Re: Z-1P and TTL flash with pre-A lenses
TTL is done through off-the-film metering, albeit as a separate system from the Z-1p (and the Z1, SF1/SF1n, Super Program) camera's regular light metering system. The LX is the only Pentax camera to incorporate both TTL metering as well as off-the-film light metering at the time of exposure (and thus truly is a horse of a different color)! The Z-1p, and the other non-LX Pentax cameras with TTL flash capabilities, still use either centerweighted, spot, or segmented metering for determining the ambient light exposure. The TTL metering cell is only used for TTL metering, which pretty much simply cuts the flash output off at the right moment. Joe Joe Wilensky wrote: It's always problematic to test TTL flash with no film in the camera. Since the sensor is measuring light reflected off the film, it's measuring what would seem to be a reduced amount of light reflecting off the black pressure plate instead. I may be wrong but I do not recall the Pz-1p having OTF metering That's totally different from TTL Now the LX, that's a horse of a different color :-) Later, Gary -- Joe Wilensky Staff Writer Media & Technology Services 1150 Comstock Hall Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853-2601 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel: 607-255-1575 fax: 607-255-9873
Re: Z-1P and TTL flash with pre-A lenses
"Gary L. Murphy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I may be wrong but I do not recall the Pz-1p having OTF metering >That's totally different from TTL TTL metering is done off the film. There's a sensor in the mirror box that points back toward the film plane (on the PZ-1p it's on the right side of the mirror box as you look in without a lens mounted). -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: *ist SLR and K-mount lenses
IMHO the advances in TTL metering are attempts to become as good as quality hand-held meters. It's also MHO that multi segment metering calculates an xposure that is correct most of the time but not every time, and the photographer isn't likely to know just what skew the meter's interpretive feature has put on the exposure. OTOH a hand-held meter used with experience and skill gets the correct exposure every time, and its workings are completely transparent. Centre-weighted averaging TTL is almost as good as external metering if you use manual exposure or a memory-lock in auto, it is arguably even better when a very long lens is up front. TTL metering is for speed of working where that's essential, or convenience whether to avoid the purchase of an external meter or to carry less gear. It's a compromise whose price is ultimate accuracy. It's unreasonable to expect full backwards compatability from a CHEAP camera like the *ist, which is chock-full of bells and whistles for first time 35mm SLR users or those prepared to accept limitations when using obsolete lenses. At least you'd be able to use those lenses. Good luck fitting old-mount Canon or Minolta lenses to the current bodies of those brands. Pentax has cameras in its current lineup for old lens owners, and most likely will have suitable future offerings when the higher level *ists (or the mythic "New LX") come out. regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: "Artur Ledóchowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (snip) > Buying an external meter only to be able to work with the plain K-mount > lenses in the M mode of the *ist makes no sense to me. The camera has a new, > advanced, 16-segment matrix and it's IMHO better to get rid of such lenses > and get the KA-mount ones to be able to use it. > One thing I'm sure is that the *ist is not the camera for me - I need full > backward compatibility... > Regards > Artur > > >
Re: Z-1P and TTL flash with pre-A lenses
Mark Roberts wrote: TTL metering is done off the film. There's a sensor in the mirror box that points back toward the film plane (on the PZ-1p it's on the right side of the mirror box as you look in without a lens mounted). Brain fart. :-) Later, Gary
Re: Its that time again for the false Paypal emails!
The incorrect copyright date at the bottom of the letter is another proof that it is not quite right . . . Alan Abbott wrote: The 'Login button does NOT go to Paypal but: "http://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/boyz.php". Alan "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer -Original Message- From: T Rittenhouse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 9:31 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Its that time again for the false Paypal emails! If you log into your paypal account and update the information, how does that let someone rip you off? Now if they said to e-mail them the info, I would be worried. Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto - Original Message - From: "Alan Abbott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax-Discuss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 3:43 PM Subject: Its that time again for the false Paypal emails! Hi All, Just received a load of the usual FALSE Emails trying to get my Paypal account. I have let Paypal know (not sure if they are really bothered or not). I though I would just teach my 'Grandmother to suck eggs' and remind everybody that people like PayPal do NOT ask for the information below! So no matter what it says 'your account is closing/has been hacked' etc. etc. DO NOT GIVE THEM YOUR INFO!!! (sorry for shouting). Alan Abbott (going back to lurking mode) Those who do not learn from Dilbert are doomed to repeat it. Dear PayPal Customer This e-mail is the notification of recent innovations taken by PayPal to detect inactive customers and non-functioning mailboxes. The inactive customers are subject to restriction and removal in the next 3 months. Please confirm your email address and and Credit Card info number by logging in to your PayPal account using the form below: Email Address: Password: Full Name #: Credit Card #: Exp.Date(mm/) #: ATM PIN (For Bank Verification) #: This notification expires May 31, 2003 Thanks for using PayPal! This PayPal notification was sent to your mailbox. Your PayPal account is set up to receive the PayPal Periodical newsletter and product updates when you create your account. To modify your notification preferences and unsubscribe, go to https://www.paypal.com/PREFS-NOTI and log in to your account. Changes to your preferences may take several days to be reflected in our mailings. Replies to this email will not be processed. If you previously asked to be excluded from Providian product offerings and solicitations, they apologize for this e-mail. Every effort was made to ensure that you were excluded from this e-mail. If you do not wish to receive promotional e-mail from Providian, go to http://removeme.providian.com/. CopyrightC 2002 PayPal Inc. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners. -- William Kane http://www.KaneScience.com IABT Advisory Board Member http://www.iabt.net Tinley Park High School 6111 W. 175th Street Tinley Park, IL 60477 V: 708/532-1900 ext 3909 http://www.bhsd228.com
Re: Its that time again for the false Paypal emails!
- Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist Subject: Re: Its that time again for the false Paypal emails! > I get false ebay emails as well. They usually ask for credit card > numbers, name and address. I just discard them. Thanks for the warning. I got one of those on my hotmail account, which I have never used for anything to do with eBay. I thought that was pretty brainless of the people trying to pull the scam. William Robb
Re: First 6x7 lessons learned
- Original Message - From: Paul Subject: Re: First 6x7 lessons learned > Pentax 6x7 f22 @ 1/30th. Hand held of course. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1069827 Nice panning technique. Yer very good. William Robb
Re: *ist
I may be bigger than you as well, which would make the camera a bit harder to operate cleanly. I have also, so far, eschewed the new style smaller spectacles in favour of my older semi aviation style frames. I think it will do well in the market segment it is aimed at though. I don't see the lack of non A series lens compatability to be an issue, if nothing else, Pentax has given it's users a much better run than any other 35mm camera maker in this regard. The should come out with smaller lenses for it, the one I saw looked ridiculous on the Asterist. William Robb - Original Message - From: Harold Owen Subject: Re: *ist > > > The operation was easy enough, though I disagree with Harold about the > > ease of using the control dial. I kept bumping my glasses with my thumb > > when operating the control dial with the camera at eye level. > > * "For anybody using their right eye for viewing there is ample > * room for carrying out this operation, for left-handed people who > * tend to use their left eye for viewing the whole operation is a > * bit cramped but ok". > > I must admit William that when I made the statement above that I had > only tried using my right eye for viewing to see what difference it made > to operating various controls, it is not a normal operation for me and I > did not encounter problems. On reflection one could change the word > 'ample' to 'adequate'. > > I did notice if one lifted the thumb away from the control dial it will > collide with ones glasses, in my case the side of the frame, but as I > tend to slide my thumb along these type of control dials it is not a > problem for me. > > Perhaps I should not make assumptions as to how people who use their > right eye for viewing will cope with this camera seeing as how I use my > left eye! > > > > It didn't instill much confidence in me as a tough > > and rugged camera. > > I agree with you there it certainly cannot be classed as tough and > rugged, it is like many other entry level cameras from various manufacturers > pack in as many features as possible at a given price point. > > For me it is the ideal stop-gap camera at a reasonable price whilst I > wait for the hopefully forthcoming *ist D. > > Harry > > Harold Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >
Re: New Scanner
- Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell Subject: RE: New Scanner > Could you guys please try a 4X5 tranny scan at max resolution > ( which I assume is 3200 ppi) and report the scan time > to me? With the 2450 (2400 ppi) it takes about 20 minutes > which is quite annoying John, what have you got your 2450 hooked up to, and how is it connected. On my old machine, the scan times were unbearable with my 2450, but on the new one, the times are much more agreeable, around 5 minutes. William Robb
Re: *ist
- Original Message - From: James Fellows Subject: Re: *ist > How does it's "feel" or construction compare to the ZX/MZ series? For me, about the same, based on a very short look at the camera, mostly spent fumbling the (in my opinion only) too small control interface. My reference is the MZ-5, which was the first of the MZ cameras. It seems to me that if Pentax follows the same pattern with this chassis as they did with the MZ chassis, they have a lot of room to put other feature sets on the thing for model changes. The MZ-5 was pretty well equipped for it's day, but they came out with several bodies above it, and quite a few below it as well. William Robb
