anymore. Because of the sheer amount of RD money Canon had, it
probably already has prototypes for a number of cameras. So, for
example, if Pentax did come out with a full frame DSLR, I'm sure Canon
would one-up it within a month
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:00:23 +0100, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote:
See http://www.rcbatteryclinic.com/ for information on rechargeable
batteries. (It's a site for radio control modelers, a group of people
who really, really appreciate (and need) good batteries.)
It's a good site, but you have to
On 13/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
Honestly - with my MZ-5n I was very satisfied with the 28mm of my 28-
105PZ concerning wide angle. But it took only one day to change that:
When I tried this preproduction *istD with its 18-35 lens, I made the
mistake and put the 18-35 on my MZ-5n.
Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suspect that Pentax just can't even begin to compete with Canon
anymore. Because of the sheer amount of RD money Canon had, it
probably already has prototypes for a number of cameras. So, for
example, if Pentax did come out with a full frame DSLR, I'm
Check out the new View Camera magazine.
The review of Better Light's 4x5 scanning backs is impressive.
The top-of-the-line model produces a 309 meg image but costs $13k.
The low end model produces a 50 meg image and is $6k.
http://www.viewcamera.com
Collin
Have you talked to your opthalmologist? There seem to be a lot of blind
photographers out there. My eyesight is not very good, never has been, but I can
still focus a camera. Of course I do need to replace my glasses every couple of
years. Also I would think most of your horse shots could be
- Original Message -
From: Ryan Lee
Subject: Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
I was just wondering if anyone else agrees with me that the new DA lenses
seem like a bit of a backward move. Shouldn't they be working toward
incorporating full frame CCDs and reducing the cost of that
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/istd_pg7.html
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Tiger Moses wrote:
Been around...always shooting the Pentax (or my Russian cams),
but I joined back tonite because I got my new *ist-D next to me!
Welcome back, and congrats on the *istD!
chris
Hi,
David Madsen wrote:
OK, I am ready for my lashing.
I don't think that will happen. Almost everyone on this list (or at
least a significant proportion) agrees with you. What people
continually castigate Pentax for is its abysmal, pathetic,
stomach-churningly bad marketing department.
Depends on condition and current supply vs. demand.
Some folks have been lucky enough to get one for less than $600, but in
excellent condition I've seen them go for $800 to $1100. The FA* 85/1.4 is a
different animal and should go for $450 to $500.
Regards,
Bob...
Graywolf wrote:
Sometimes I wonder how anyone ever took a photograph back in the old days.
I don't know if it's true, but somewhere I heard or read that professional
photographers used to have a limited life span, just like professional athletes.
Had to quit young, thirties, forties.
When
- Original Message -
From: Ryan Lee
Subject: Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
I agree with this totally. I give them points for identifying, and tending
to this market, but if Canon unveils a full frame CCD in a 300D price
range
a bit too soon, it'll be a disaster for Pentax if
- Original Message -
From: Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 8:53 AM
Subject: Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
Well, actually for 16-45/4 lens it is very small (just imagine this zoom
range and brightness for 35mm
- Original Message -
From: Sylwester Pietrzyk
Subject: Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
Never? LX was strictly marketed as a pure professional tool, and as such a
system it won hearts of many pro photographers around the world. It took
many customers away from Nikon F3 and
- Original Message -
From: Steve Desjardins
Subject: Re: I really like the MZ-S!
The funny part is that if the do release an F6 very few people will
care, since many of the already small group of potential F6 buyers are
now investing in digital.
The F6 will probably be a digital.
- Original Message -
From: David Madsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am sure I will
get dumped on for saying this, but I am surprised at how much Pentax gets
dumped on in this forum.
Dinks don't like to be called dinks, and thus have moved one step ahead, and
employed this dink-protection
Beware of mercury vapour! Does some pretty weird stuff.
http://www.muddypawz.net/dfst3
I'd play safe and go for the 3200 BW. You may be disappointed with the colour shots
if the lighting's like I had. Last time I was shooting in an arena (see above) I was
only getting 1/350 at 2.8 so it would
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, William Robb wrote:
I'm not imagining it as a 35mm lens, since it doesn't cover the format.
The whole point of the small sensors was to enable smaller cameras and
lenses.