Re: Re:[2] First 6x7 lessons learned
- Original Message - Subject: Re:[2] First 6x7 lessons learned > > > I tried photographing a moving steam locomotive once. The slow shutter > > time caused the wheels to look out of round. > > It takes the 6x7 shutter 1/30 of a second to transverse the entire > > frame, so fast action shots are going to be difficult. > > If you are doing horse jumping, the thing would probably work, since you > > can catch the animal at the height of it's jump when there is little > > movement. > > > > William Robb > > > I suppose that using 1/1000 shutter,or at least 1 500,will help(these are my 35mm > settings)but there is more movment on the side shots than front ones.There is a > jumper grand prix during the Aurora fair this Friday.Weather is supposed to > be ok.I planned on going for an hour(6:30 pm start)or so with the digital and > a 35mm with slide film.I have some Provia 400 in the 6x7 now.I'll try a few > and see. Paul seems to have a good workaround (panning), and I don't really know if the slow shutter speed will be an issue with what you are doing. It doesn't matter what shutter speed you are using above 1/30th on the 6x7, the exposure time (how long it takes for the exposure to happen) is 1/30 of a second. At 1/500 of a second. the entire frame gets a 1/500 of a second exposure, but it takes the camera 1/30th of a second to do it. Consequently, if something is moving very quickly in relation to the camera, there can be movement related distortion, even though the subject is sharply rendered. William Robb
Re: New Scanner
Is the negative in contact with glass at all when doing a transparency scan on the 2450? If so, any issues w/ newton rings, and keeping the glass clean? -Mat J. C. O'Connell wrote: Could you guys please try a 4X5 tranny scan at max resolution ( which I assume is 3200 ppi) and report the scan time to me? With the 2450 (2400 ppi) it takes about 20 minutes which is quite annoying JCO -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 7:16 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: New Scanner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just got home with a new Epson Perfection 3200 scanner. I'm looking forward to installing it and trying it out later today, but in the meantime... Anybody know how it compares with the HP S20 for 35mm? Gosh, I don't know, but I just ordered one myself from B&H. I once had acces to an Agfa 2500T Duoscan at work, and it was excellent. But the lease expired. Our new one at the office is an Epson 1640 Pro. A big flatbed with limited resolution. What's more, I have to do more of this at home. I'd love to have the Nikon 5000, but I can't afford one right now. I guess I'll have to wait until everyone goes digital. In the meantime, I'll use the Epson 3200. I'm sure it will be great for medium format, and MF constitutes most of my important work. Paul
Re: Re:[2] First 6x7 lessons learned
> - Original Message -Penned by WW > > Subject: Re:[2] First 6x7 lessons learned > Paul seems to have a good workaround (panning), and I don't really know > if the slow shutter speed will be an issue with what you are doing. > It doesn't matter what shutter speed you are using above 1/30th on the > 6x7, the exposure time (how long it takes for the exposure to happen) is > 1/30 of a second. > > William Robb Ok,there you go.I did not realize that 1/30 aspect.Thanks for that info Bill.I suspected the travell time on the mirror was longer than 35mm.Its $6.75 Canadian to proccess a roll of 120 E-6 so experimentation is not costly.I'll try a pan or two and see. Here we go Dave
Re: *ist in stock
Daniel Liu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: *ist in stock >From: Daniel Liu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:18:20 -0800 > >What on earth is wrong with silver? Wed, 31 Dec 1969??? ;-) "Let's do the time warp again" BUTCH Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself. Hermann Hess (Demian)
RE: 31Dec1969 (was: *ist in stock)
Hey Butch, >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Subject: Re: *ist in stock >>From: Daniel Liu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:18:20 -0800 >> >>What on earth is wrong with silver? > >Wed, 31 Dec 1969??? >;-) > >"Let's do the time warp again" > Looks like a Mac user with the date reset problem! :-) - THaller
Re: New Scanner
> Is the negative in contact with glass at all when doing a transparency > scan on the 2450? If so, any issues w/ newton rings, and keeping the > glass clean? > > -Mat Mat. The 2450,and i assume the 3200, have plastic holders for 35mm,120,mounted slides and 4x5.The neg sits up from the glass,at what distance i'm not sure.Looks like about 2-3mm.I thinks someone did a test raising the adaptor up the thickness of a coin,which helped in a focus problem, but i forget who it was. Dave
Re: New Scanner
My new 3200 is used with a PC with 800Mz processor, 382Mb RAM and USB 2.0. I just scanned a 6x6 tranny at 3200 and the times were; 2:31 for scanning, 0:27 for processing for a total time of 2:58. The film is not in contact with the scanner glass at any time. Bill - Original Message - From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 10:27 AM Subject: Re: New Scanner > > - Original Message - > From: J. C. O'Connell > > Subject: RE: New Scanner > > > > Could you guys please try a 4X5 tranny scan at max resolution > > ( which I assume is 3200 ppi) and report the scan time > > to me? With the 2450 (2400 ppi) it takes about 20 minutes > > which is quite annoying > > John, what have you got your 2450 hooked up to, and how is it connected. > On my old machine, the scan times were unbearable with my 2450, but on > the new one, the times are much more agreeable, around 5 minutes. > > William Robb >
Joe's Homemade Lens Tests
I wanted to do some sharpness tests on my Tokina and Arsat lenses (see lens list below). While I was at it, I decided to compare some other lenses as well. Some of the results are interesting enough to share. Here's what I did: Subject is the front of the old (1870) church in Corrales, New Mexico. (The front of the church has fine details for such a test.) Film: Provia 100F. Tripod. All lenses set at f8. Scanned as TIFF files on a Nikon LS-2000 at 2720 dpi. Image cleaning turned off. All images had Nikon contrast correction applied. A couple of images had to be brightened or darkened a little. All assessments are my subjective evaluation of image sharpness, onscreen in Photoshop, at enlargements of 200% or 300%. The monitor is a new, sharp Sony, 17 inch, at 1024 x 768. The lenses are: FA* 24 f2.0 FA 28 f2.8 FA 35 F2.0 FA 50 F1.7 FA 20-35 F4.0 FA Power Zoom 28-105 F4.0-5.6 Tokina AT-X AF Pro 28-80 F2.8 Arsat 35 f2.8 tilt/shift (tested in normal position) For 24 and 28 mm. I evaluated corner sharpness. For other focal lengths, the subject I evaluated is closer to the center of the lens. The tests below list lenses from most sharp, at the top, descending to least sharp. 24 mm. FA 20-35 @ 24 mm. FA 24 28 mm. FA 28 Tokina 28-80 @ 28 mm. FA 20-35 @ 28 mm. FA PZ 28-105 @ 28 mm. 35 mm. Tokina 28-80 @ 35 mm. Arsat 35 (The first two were very close; evaluated at 300%) FA PZ 28-105 @ 35 mm. FA 20-35 @ 35 mm. FA 35 (These last three were also very close; evaluated at 300%) 50 mm. FA 50 f1.7 Tokina 28-80 @ 50 mm. (The first two were quite close; evaluated at 300%) FA PZ 28-105 @ 50 mm. 80 mm. Tokina 28-80 @ 80 mm. FA PZ 28-105 @ 80 mm. (These were close; evaluated at 300%) On close tests, I enlarged to 300% to ensure that I was not mistaking differences in contrast for differences in sharpness. It is surprising that the much-vaunted FA* 24 and FA 35 did not perform better. The FA 28 looks good. We are often asked about this lens on the list. I feel we can recommend it. Also very good, as we already knew, is the FA 20-35. These is a very limited test. I did not consider other apertures, other distances, or such factors as flare control, light fall-off, or contrast. These are relative rankings only, done at great enlargement. A low rank does not mean that the lens is not good. All of the Pentax lenses here have fine reputations. All will give fine results at moderate enlargement. The weakest performer, the FA PZ 28-105, is considered one of Pentax's best zooms, and a fine lens. (I have two of them.) Despite the limited nature of the test, some conclusions seem warranted: - The Arsat tilt/shift looks like a promising lens. - The Tokina 28-80 is clearly a winner. - Prime lenses do not necessarily outperform zooms. I don't have a web site to put the images on. If someone else would like to put them up, please contact me: jtainter at mindspring dot com Joe
Mail-Archive.com again
Mail-Archive.com is back up today, after its latest protracted vacation. It appears that all messages between April 6 and June 5 have been lost. This means that I don't know the reaction (flames??) to my complaint about the 2004 PUG themes. Can anyone summarize the list's reaction for me? Will we finally see the last of synchronicity? Thanks, Joe
Re: OT: Bayer image example
Wouldn't this be the correct way to print/display the digital image before starting to do comparisons with film ? If you process it with interpolation and god knows what other algorithms, then how can you jump out the gun with conclusions like "digital is smoother and has less grain" etc. If I take two images and get them through that great FixItLaterInPhotoshop (TM) technology, doing different processing to them, how can I assess the quality of the original images by looking at the processed ones ? Isn't this like comparing a camera clara painting with a photograph ? Rob Studdert wrote: For anyone so inclined I have posted a really rough page showing a section of the raw bayer map image captured by my Oly E-10 digicam and the subsequent "demosaiced" image. I can help but be amazed that the output is a good as it is, lets hope Foveon is successful. I'll leave it up for a day then it's gone, beware the page is about 600kB in total. http://members.ozemail.com.au/~geroc/bayer.html Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Joe's Homemade Lens Tests
you weren't able to account for sample to sample variation, which may be larger than the differences you saw. that's the trouble with these. very few people have the access to the number of different samples of the same lens, let alone have the inclination and patience to do the tests. Herb... - Original Message - From: "Joseph Tainter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "pdml" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Joseph Tainter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 16:03 Subject: Joe's Homemade Lens Tests > It is surprising that the much-vaunted FA* 24 and FA 35 did not perform > better. The FA 28 looks good. We are often asked about this lens on the > list. I feel we can recommend it. Also very good, as we already knew, is > the FA 20-35.
Re: Its that time again for the false Paypal emails!
"Alan Abbott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >The 'Login button does NOT go to Paypal but: >"http://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/boyz.php". Just for future reference: In web URL's, anything to the LEFT of an "@" (but after the "http://";) is ignored by the browser. So the above URL is simply http://fredhomepage.port5.com/boyz.php There are more complex ways of obfuscating URL's, but you can easily decode them with an online tool here: http://samspade.org/t/ (Use the second one down, "obfuscated URLs". -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Z-1P and TTL flash with pre-A lenses
Mark Roberts a écrit: ... TTL metering is done off the film. There's a sensor in the mirror box that points back toward the film plane (on the PZ-1p it's on the right side of the mirror box as you look in without a lens mounted). Yes, and on the MZ-S the sensor is under the mirror, before the AF sensors: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/krg/Photo/mz-s.htm http://perso.wanadoo.fr/krg/Photo/Images/mz-s/capteurs.gif TTL is available with all K, Ka, Kaf lenses. P-TTL is not available with K lenses, but available with K-insulated lenses. See Mark's page: http://www.robertstech.com/matrix.htm or mine http://perso.wanadoo.fr/krg/Photo/multizone.htm Michel
Re: Mail-Archive.com again
Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Mail-Archive.com is back up today, after its latest protracted vacation. >It appears that all messages between April 6 and June 5 have been lost. >This means that I don't know the reaction (flames??) to my complaint >about the 2004 PUG themes. > >Can anyone summarize the list's reaction for me? That sound you hear in the background is a mob armed with torches and pitchforks coming to get you... >Will we finally see the last of synchronicity? They'll be arriving on the solstice. :-P (Seriously, I don't remember.) -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: OT: Bayer image example
if the end image is the same, what is the point? if one image is better, does it matter how? Herb - Original Message - From: "Caveman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 12:04 Subject: Re: OT: Bayer image example > Wouldn't this be the correct way to print/display the digital image > before starting to do comparisons with film ? If you process it with > interpolation and god knows what other algorithms, then how can you jump > out the gun with conclusions like "digital is smoother and has less > grain" etc. If I take two images and get them through that great > FixItLaterInPhotoshop (TM) technology, doing different processing to > them, how can I assess the quality of the original images by looking at > the processed ones ? Isn't this like comparing a camera clara painting > with a photograph ?
Re: OT: Bayer image example
Herb Chong wrote: if one image is better, does it matter how? Yes it does, it's a question of comparison/test methods. cheers, caveman
Re: Its that time again for the false Paypal emails!
Sam Spade is a very good site. Thanks, Mark. I've put it in my easily reached place of honor, in the menu bar! keith whaley Mark Roberts wrote: > > "Alan Abbott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >The 'Login button does NOT go to Paypal but: > >"http://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/boyz.php". > > Just for future reference: In web URL's, anything to the LEFT of an "@" > (but after the "http://";) is ignored by the browser. So the above URL is > simply http://fredhomepage.port5.com/boyz.php > > There are more complex ways of obfuscating URL's, but you can easily > decode them with an online tool here: http://samspade.org/t/ (Use the > second one down, "obfuscated URLs". > > -- > Mark Roberts > Photography and writing > www.robertstech.com
Re: Z-1P and TTL flash with pre-A lenses
"Gary L. Murphy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Mark Roberts wrote: > >>TTL metering is done off the film. There's a sensor in the mirror box >>that points back toward the film plane (on the PZ-1p it's on the right >>side of the mirror box as you look in without a lens mounted). > >Brain fart. :-) Hey, for years I didn't know how TTL flash worked at all. I posted some questions on rec.photo.equipment.35mm and got several detailed answers... *all* of which covered everything *except* the fact that the camera is metering off the film during the exposure! And, of course, without this piece of information, TTL flash as a whole doesn't make any sense at all. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Bayer image example
Very interesting... Now, when they say a digicam is 6 megapixel, do they mean 6 million blue-green-green-red pixels (24 million sensor pixels), or do they mean 1.5 million blue-green-green-red pixels (6 million sensor pixels)? Now, on the Foveon, when they say 3 megapixels, do they mean 3 million, equivalent, blue-green-red pixels, or 1 million, equivalent, blue-green-red pixels? And, what about the reduced green sensitivity of the Foveon sensor compared to a Bayer sensor? I suspect we are talking about 1.5 million 4 color pixels, and 1 million 3 color pixels respectively. Sometimes I think digital folks are all bankers at heart (If we went back on the gold standard would the dollar be worthe 1/350 of an ounce, or 1/7500 of an ounce of gold?). Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto - Original Message - From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 7:03 AM Subject: OT: Bayer image example > For anyone so inclined I have posted a really rough page showing a section of > the raw bayer map image captured by my Oly E-10 digicam and the subsequent > "demosaiced" image. > > I can help but be amazed that the output is a good as it is, lets hope Foveon > is successful. I'll leave it up for a day then it's gone, beware the page is > about 600kB in total. > > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~geroc/bayer.html > > Cheers, > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 >
Re: Re: *ist SLR and K-mount lenses
Użytkownik Nick Zentena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał: >But that\'s not an open aperture M42 lens I don\'t think. Don\'t you have to >meter stopped down? Nope, you're right. It's a stopped down aperture lens - I missed the word "open". OTOH, how can one use automatic diaphragm of an m42 lens on any K-mount body? I haven't heard of any adapter that allows such operation. Is there any? Regards Artur
Re: Pentax Macro/pix for the web question
> What about... get a polarazing filter, place it on the scanner, put the diamond on it and scan at a high res. No camera needed. I just did this with a cloisonne ladybug pin I listed on ebay.. It did pretty well, and I actually didnt do it at high res. I barely have time to glance at the list these days so please forgive if this idea is redundant. annsan
Re: New Scanner
You are correct about the carrier holding the neg above the glass. Depending on the size of the negative, you can get some sag in the middle. I am scanning 67 negs and find that strips do better than single negs because the strip helps hold the neg more evenly. I would guess that 4X5 would have more problems with sag unless the emulsion was quite thick. Overall, it is a nice scanner - especially for the price. Bruce Thursday, June 5, 2003, 6:25:50 AM, you wrote: g> On Wed, 4 Jun 2003, Butch Black wrote: >> A friend of mine gave me some MF and LF scans done on an Epson 2450. The >> files were 20-30MB PSD files (Photoshop) I was amazed at the quality. It's >> still not ideal for 35mm although it may compare favorably with the S20. g> All this talk finally inspired me to buy a 2450 off of ebay (plus my Astra g> 4450 won't work under MacOS 10). g> The 2450 doesn't have a newton ring problem as the neg isn't on the glass, g> correct?