The 16-45 takes a 67mm filter, and is larger than the 18-35. I happen to
have that lens, and it is
- Original Message -
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The whole point of the small sensors was to enable smaller cameras and
lenses.
Not to make it cheap? I don't think it was the lens size that motivated ccd
size like you seem to be saying..
I am sure I will
get dumped on for saying this, but I am surprised at how much Pentax gets
dumped on in this forum.
My take on it is a little different.
A lot of the people on this list have been very loyal Pentaxians. Very
partial to Pentax.
So they get pained when Pentax falls below the
Dave does this for money. The idea is to shoot at latge apertures with
shallow DOF to separate the subject from the background. Zone focusing means
you're a hobbiest that can't afford the right gear.
Sure they took pictures in the old days, but not the ones they take today.
BR
From: graywolf
Dave does this for money. The idea is to shoot at latge apertures with
shallow DOF to separate the subject from the background. Zone focusing means
you're a hobbiest that can't afford the right gear.
Sure they took pictures in the old days, but not the ones they take today.
BR
From: graywolf
I'm not sure if they are MV lights but they look like them.What ever hockey arena's use
these
days.vbg
Thanks for the samples Wendy. My main plan is for the BW,her Mom likes my BW.:-)
I think i'll put a shorter lens on the D1 and use digital for any presentations or
candids,if i can get back
I will concede that the marketing dept. needs help. Thank you for your
comment.
David Madsen
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.davidmadsen.com
-Original Message-
From: mike wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 9:59 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re:
OK, I will agree that IS is very cool. Nikon caught on, maybe Pentax will
get the picture (pun intended).
David Madsen
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.davidmadsen.com
-Original Message-
From: Ryan Lee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 10:37 AM
To: [EMAIL
P.S. As a Ziess Ikon and Rolleicord owner, I will concede to your comment
about the finer German optics. You'll notice that I said 'dollar for
dollar'. I wish I could get Leica gear for the cost of my Pentax.
David Madsen
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.davidmadsen.com
-Original
I will agree with that. Good comment.
David Madsen
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.davidmadsen.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 10:46 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax enthusiast (long)
I am sure
Interesting idea. Do you think they'll go with F6 or F6D, etc., or go
for another name?
Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA 24450
(540) 458-8873
FAX: (540) 458-8878
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/13/03 11:58AM
- Original Message
True enough Bruce,but the AF and fast glass help here.
I started to worry when i compared prints from 2 years ago,shot on 'shudder' Kodak Max
400, with my
recent stuff shot with Royal Gold or Gold 200 and some of the Portra series. The older
prints were
more crisp'. I have been using the primes
Hi Tiger! Glad to see you back. Congratulation on your new *ist D. I have
one and am very happy with it.
Len
---
_
Compare high-speed Internet plans, starting at $26.95.
https://broadband.msn.com (Prices may vary by service
Interesting idea. Do you think they'll go with F6 or F6D, etc., or go
for another name?
Steven Desjardins
They seem to do slightly less goofy names than some we could mention. :-)
How about the F5D?
Marnie aka Doe Based on name recognition.
alex wetmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, William Robb wrote:
I'm not imagining it as a 35mm lens, since it doesn't cover the format.
The whole point of the small sensors was to enable smaller cameras and
lenses.
The 16-45 takes a 67mm filter, and is larger than the 18-35. I
On 13/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
work to justify it. Besides a 38mm in macro (24mm EX macro) is a very
interesting focal length for a macro and it's superb on faces!
Would you share an example of the latter? I have only shot faces at
50, other than 70 and above, and that was because I
Previously written;
I was just wondering if anyone else agrees with me that the new DA lenses
seem like a bit of a backward move. Shouldn't they be working toward
incorporating full frame CCDs and reducing the cost of that technology
first? Doesn't this new DA lens reduce the optical sweet spot
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Mark Roberts wrote:
alex wetmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Compared to 35mm lenses in the same size it is small.
For comparison lets look at the Sigma 15-30/f3.5-f4.5.
Well, that's not a fair comparison. For *equivalent focal length*, you
should be comparing it to a
Hi John,
Is this important to know? Will knowing this make for better
photographs? If so, in what way?