Re: Re: *ist SLR and K-mount lenses
Użytkownik Anthony Farr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał: >IMHO the advances in TTL metering are attempts to become as good as quality >hand-held meters. Of course It\'s also MHO that multi segment metering calculates an >xposure that is correct most of the time but not every time, and the >photographer isn\'t likely to know just what skew the meter\'s interpretive >feature has put on the exposure. By all means - that's why I dislike using the matrix metering. I really dislike the feeling of being unsure of both the factors the matrix takes into account and the final results. I prefer using c/w and spot metering. OTOH a hand-held meter used with >experience and skill gets the correct exposure every time, and its workings >are completely transparent. Centre-weighted averaging TTL is almost as good >as external metering if you use manual exposure or a memory-lock in auto, it >is arguably even better when a very long lens is up front. Absolutely. IMHO external meters outperform any built-in meter in terms of the precision of metering, reliablity and consistence of results. Especially incident light meters... > >TTL metering is for speed of working where that\'s essential, or convenience >whether to avoid the purchase of an external meter or to carry less gear. >It\'s a compromise whose price is ultimate accuracy. Of course. It seems that you've gotten me wrong. What I want to say is that one doesn't buy such a modern and well-equipped camera only to buy the external meter and leave the 16-segment meter aside. > >It\'s unreasonable to expect full backwards compatability from a CHEAP camera >like the *ist, which is chock-full of bells and whistles for first time 35mm >SLR users or those prepared to accept limitations when using obsolete >lenses. At least you\'d be able to use those lenses. Then what about the MZ-6? It is also full of features, it's even cheaper that the *ist, it's also destined for the amateur market, yet the compatibility is maintained. No, I don't agree with you - it's the Pentax strategy that has changed. It's all about decreasing the 2nd-hand market and selling more FA lenses(or especially the unfamous FA J lenses). Actually it's good from the marketing point of view... although those Pentax users, who are get used to the famous Pentax backward compatibility, suffer... Good luck fitting >old-mount Canon or Minolta lenses to the current bodies of those brands. >Pentax has cameras in its current lineup for old lens owners, and most >likely will have suitable future offerings when the higher level *ists (or >the mythic "New LX") come out. Yes, that's why I wrote I was waiting for the MZ-5n/3 successor. Regards Artur
Re: Lens Tests
My extensive tests on the Tokina 28-80 confirm similar findings.very sharp thru the entire range, often as good or better than fixed lenses. Robert James In a message dated 6/5/03 9:13:47 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > The Tokina 28-80 is clearly a winner. >- Prime lenses do not necessarily outperform zooms. > >I don't have a web site to put the images on. If someone else would like > >to put them up, please contact me: > >jtainter at mindspring dot com
Re: Bayer image example
all digital camera specs except for the Foveon based ones count individual sensing elements as a pixel. it carries almost all of the same detail information as if they were pure luminance sensors. the eye is pretty insensitive to color detail and there are many, many experiments that verify this. the luminance channel is where perceived detail comes from. interpolating color with hints from luminance works almost as well as having the same number of pixels sensitive to RGB like the Foveon. i don't know if you have noticed, but they have changed the Sigma/Foveon ads to say 10.2 million sensors. Herb - Original Message - From: "T Rittenhouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 13:07 Subject: Re: Bayer image example > Very interesting... > > Now, when they say a digicam is 6 megapixel, do they mean 6 million > blue-green-green-red pixels (24 million sensor pixels), or do they mean 1.5 > million blue-green-green-red pixels (6 million sensor pixels)? > > Now, on the Foveon, when they say 3 megapixels, do they mean 3 million, > equivalent, blue-green-red pixels, or 1 million, equivalent, blue-green-red > pixels? And, what about the reduced green sensitivity of the Foveon sensor > compared to a Bayer sensor?
Re: New Scanner
Yes it was to you Dave :D --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Bring a few 35mm slides over, we can > compare. > > > Not sure Brendan,was this directed at moi,or some > one else.If its moi i have a few i can > bring over. > > Dave > > __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
RE: Digital vs. film cave test
> -Original Message- > From: Keith Whaley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Not pertinent. It's pertinent for me. > > When the test being performed has the resolution of the > projector lens, > good or bad, as a common factor, so long as you don't > change the lens > between tests, it can be ignored, and only the eyeball > results considered. I have no idea what point you're trying to make. He didn't say he used the same lens for both projections, so I fail to see how that could be a common factor. I also fail see how it's a relevant factor when you're projecting a .7 meg image on the wall. You could project it through a coke bottle and not see much degradation. Basically he took an 11 meg image file, used an unknown method to reduce the file size to 6% of the original, threw it up on the wall and bhahaha'd at digital. If his point was that digital projection is inferior, fine, I don't think anyone would argue that an XGA resolution projector is going to beat any slide projector. He likes to project, so he should avoid them. However, he went to some effort to use files from dslrs that are way overkill for the projector's intended uses, implying that the capture method had something to do with his poor results. The implication is wrong. tv
RE: MX Batteries: MS76 vs. DL-1 (vs. ?)
If you're in the US and can stomach Wall Mart Eveready 357, 1/2 the price of the MS76 and still Silver oxide. At 01:30 PM 6/2/03 -0700, you wrote: Hmm, A76? Wouldn't that be an alkaline? Wouldn't that have the "dreaded" slow voltage drop discharge characteristic? I would have thought (from what I was reading online) that my choices were two MS76 or one CR1/3N (aka DL-1)? According to the manual, LR44 & G13 can be used. They are identical to A76 & S76. Two S76 are expensive so I use A76. Since the batteries power the meter only, alkaline should do the job. regards, Alan Chan _ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
Re: Z-1P and TTL flash with pre-A lenses
If I am correct, the TTL flash metering of Z-1p can do centre-weighted only (unlike Nikon where you can choose whatever metering you liked for TTL flash), similar to Super A/Program. The TTL flash sensor is located on the side of the mirror box. However, I could be wrong. The manual doesn't state clearly on this. regards, Alan Chan The Z-1p, and the other non-LX Pentax cameras with TTL flash capabilities, still use either centerweighted, spot, or segmented metering for determining the ambient light exposure. The TTL metering cell is only used for TTL metering, which pretty much simply cuts the flash output off at the right moment. _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
RE: MX Batteries: MS76 vs. DL-1 (vs. ?)
Hello Peter! > "If you're in the US and can stomach Wall Mart Eveready > 357, 1/2 the price of the MS76 and still Silver oxide." > Thanks Peter, that sounds useful! Still 1.5V each and the proper size I imagine, or you wouldn't be recommending them, I presume... What was the store you mentioned, Appall Mart? Wallet Mart? Mall Wart? :-) Oh well, I'll just look at my local Martha Stewart store, I can trust them can't I? :-o - THaller
Re: OT: The problems of E.T. (was Re: pentax smc 15mm A turned into Star Trek Thread)
I've put it on another, more appropriate list :-) Maris Peter Alling wrote: > I'd love to see the methodology. (And yes I'm sure Frank will see a > dirty joke here as well, just to combine another thread). > > At 04:19 AM 6/3/03 -0500, you wrote: >> I have studied this matter thoroughly while keeping silent. >> >> The number of planets that can possibly produce life turns out to be >> 69. >> >> (No joke in there - it's a scientific fact) >> >> Maris >> >> T Rittenhouse wrote: >>> Literally! >>> >>> The equation probably would give us a relatively precise indication >>> of the life out there, IF we had real numbers to plug into it. >>> However, all we have is off the top of our heads BS. It is a case of >>> having a method, but not having any data to use it with. We can give >>> an accurate estimate of the range of possible answers though. >>> Somewhere between 1 (this one), and all the planets that possibly >>> can produce life. >>> >>> Ciao, >>> Graywolf >>> http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 2:10 AM >>> Subject: Re: OT: The problems of E.T. (was Re: pentax smc 15mm A >>> turned into Star Trek Thread) >>> >>> The drake equation quantifies nothing. But it does look impressive, which is the point. > > Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. > Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
Re: Bayer image example
>From the tests it out resolves the D60, but the real problem is that it produces small file sizes. DPreview said that ressing up a bit you can get sharper prints with more detail than most 5 mp cams, I believe them but untill they can pull a 6 mp chip out of the rabbit hat a 6 mp cam will still make better prints. Hey Pentax, go steal some x3 samples and see what you can do with it lol. --- Herb Chong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > a Foveon has 3.4 million places where there are > sensors. each place has R, G, and B sensitive > elements. if you read the Foveon docs and looked at > the pictures of how the RGB elements are arranged, > it is perfectly clear what they mean. you're the one > that is confused and can't get past the mistake in > your assumptions. > > Herb > - Original Message - > From: "T Rittenhouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 15:06 > Subject: Re: Bayer image example > > > > Herb, that is clear as mud. Where do they get 10.2 > from? Most likely out of > > their hat. And it sounds to me like you are > parroting things (written by > > people that know less than I do about the subject) > you have read. In no way > > does your mumble jumbo answer my questions in a > straight forward way. > > > > It still seems to me that we are talking about 1.5 > million, verses 1 million > > picture pixels with reduced green sensitivity > (which is the color the eye is > > most responsive to). As long as the picture pixel > is smaller than the eye > > can detect individually it hardly matters whether > it is made up of 1, 4, or > > 128 individual pixels. So, until I see something > that make it clear > > otherwise, I will continue to view most of the > digital mumble jumbo as the > > BS I think it is. Especially the Foveon cant. > > __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Re: Digital vs. film cave test
tom wrote: If his point was that digital projection is inferior, fine, I don't think anyone would argue that an XGA resolution projector is going to beat any slide projector. You got it right. The cave thing was that before starting any kind of X vs. Y comparison, you have to define the purpose for which you want to use them, and please make it a valid one. The kind of testing we see now on most web sites is the "we take a shot with both cameras, then we scan the film, and examine on a computer screen a small detail of the digital image vs. the scanned one". I seriously doubt that this is the way most viewers look at photos, so while the test is a nice technical exercise, it has little meaning. If you tell me "my purpose is 8x10 prints and I took images with both kind of cameras and sent them to my lab and I got better results with X", I won't object, whatever X is (digital or film). Like you didn't object to the conclusion of the test for my purpose. cheers, caveman
Re: What about Takumar 1:1.9/85
> A question for you screwmount guys. What do you think about the > Super Takumar 1:1.9/85? I have an opportunity to buy one and > wonder if and how much I should pay for it. Is it worth the hassle > to use it on a K-mount? It's not the best 85mm lens there is, but if the price is right... The bokeh seems pleasing, and it might be just the portrait lens you're looking for... Inasmuch as all of the K-mount 85's are a little dear in price, you might consider using it with an M42-K adapter. I do have some comparative 85mm shots (including the Super Takumar 85/1.9) at - http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/85compar/ Fred
Re: Z-1P and TTL flash with pre-A lenses
Mark Roberts wrote: Hey, for years I didn't know how TTL flash worked at all. I posted some questions on rec.photo.equipment.35mm and got several detailed answers... *all* of which covered everything *except* the fact that the camera is metering off the film during the exposure! And, of course, without this piece of information, TTL flash as a whole doesn't make any sense at all. You know, after thinking about it, where else could it be making the readings? Not like non-flash metering where it's based on the film speed and the amount of light allowed by the given apeture, otherwise Mark Cassino's essay on the reflective nature of the different film brands/types would not be a concern ;-) Thanks! Later, Gary
*ist D revisited
Thanks to a good Pentax contact and to a very kind invitation I was today able to inspect a pre-production *ist D which has just arrived in Germany. This "pre-production"camera body is believed to be not a prototype anymore but equivalent to the final model except for some last software modifications. Also there was an *ist that I could compare the *ist D to. I brough FA, A, K and screw mount lenses to try them all. The good news (some of it may be old news, though): - the *ist D is solid - much more solid than the *ist, and also heavier, but not heavy. The body seems to be made of magnesium alloy or something like that. - the body of the *ist D is small but its grip is big enough to hold the body comfortably. - the user interface is very clear and owes much to the (P)Z1 family (hyper modes, 2 wheels etc...) - the CCD sensor is protected by a glass just in front of it. - when compared to the *ist, the 11 focus sensors of the *ist D cover a larger relative area. - Focus sensor selection is easy, and AF speed seems to be quite fast. - 2s mirror prefire self-timer - Everything works fine with lenses in "A" position. The not-so-good news - like the pototype shown at the CeBit, this *ist D does not feature an aperture simulator, so there is no mechanical transfer of information about the aperture selected on the lens - With a lens not in "A" position the body fires only if this is enabled by the according custom function - In aperture priority mode, with a K-mount lens not in "A" position, the camera chooses the shutter speed as if the lens was set at open aperture. And really, the aperture stays open during exposure, no matter what aperture is set on the lens, as the lens's aperture lever is not released by the camera but stays pressed down, so that the aperture stays open. I guess the same is true for the *ist. - In aperture priority mode, with a K-mount lens not in "A" position, DOF preview can be operated, and the operation can be heard, too, however, the aperture stays open all the same. Well, this is logical, as the aperture really will stay open during exposure. - In manual mode, with a lens not in "A" position, the meter does not work, but DOF preview does, just like with the *ist. This really is a shame. Why do the programmers of the camera not just turn the meter ON with DOF preview activated for manual mode? - In aperture priority mode, the camera and its meter work correctly with manual aperture lenses like K28/f3.5 Shift, K500/f4.5, K1000/f8, and Srew Mount lenses with K-mount adaptor. -the batteries do not last long Let's hope (never stop hoping) that the compatibilty issue will be bettered in a software update or in an updated *ist D or in the successor of the *ist D - this could be one advatage of the short production cycles of the digital age. Arnold
Re: What about Takumar 1:1.9/85
Fred wrote: I do have some comparative 85mm shots (including the Super Takumar 85/1.9) at - http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/85compar/ Even being one of the old f**ts that know those images for quite a while, I still can't refrain to LOL each time when I get to view the 85/2.2 Soft one in the "Location of depth of field" category ;-) cheers, caveman
RE: Digital vs. film cave test
> -Original Message- > From: Caveman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > You got it right. The cave thing was that before starting > any kind of X > vs. Y comparison, you have to define the purpose for which > you want to > use them, and please make it a valid one. The kind of > testing we see now > on most web sites is the "we take a shot with both cameras, > then we scan > the film, and examine on a computer screen a small detail > of the digital > image vs. the scanned one". Right, but out of curiousity, why bother with full sized 10D and 1DS files if you knew the projector is only running at XGA resolution? tv
Re: Digital vs. film cave test
I wanted them to be the exact output of the respective cameras, without further processing or compression artifacts. I somehow hoped that I will see some differences, in the color rendition and local contrast dept., but no luck, the projector was a very good equalizer. No notable differences to see. tom wrote: Right, but out of curiousity, why bother with full sized 10D and 1DS files if you knew the projector is only running at XGA resolution? tv
RE: New Scanner
no, the holder keeps the 4X5 neg off the glass but I found that thin negs sagged a little and did cause newton rings. I solved the problem by taping 4 quarters to the bottom of the neg holder to hold neg slightly higher off glass. Still get sharp results as the scanners optical system has plenty of DOF. JCO > -Original Message- > From: Mat Maessen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 11:01 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: New Scanner > > > Is the negative in contact with glass at all when doing a transparency > scan on the 2450? If so, any issues w/ newton rings, and keeping the > glass clean? > > -Mat > > J. C. O'Connell wrote: > > Could you guys please try a 4X5 tranny scan at max resolution > > ( which I assume is 3200 ppi) and report the scan time > > to me? With the 2450 (2400 ppi) it takes about 20 minutes > > which is quite annoying > > JCO > > > > > >>-Original Message- > >>From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 7:16 PM > >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Subject: Re: New Scanner > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> > >>> > >>>Just got home with a new Epson Perfection 3200 scanner. I'm > >> > >>looking forward to installing it and trying it out later today, > >>but in the meantime... Anybody know how it compares with the HP > >>S20 for 35mm? > >> > >>Gosh, I don't know, but I just ordered one myself from B&H. I once had > >>acces to an Agfa 2500T Duoscan at work, and it was excellent. But the > >>lease expired. Our new one at the office is an Epson 1640 Pro. A big > >>flatbed with limited resolution. What's more, I have to do more of this > >>at home. I'd love to have the Nikon 5000, but I can't afford one right > >>now. I guess I'll have to wait until everyone goes digital. In the > >>meantime, I'll use the Epson 3200. I'm sure it will be great for medium > >>format, and MF constitutes most of my important work. > >>Paul > >> >
Re[2]: waiting for the MZ-5n/3 successor
I must agree with everything Alin wrote. It was the MZ-5 (and 3 months later the 5n) that finally tempted me away from my long-serving MX. Four years later, the MZ-S seemed the ultimate expression of the 5n concept, so I bought it and have been very happy with it. The "menu and control wheels" cameras never appealed to me, although many people find them convenient to use. Pat White
Re: Pentax bashing (was Re: another 31 Limited question)
I think what you really want is "Louisiana Stupid Sauce", at least that's it's name. Pure Capsaicin with just enough vinegar to keep it liquid and red die for coloring. Pure heat no flavor, (Unless you consider acetic acid flavor). At 10:25 AM 6/2/03 -0400, you wrote: Rob Wasabi eating contest. Nothing more to say.. Peter Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
pdml@pdml.net
Just got an e-mail from B&H (in New York, NY) that the *ist is in stock. FYI. Peter __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com
Re: *ist D revisited