If a Pentax RAW file is essentially a TIFF (as I understand your
comment), and Pentax doesn't much compress their RAW files (per comments
on a digital camera review site), what is the
I was mostly speaking about PTTL. It fires the flash once to measure the
exposure and then once again to make the actual exposure. I really only use
PTTL when using the RTF built into the *ist D, and that's usually when I'm
only carrying the camera, with lens, and no other equipment. When I
Is this number 8? Hell if I know.
It's cold, and it gets dark early, so we're going to skip any attempt
to actually shoot. We'll get right to the food and beer.
Where - My place, near Tyson's Corner, Virginia
When - Monday, November 17th, 7:30
I'll make the food, you bring some beer. Or
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Is this important to know? Will knowing this make for better
photographs? If so, in what way?
If a Pentax RAW file is essentially a TIFF (as I understand your
comment), and Pentax doesn't much compress their RAW files (per comments
on a digital
You're into the bits and bytes of it more than I am. I was hoping that,
since the D100 and the *ist D both use the same CCD that the CCD itself
would have a greater role in defining the RAW format. I guess that was way
too much to hope for.
I don't hold much hope that Adobe is going to
Hi Len,
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:56:30 -0600, Leonard Paris wrote:
I don't hold much hope that Adobe is going to accomodate the .PEF format in
either a plug-in or in their new PhotoShop CS. I fear that there may not be
enough *ist D users to cause Adobe to want to support us. Hopefully,
Is this number 8? Hell if I know.
It's cold, and it gets dark early, so we're going to skip any attempt
to actually shoot. We'll get right to the food and beer.
The only pictures we took at the last TOPDMLWAS f beer and food.vbgWhen Jeff T gets
his
The Pentax RAW files are not much smaller than the TIFF, so, IMO, size isn't
much of an issue.
You say RAW is better, but HOW is it better? Does one get better quality
images from a RAW file than from a TIFF file? Just because a TIFF may be
processed a bit more in the camera, will that lessen
The new PS is out and it does not support PEF files. Here's a list of PS
supported files:
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/cameraraw.html
Leonard Paris wrote:
I don't hold much hope that Adobe is going to accomodate the .PEF
format in either a plug-in or in their new PhotoShop CS.
Hi,
graywolf wrote:
I will admit that when I have not been shooting for awhile I tend to fiddle
myself until I reallize I am doing it and deliberately work to overcome it.
Are you trying to make Cotty spill his drink?
mike
Hi Bruce,
Yes, how about the Pentax company...? ;o) Well, the paradox is that
Pentax has little company and that may be very well their only
excuse.
I don't think that Fuji (or Kodak for that matter) are players. They
lack a SLR tradition nor do they have a client base - so it's
Hi Shel, good to see you back.
I have questions for the eggspurts here, myself.
Given that Pentax's software for manipulating and converting a RAW file is a
bit lacking in capabilities, what would be the best approach?
1. Shoot everything in largest, highest quality jpeg and print using PIM
That makes sense, I do the same thing.
David Madsen
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.davidmadsen.com
-Original Message-
From: graywolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 1:35 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax enthusiast (long)
Actually, it is just
So, you guys are going to be out-ed?
CRB
A 300/2.8 is a 300/2.8 no matter the format it's on.
Period.
Now, 300mm on 8x10 is normal, but the magnification is
EXACTLY THE SAME as on 35mm! It's just that 35mm has been
seriously (severly) CROPPED!
CRB
Now imagine DA 300/2.8 - being 30%
smaller andf lighter than A* 300/3.8 - wouldn't it
Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
See http://www.rcbatteryclinic.com/ for information on rechargeable
batteries. (It's a site for radio control modelers, a group of people
who really, really appreciate (and need) good batteries.)
It's a good site, but you have to keep in mind the way
Hi,
Does anybody have experience of the FA28-105/3.2-4.5? Have you got/had
any other similar lenses and how does it compare in terms of optical
quality? I am interested in distortions at the zoom ends, flare, bokeh
and resolution. I have the F28-80/3.5-3.5 and the FA28-80/3.5-5.6 and
for some
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Cotty wrote:
On 13/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
work to justify it. Besides a 38mm in macro (24mm EX macro) is a very
interesting focal length for a macro and it's superb on faces!