A few things regarding the "not so good news": > - In aperture priority mode, with a K-mount lens not in "A" position, > the camera chooses the shutter speed as if the lens was set at open > aperture. And really, the aperture stays open during exposure, no matter > what aperture is set on the lens, as the lens's aperture lever is not > released by the camera but stays pressed down, so that the aperture > stays open. I guess the same is true for the *ist. This makes senses because there is nothing from the body (no mechanical link) to stop down the lens or for the lens to indicate to the body what aperture it is set to. > - In aperture priority mode, with a K-mount lens not in "A" position, > DOF preview can be operated, and the operation can be heard, too, > however, the aperture stays open all the same. Well, this is logical, as > the aperture really will stay open during exposure. Again, perfect sense because there is no mechanical link. > - In manual mode, with a lens not in "A" position, the meter does not > work, but DOF preview does, just like with the *ist. This really is a > shame. Why do the programmers of the camera not just turn the meter ON > with DOF preview activated for manual mode? This makes no sense at all. How can the body stop the lens down with the DOF preview if there is no mechanical link between body and lens? I don't understand how this could possibly work. If the DOF preview can stop the lens down than the body should be able to do the same during exposure, just like a K or M series camera. > - In aperture priority mode, the camera and its meter work correctly > with manual aperture lenses like K28/f3.5 Shift, K500/f4.5, K1000/f8, > and Srew Mount lenses with K-mount adaptor. What do you mean "meter work correctly"? You just stated that in Aperture priority the lens stayed open regardless of what aperture was selected and that the meter reading reflected only the wide-open aperture. I don't see how the *ist or *ist-D could possibly work at all with non-"A" lenses because the body has no mechanical means of stopping the lens down (as stated in the original post). Unless of course I'm missing something. Perhaps with screw-mount lenses it would work like the LX in Aperture priority does with theses lenses because the lens is stopping itself down and the meter is getting a stopped-down reading. I really can't wait to see a full-production version of the *ist-D. The pre-prod sample you saw seems remarkably like the "prototypes" that were at the various shows. Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Pentax bashing (was Re: another 31 Limited question)
At 05:04 PM 6/5/03 -0400, you wrote: I think what you really want is "Louisiana Stupid Sauce", at least that's ^^ it's name. Pure Capsaicin with just enough vinegar to keep it liquid and ^ This should read "...at least that's what I think it's name is." red die for coloring. Pure heat no flavor, (Unless you consider acetic acid ^^^ And while I'm at it this should read: dye, although die may be a better word now that I think about it. flavor). At 10:25 AM 6/2/03 -0400, you wrote: Rob Wasabi eating contest. Nothing more to say.. Peter Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
Re: *ist D revisited
They better just put the simulator back in the camera and make it work correctly, we would want DOF preview AT ANY TIME like we are used to. That and metering AT ANY TIME to. --- Arnold Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks to a good Pentax contact and to a very kind > invitation I was > today able to inspect a pre-production *ist D which > has just arrived in > Germany. This "pre-production"camera body is > believed to be not a > prototype anymore but equivalent to the final model > except for some last > software modifications. Also there was an *ist that > I could compare the > *ist D to. I brough FA, A, K and screw mount lenses > to try them all. > > The good news (some of it may be old news, though): > - the *ist D is solid - much more solid than the > *ist, and also heavier, > but not heavy. The body seems to be made of > magnesium alloy or something > like that. > - the body of the *ist D is small but its grip is > big enough to hold the > body comfortably. > - the user interface is very clear and owes much to > the (P)Z1 family > (hyper modes, 2 wheels etc...) > - the CCD sensor is protected by a glass just in > front of it. > - when compared to the *ist, the 11 focus sensors of > the *ist D cover a > larger relative area. > - Focus sensor selection is easy, and AF speed seems > to be quite fast. > - 2s mirror prefire self-timer > - Everything works fine with lenses in "A" position. > > The not-so-good news > - like the pototype shown at the CeBit, this *ist D > does not feature an > aperture simulator, so there is no mechanical > transfer of information > about the aperture selected on the lens > - With a lens not in "A" position the body fires > only if this is enabled > by the according custom function > - In aperture priority mode, with a K-mount lens not > in "A" position, > the camera chooses the shutter speed as if the lens > was set at open > aperture. And really, the aperture stays open during > exposure, no matter > what aperture is set on the lens, as the lens's > aperture lever is not > released by the camera but stays pressed down, so > that the aperture > stays open. I guess the same is true for the *ist. > - In aperture priority mode, with a K-mount lens not > in "A" position, > DOF preview can be operated, and the operation can > be heard, too, > however, the aperture stays open all the same. Well, > this is logical, as > the aperture really will stay open during exposure. > - In manual mode, with a lens not in "A" position, > the meter does not > work, but DOF preview does, just like with the *ist. > This really is a > shame. Why do the programmers of the camera not just > turn the meter ON > with DOF preview activated for manual mode? > - In aperture priority mode, the camera and its > meter work correctly > with manual aperture lenses like K28/f3.5 Shift, > K500/f4.5, K1000/f8, > and Srew Mount lenses with K-mount adaptor. > -the batteries do not last long > > Let's hope (never stop hoping) that the compatibilty > issue will be > bettered in a software update or in an updated *ist > D or in the > successor of the *ist D - this could be one advatage > of the short > production cycles of the digital age. > > Arnold > __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Re: Digital vs. film cave test
What do you need, JCO to wander into this to know you're in the Twilight Zone? You've got folks who have an agenda to prove something, and don't care how they do it. So stop confusing things with facts. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... he went to some effort to use files from dslrs that are way overkill for the projector's intended uses, implying that the capture method had something to do with his poor results. The implication is wrong. tv
Re: *ist D revisited
Brendan wrote: They better just put the simulator back in the camera and make it work correctly, we would want DOF preview AT ANY TIME like we are used to. That and metering AT ANY TIME to. C'mon Brendan. They are now closer to that great camera Nikon F80 and you complain ? cheers, caveman
Re: *ist
> The should come out with smaller lenses for it, the one I saw looked > ridiculous on the Asterist. > > William Robb I have been trying a number of secondhand F & FA lenses on the camera basically to check the function of the lenses before the guarantees on the individual lenses expire. So far I prefer the FA 35mm 2.0, FA 50mm 1.7 and for a zoom an FA 28-70 f4 on this camera the physical size of the lenses seem to match the *ist SLR quite well. Pentax will have to release quality FAJ lenses for the *ist D rather than the 'economy' type lenses supplied for the *ist SLR. Harry Harold Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: *ist in stock
> But, how is the metering system activated? Isn't it by pressing the shutter > button? And it stays on for 10 seconds. Half pressing the shutter release button will activate the metering system, LCD display etc, or alternatively you can press the AV button adjacent to the shutter release button. Also rotating the "select dial" or I have just found out pressing the AE lock button will activate the metering system etc. The metering and LCD displays will remain active for the time you are operating either the "select dial" or any of the other alternative buttons, once you remove your finger from either dial or buttons the display etc, remain active for a further 10-seconds before switching off. Harry Harold Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Pentax bashing (was Re: another 31 Limited question)
Peter Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >At 05:04 PM 6/5/03 -0400, you wrote: >>I think what you really want is "Louisiana Stupid Sauce", at least that's > ^^ >>it's name. Pure Capsaicin with just enough vinegar to keep it liquid and > ^ >This should read "...at least that's what I think it's name is." Actually, it should read "...at least that's what I think its name is." ;-) >>red die for coloring. Pure heat no flavor, (Unless you consider acetic acid > ^^^ >And while I'm at it this should read: dye, although die may be a better >word now that I think about it. HAR! -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Its that time again for the false Paypal emails!
Keith Whaley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Sam Spade is a very good site. Thanks, Mark. >I've put it in my easily reached place of honor, in the menu bar! Samspade.org rocks! Try downloading their free software, though (http://samspade.org/ssw/). Even better (and much faster) than the web page. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
OT: He came back...
...and this time I was ready and waiting for him... http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/photoessays/owl.html Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Digital vs. film cave test
On 03.6.5 5:33 PM, "Bruce Rubenstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So stop confusing things with facts. Here you go again. Stop confusing things with something you know nothing about. What is the point of you suddenly coming into this without anything useful to contribute? Be specific as others do, rather than mentioning JCO and Twilight Zone etc. What's your point? Ken
RE: Digital vs. film cave test
I believe the point was humor. -Original Message- From: KT Takeshita [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 6:13 PM To: Pentax Discuss Subject: Re: Digital vs. film cave test On 03.6.5 5:33 PM, "Bruce Rubenstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So stop confusing things with facts. Here you go again. Stop confusing things with something you know nothing about. What is the point of you suddenly coming into this without anything useful to contribute? Be specific as others do, rather than mentioning JCO and Twilight Zone etc. What's your point? Ken
RE: He came back...
Very nice, indeed. Len --- > -Original Message- > From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 5:07 PM > To: Pentax List > Subject: OT: He came back... > > > ...and this time I was ready and waiting for him... > > http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/photoessays/owl.html > > > > > Cheers, > Cotty
Re: Digital vs. film cave test
KT Takeshita wrote: On 03.6.5 5:33 PM, "Bruce Rubenstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> [...] What is the point of you suddenly coming into this without anything useful to contribute? He's just trolling, as usual. Brucey, you're soo predictable Why don't you make some effort to surprise me ? Just once ? cheers, caveman
RE: He came back...
Nice shots Cotty, Looks like he heard the mirror going up on the first shot! :-) - THaller
Re: First 6x7 lessons learned
Yes, I was panning. I was shooting this car for an enthusiast magazine, so I didn't mind burning some film. The profile pan is one of the standard shots that I do on almost every car shoot. In this case, the car was moving at about 30 mph. I had the driver go back and forth following the same path and maintaining a constant speed. I shot six or seven frames. Half of them were decent. This was the best. Steve Desjardins wrote: > > This looks like a textbook "pan". Were you panning? > > Steven Desjardins > Department of Chemistry > Washington and Lee University > Lexington, VA 24450 > (540) 458-8873 > FAX: (540) 458-8878 > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: First 6x7 lessons learned
Thank you. I think a heavy camera and lens are actually an advantage when panning. The momentum of the mass contributes to the smoothness of the swing. Paul William Robb wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: Paul > Subject: Re: First 6x7 lessons learned > > > Pentax 6x7 f22 @ 1/30th. Hand held of course. > http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1069827 > > Nice panning technique. > Yer very good. > > William Robb
Re: Bayer image example
On 5 Jun 2003 at 13:07, T Rittenhouse wrote: > Very interesting... > > Now, when they say a digicam is 6 megapixel, do they mean 6 million > blue-green-green-red pixels (24 million sensor pixels), or do they mean 1.5 > million blue-green-green-red pixels (6 million sensor pixels)? Indeed it is interesting.. My E-10 is spec'd as a 4M pixel camera. The raw files consist of 2256x1684 pixels laid out in the RGBG bayer pattern as you saw on my page. The processed files are 2240x1680 pixels as processed by the camera or 2248x1676 as processed by an external application (varying amounts of edge pixels have to be discarded dependant upon the demosaicing algorithm utilized). > Now, on the Foveon, when they say 3 megapixels, do they mean 3 million, > equivalent, blue-green-red pixels, or 1 million, equivalent, blue-green-red > pixels? And, what about the reduced green sensitivity of the Foveon sensor > compared to a Bayer sensor? As Herb mentioned, each pixel location features three colour sensors unlike the fixed matrix of single primary colour sensors on a bayer sensor. I do have problems with the hype surrounding the "human green sensitivity" given that in any case regardless of how much original information is sampled for each colour the interpolated image has a finite colour depth for each RGB component in the composite image. I've seen no proof that the green component is any more linear. Obviously though the majority of lumimance component is derived from the green channel given that there are 2 pixels for ever one of green and blue. > Sometimes I think digital folks are all bankers at heart (If we went back on the > gold standard would the dollar be worthe 1/350 of an ounce, or 1/7500 of an > ounce of gold?). If you wan to delve into marketing speak and tweaking the truth look into the controversy surrounding Fujifilms claims regarding it's proprietary SuperCCD sensor technology :-( http://home.fujifilm.com/products/digital/sccd/faq.html BTW Did you have a glance over the pdf that I provided the link to at the bottom of the page? If not take a peek, it's pretty interesting stuff and quite revealing in that there is no one best demosaicing algorithm. http://www4.ncsu.edu:8030/~rramana/Research/demosaicking-JEI-02.pdf Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: OT: He came back...
Wow! Great shots. I'm going to save them. Paul Cotty wrote: > > ...and this time I was ready and waiting for him... > > http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/photoessays/owl.html > > Cheers, > Cotty > > ___/\__ > || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche > ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps > _ > Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Bayer image example
That should read: "Obviously though the majority of the lumimance component is derived from the green channel given that there are 2 pixels for every one of red and blue." Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: *ist in stock
Ohhh dear, powerout resets the computer clock all the time, i need to get a new battery, but i'm too lazy. Still though, i personally like silver. Besides, a variety of colors is probably more expensive for them to make. Apple had to nix the multi-colored imacs partly because of poor sales on orange. Oh, the days of metal cameras with fake leather are over, aren't they? But i'm sure some brave soul will try painting theirs. --Daniel Liu "You know when you're getting old, there are certain signs. I walked past a cemetery and two guys ran after me with shovels." On Thursday, Jun 5, 2003, at 04:40 US/Pacific, Mark Roberts wrote: Daniel Liu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: *ist in stock From: Daniel Liu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:18:20 -0800 What on earth is wrong with silver? Wed, 31 Dec 1969??? ;-) -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: *ist D revisited
On 5 Jun 2003 at 22:34, Arnold Stark wrote: > Let's hope (never stop hoping) that the compatibilty issue will be > bettered in a software update or in an updated *ist D or in the > successor of the *ist D - this could be one advatage of the short > production cycles of the digital age. Thanks for the report. Let's hope this one was far from a production model, otherwise there is no hope. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: *ist in stock
On June 5, 2003 07:08 pm, Daniel Liu wrote: > > Oh, the days of metal cameras with fake leather are over, aren't they? > But i'm sure some brave soul will try painting theirs. http://www.hartblei.com/products/cameras/trim-finish.htm Now that's a company that believes in choice. Nick
Re: *ist SLR and K-mount lenses
On June 5, 2003 01:11 pm, Artur Ledóchowski wrote: > > Nope, you're right. It's a stopped down aperture lens - I missed the word > "open". OTOH, how can one use automatic diaphragm of an m42 lens on any > K-mount body? I haven't heard of any adapter that allows such operation. Is > there any? Regards > Artur Which is why I brought up the Spotmatic F the last camera with full backward support. Every camera since then has had a crippled mount. The only question is how crippled. Nick
Re: *ist SLR and K-mount lenses
If you ask me, they're probably working on a more advanced version of the *ist, something that more resembles the 5n. After all, why wouldn't they? Seems like a lot (not all) of the problems you guys have described can be solved with a software fix, like the metering with older lenses. --Daniel Liu "Six meals a day keeps the doctor away!" On Thursday, Jun 5, 2003, at 07:21 US/Pacific, Anthony Farr wrote: IMHO the advances in TTL metering are attempts to become as good as quality hand-held meters. It's also MHO that multi segment metering calculates an xposure that is correct most of the time but not every time, and the photographer isn't likely to know just what skew the meter's interpretive feature has put on the exposure. OTOH a hand-held meter used with experience and skill gets the correct exposure every time, and its workings are completely transparent. Centre-weighted averaging TTL is almost as good as external metering if you use manual exposure or a memory-lock in auto, it is arguably even better when a very long lens is up front. TTL metering is for speed of working where that's essential, or convenience whether to avoid the purchase of an external meter or to carry less gear. It's a compromise whose price is ultimate accuracy. It's unreasonable to expect full backwards compatability from a CHEAP camera like the *ist, which is chock-full of bells and whistles for first time 35mm SLR users or those prepared to accept limitations when using obsolete lenses. At least you'd be able to use those lenses. Good luck fitting old-mount Canon or Minolta lenses to the current bodies of those brands. Pentax has cameras in its current lineup for old lens owners, and most likely will have suitable future offerings when the higher level *ists (or the mythic "New LX") come out. regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: "Artur Ledóchowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (snip) Buying an external meter only to be able to work with the plain K-mount lenses in the M mode of the *ist makes no sense to me. The camera has a new, advanced, 16-segment matrix and it's IMHO better to get rid of such lenses and get the KA-mount ones to be able to use it. One thing I'm sure is that the *ist is not the camera for me - I need full backward compatibility... Regards Artur
Re: OT: 2 articles from the washington post
On June 5, 2003 07:44 am, Herb Chong wrote: > oops, i meant filtering and interpolating. > > Herb... > - Original Message - > From: "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 07:33 > Subject: Re: OT: 2 articles from the washington post > > > it doesn't interpolate. you can tell when you take pictures of things > > that would be improved by a small amount of interpolation. i have some > > test images done up as photographic prints and there are a few places > > where these artifacts are visible. if they interpolated, they would not > > be. > If it doesn't interpolate then what does it do? Do the pixels cover the whole sensor? That link claimed the pixels are on a 9 micron centre spacing. That would be a big sensor with a lot of false data. If they've got gaps then you're using swiss cheese. Aren't those the only choices? Interpolate,cover the whole sensor or ignore the gaps? Nick
Re: *ist
On June 5, 2003 05:48 pm, Harold Owen wrote: > > Pentax will have to release quality FAJ lenses for the *ist D rather > than the 'economy' type lenses supplied for the *ist SLR. > Why would the *ist digital need better lenses then the *ist film? I'm guessing they're filtering the lenses on the *ist digital just like every other digital camera. What's the point of wasting good lenses on a digital camera? The FAJ for the *ist are going to be over kill for a digital camera. Nick
Re: What about Takumar 1:1.9/85
Haha, that is pretty neat. Does anyone know how much one of those things costs nowadays? Or where i can get one once i win the lottery? --Daniel Liu "The face of a child can say it all, especially the mouth part of the face." On Thursday, Jun 5, 2003, at 13:36 US/Pacific, Caveman wrote: Fred wrote: I do have some comparative 85mm shots (including the Super Takumar 85/1.9) at - http://www.cetussoft.com/pentax/85compar/ Even being one of the old f**ts that know those images for quite a while, I still can't refrain to LOL each time when I get to view the 85/2.2 Soft one in the "Location of depth of field" category ;-) cheers, caveman
Re: Its that time again for the false Paypal emails!
Awww, I thought that might be really something, but it's all Windows. Sighhh. keith Mark Roberts wrote: > > Keith Whaley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Sam Spade is a very good site. Thanks, Mark. > >I've put it in my easily reached place of honor, in the menu bar! > > Samspade.org rocks! Try downloading their free software, though > (http://samspade.org/ssw/). Even better (and much faster) than the web > page. > > -- > Mark Roberts > Photography and writing > www.robertstech.com
Re: He came back...
That first shot is super. Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto - Original Message - From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 6:07 PM Subject: OT: He came back... > ...and this time I was ready and waiting for him... > > http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/photoessays/owl.html > > > > > Cheers, > Cotty > > > ___/\__ > || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche > ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps > _ > Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk >
Re: OT: He came back...