Would you share an example of the latter? I have only shot faces at
50, other
I use number 2, do my editing and then print, but not save the file. It
goes back to its original folder unchanged. If I think I might want a
reprint later, I'll do a save as and put it in another folder.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Leonard Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Mark Roberts wrote:
No. You'd have to compare a 450/2.8 FULL IMAGE CIRCLE lens on a film
camera to a 300/2.8 limited image circle lens on a digital camera.
Allright, but it doesn't matter. If 300/2.8 FULL IMAGE CIRCLE lens
is two times smaller than 400/2.8 for film, then
Alin,
Thanks for your insights and thoughts. If I were to consider a DSLR
other than the *istD, it would probably be the Nikon D100 at this
point. I have tried Canon in the past and just don't really care for
them. Besides, my local camera store is Nikon and Pentax - no Canon.
Have you looked
Mark Cassino has the Sigma, I have the Pentax. We did an impromptu and very
unscientific comparison at a Michigan PDML gathering a couple of years ago.
At f2.8 and f8 at about 50' distance, at 200mm, the Pentax was sharper.
And, Mark states the Sigma freezes wide open at temps below 5 degrees.
Hi John,
Is this important to know? Will knowing this make for better
photographs? If so, in what way?
Knowing that a PEF file is, essentially, a TIFF file is about
as relevant to making better photographs as a discussion of just
what developer to use for a given film.
If you don't do
Maybe:
http://cgi.ebay.it/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=2961648344category=12877;
rd=1
fabio
- Original Message -
From: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 5:46 PM
Subject: new 15mm/3.5 on ebay
Hi,
What was wrong with this - just the
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, John Francis wrote:
I looked at the Pentax PEF file and noticed that it starts out
directly with what looked like EXIF information. To see if this
is true I wrote this simple perl script: . . .
Actually, as has already been noted on the PDML, a PEF file is
It's good to see you with us again, Shel.
-Original Message-
From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 11, 2003 1:03 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: And now: the *ist D vs. the EOS 300D! (And my little Sony PS)
Hi gang ...
More picture details here:
http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p7e.htm
I added crops from in-camera TIFF and RAW to TIFF files.
Then I added crops from shadow areas in the big pictures at different ISO
settings.
Bye,
Dario Bonazza
On 13/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
It's cold, and it gets dark early, so we're going to skip any attempt
to actually shoot. We'll get right to the food and beer.
Who needs food?
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps
I guess it depends on what you choose to not understand.
Lewis
From: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have never
understood how one could see well enough to take photos and not well enough
to focus the camera at the same time.
-
Lewis Matthew wrote:
I see my opthalmologist annually, but since I wear
On 13/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
Finally, is the amount of extra work converting a RAW file to a final image
worth it? Having worked a little with some RAW formats, I cannot tell any
difference between a photo made from a RAW file or one made from a TIFF, by
the time a final print is
On 13/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
tom wrote:
Is this number 8? Hell if I know.
It's cold, and it gets dark early, so we're going to skip any attempt
to actually shoot. We'll get right to the food and beer.
Where - My place, near Tyson's Corner, Virginia
When - Monday, November
On 13/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
I will admit that when I have not been shooting for awhile I tend to fiddle
That at the same time as the mandolin, or instead of?
;-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps
Yeah, when Jeff gets them posted. Whenever is more like it.
I thought the allure of digital is that you don't have to wait for
development - from the camera to the computer to the internet. As for
Jeff's pics, I'm still waiting...
BUT, I got some pics back today. Not a lot (just the MX
LOL
I got my 6x7's back to day.One of Jeffs Canon eos 3 and one of my beer.Which one do you
want to
see.:-)
Dave
Yeah, when Jeff gets them posted.
Whenever is
more like it.
I thought the allure of digital is that you don't have to wait for
Hi,
Thursday, November 13, 2003, 6:00:35 PM, you wrote:
P.S. As a Ziess Ikon and Rolleicord owner, I will concede to your comment
about the finer German optics. You'll notice that I said 'dollar for
dollar'. I wish I could get Leica gear for the cost of my Pentax.
over the years I've met
TIFF raster data can start anywhere. only the header has fixed location.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: alex wetmore [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 9:56 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax RAW file discoveries
I thought the TIFF portion of the file
1 - 100 of 121 matches
Mail list logo