Those are beauties, Cotty! What a well-done task! keith Cotty wrote: > > ...and this time I was ready and waiting for him... > > http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/photoessays/owl.html > > Cheers, > Cotty
Pro Cameras
CityTV showed one of it's "Naked in the House" episodes this week. It's an invitation only competition. The photographer gets 30 minutes with a naked model and one roll of film. I've yet to see a Nikon or a Canon. I've seen Pentax,Mamiya,Hasselblad, lots of Texas Leicas, something that I swear looked like a Graflex Crown and almost every other camera ever made. Yet no Nikons no Canon. Nick
Re: On the beach with Bob
I need to go for one of those walks. Been a long time. However, it would take all summer to get back in shape to do it. Enjoy yourself, Bob. Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto - Original Message - From: "Bob Walkden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 7:41 PM Subject: OT: On the beach with Bob > Hi, > > thought you might be interested in this aerial photo of Omaha Beach on > D-Day: > http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/uk/03/d_day_iphoto/html/default.stm > > somewhere down there is Bob Capa, taking those famous photos. > > I'm going for a walk now, and may be some time. I'll be back on 14th June. > > -- > Regards, > Bob mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Re: Pro Cameras
Those guys are the BIG boys from all over Canada and the States, and Medium format only or larger, no dinky 35mm amateurs there. --- Nick Zentena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > CityTV showed one of it's "Naked in the House" > episodes this week. It's an > invitation only competition. The photographer gets > 30 minutes with a naked > model and one roll of film. I've yet to see a Nikon > or a Canon. I've seen > Pentax,Mamiya,Hasselblad, lots of Texas Leicas, > something that I swear looked > like a Graflex Crown and almost every other camera > ever made. Yet no Nikons > no Canon. > > Nick > __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Re: Digital vs. film cave test
Nick Zentena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On June 5, 2003 07:53 pm, Bruce Rubenstein wrote: >> Of course you didn't. That's why you didn't understand that the >> Valentin's original post was a "spoof" test. Projecting images with a >> high resolution projector, then a low resolution projector and then >> claiming that the original image source was the cause in the difference >> is so absurd as to be funny. Only a fool or an idiot would think that >> this was a legitimate test. > > So it was stacked in favour of the digital. What's new? It was stacked *against* digital. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
smc P FA-J
I see the lenses are on the US site. Interestingly, all (as far as I have looked) "smc" is all lower case now. Must be inferior to old SMC lenses. ;( Collin
Re: Bayer image example
Oh thank you! I thought I'd had too much Glen Garioch! keith Rob Studdert wrote: > > That should read: > > "Obviously though the majority of the lumimance component is derived from the > green channel given that there are 2 pixels for every one of red and blue." > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Last friday on the mountain
I've just started sorting through my slides from last weekend at Grandfather Mountain (and I just found one more roll that I have to get processed tomorrow), but this one kinda stood out. It's from friday night when I was camping out on Attic Window Peak. MZ-S, SMC-A 20/2.8, Kodak E100SW, 2-stop ND grad. Pity this shot can't convey the wind that was almost blowing me off the cliff while I took it! http://www.robertstech.com/temp/7d301725.jpg It's 600 x 900 pixels. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: smc P FA-J
LMAO --- collinb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I see the lenses are on the US site. > Interestingly, all (as far as I have looked) "smc" > is all lower case now. > Must be inferior to old SMC lenses. ;( > > Collin > __ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Re: *ist
Nick Zentena wrote: Has Pentax ever made a lens with lower resolution then any current digital sensor can handle? The worst Pentax lens ever made likely exceeds the best current digital sensor. Don't underestimate digital. It's still in its infancy stage. In 5 years we'll laugh at the current 6MP cameras like we laugh now at the Barbie Cam. cheers, caveman
Re: *ist Position
From: Peter Jansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: *ist Position Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 20:38:24 -0700 (PDT) Check the Pentax Canada website. They have the *ist listed as a novice/intermediate SLR, which is the same as the MZ-6 & MZ-7. The MZ-5n is listed as intermediate & the MZ-S is listed as pro. In Sweden, the price for the *ist with FAJ 28-80 will be the same as for the MZ-6/ZX-L and FA 28-90. So, the *ist really is a replacement for the MZ-6. Best wishes Roland _ Hitta rätt på nätet med MSN Sök http://search.msn.se/
Re: *ist D revisited
I think he gets everything that Tom dropped and sent back. Seriously Alan, you do seem to be a magnet for problems. I have purchased 3 ZX-10's, 2 PZ-1p's, 2 MZ-S's, F17-28 fisheye, FA 20/2.8, FA *24/2, FA 28/2.8, FA 35/2, FA 50/1.7, FA *85/1.4, FA 100/2.8 macro, FA 135/2.8, FA *200/2.8 and A 400/5.6. Mostly new, a few used. None of them have had any problems to speak of. It seems as if everything that you get has some kind of problem. I feel for you! Bruce Thursday, June 5, 2003, 11:43:28 PM, you wrote: RS> On 5 Jun 2003 at 23:18, Alan Chan wrote: >> >Sorry, no, I did not check this.. However, I checked this on my Z1-P, and I can >> >tell you that mine does not behave like this. >> >> I am not reading this, I am not reading this, I am not Ahhh... I think I am >> going CRA RS> Is it just photo equipment that you have problems with? :-) RS> Rob Studdert RS> HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA RS> Tel +61-2-9554-4110 RS> UTC(GMT) +10 Hours RS> [EMAIL PROTECTED] RS> http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ RS> Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: *ist D revisited
Alan, I'm very inclined to agree with that. I suspect we could be seeing the beginning of the end of Pre-A lenses. Fortunately for me, all my lenses are A or newer. Bruce Friday, June 6, 2003, 12:04:40 AM, you wrote: AC> If an expensive model like *ist D doesn't support pre-A lenses, there is AC> almost zero chance any future Pentax SLR will. AC> regards, AC> Alan Chan >>Hm... I have mixed feeling about this. >>On one hand I know I won't buy this crippled mount and just hope >>the next camera (an upper model, full frame sensor maybe?) will >>feature full K mount compatibility. >>On the other hand, I expect coherency from Pentax policy - the only >>guarantee the K system will survive to digital transition, and that >>may very well imply the new mount is here to stay... :o( AC> _ AC> Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. AC> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: *ist D revisited
From: Arnold Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: *ist D revisited Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 07:31:18 +0200 Manual aperture lenses stops down by tehmselves. No coupling between lens and body is required. Does this mean that the FA Soft focus 85 and 28 will work in aperture priority mode with the *ist and *ist D? What "manual aperture lenses" does Pentax have in the K-mount? Best wishes Roland _ Hitta rätt på nätet med MSN Sök http://search.msn.se/
Re: The *ist camera
Don, I haven't gotten the impression that very many are jumping with delight. There are a few, but mostly what I hear is disappointment in the mount compatibility - especially with the *ist D. One thing that I haven't heard much about that concerns me is the manual interface. It appears that it works much like a ZX-50 or 30. Which means there really is only one dial to spin. That changes shutter speeds. To change apertures, you have to hold in a button and spin the same dial. I have tried that and REALLY disliked it. Perhaps people attracted to it will rarely shoot it in manual mode? Bruce Friday, June 6, 2003, 12:13:09 AM, you wrote: DEDFW> I have been reading the posts about this camera and wonder why so many, DEDFW> perhaps most, of the members of this group are so interested in such a DEDFW> crappy little thing? We have the MZ-S, the PZ-1P and many other fine Pentax DEDFW> offerings available. Now Pentax produce a tiny, featherweight, camera that DEDFW> won't use all the lenses we already have and everyone jumps up and down with DEDFW> delight. And to cap it all they will soon produce a digital twin that won't DEDFW> compare to those already available under other brand names. DEDFW> Don DEDFW> ___ DEDFW> Dr E D F Williams DEDFW> http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams DEDFW> Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery DEDFW> Updated: March 30, 2002
Re: Re: *ist D revisited
Hi Alin, Alin Flaider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am 06.06.2003, 08:54:20: > AS> - the *ist D is solid - much more solid than the *ist, and also heavier, > AS> but not heavy. The body seems to be made of magnesium alloy or something > AS> like that. > > This is good news. Will make those 10D deserters think twice before > jumping boats. "Mechanically as solid as the Canon 10D" is not a very strong selling point, or? > AS> -the batteries do not last long > > Let's hope this is a premature conclusion. All other DSLRs have come > to master very well the energy budget, surpassing the similar film > cameras. Like it has been previously discussed here, AA batteries are not best fitted to the power demands of a DSLR. Yes, they are abundant and cheap, but what good is that if I need 3-4 sets a day? Cheers, Boz
Re: The *ist camera
From: "Alan Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: The *ist camera Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 00:29:04 -0700 Since Pentax is going to push FAJ lenses from now on (judging from the spec of *ist D), we could expect there will be another high end model to replace the MZ-S. The only catch is, it won't support non-A lenses. We *don't know* that yet. The new high-end model might support old lenses, because those who wants one are likely to have been using Pentax for a long time and so has old lenses - while the tiny *ist is mainly for newcomers to Pentax. But, on the other hand - the new high-end model might not have support for older lenses. If it has a new lens mount with support för internal lens motors and image shock absorbtion/vibration reduction, then it may be too complicated and too expensive to support both the new electrical features and the old mechanical ones in one package. But, we don't know yet. Allt this is nothing but pure speculation. Best wishes Roland _ Hitta rätt på nätet med MSN Sök http://search.msn.se/
