Manual focus TTL flash

[Bo-Ming Tong]

Which manual focus Pentax bodies support TTL flash ? So far I have only 
found LX and Super A/Super Program. Did I miss any other ?

OT: Seeing IR

[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

Fallen behind on reading PDML yet again, but wanted
to share a URL I tripped over.  Apparently human 
eyes _are_ sensitive to near-IR, just not very much
so.  This page describes wandring around wearing
welder's goggles with IR filters in them so that 
one's eyes get accustomed to the low levels of
light (relative to the retina's sensitivity at
those wavelengths); what the author describes
seeing matches the results of shooting Kodak HIE
with a filter (except for the red tint to everything).

-- Glenn

Re: OT: Seeing IR Whoops

[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

Whoops -- forgot to include the URL!

Re: Manual focus TTL flash

[Alan Chan]

Did I miss any other ?
No.

regards,
Alan Chan
_
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

Re: Manual focus and proud of it

[Cotty]

>> > Is "shite" pronounced with a 
>> > long or short "i"?  
>> 
>> Long 'I', as in flying a 'kite'. British slang.
>
>
>
>Actually, its derivation is *Irish*, although 
>it has now been "accepted" into English 
>so-called "culture".
>
>;-)

I never knew that!




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   |  People, Places, Pastiche
||=|  www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk

Re: Manual focus and proud of it

[Cotty]

>I think that's unlikely. My dictionary gives the same origin for
>'shit' and 'shite' (linguistically. Biologically of course they have
>the same origin), namely 'scitan' from the Old English, with ancestry
>going back through the normal Germanic line. If there's a similar word
>in Celtic it's probably because of a common ancestor.
>
>The OE past participle was 'scitten' which probably led to the normal
>'shit' pronunciation of today, but 'scitan' would apparently have been
>pronounced to rhyme with 'heighten'.

No scitten Bob?




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   |  People, Places, Pastiche
||=|  www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk

Re: OT: Seeing IR

[Sid Barras]

> From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> Subject: OT:  Seeing IR
> This page describes  what the author describes
> seeing matches the results of shooting Kodak HIE
> with a filter (except for the red tint to everything).
> 
> -- Glenn
> 
Whoaa!
THIS IS something I will definitely try! I have been shooting IR for some
time now, and have attempted various methods to "not so much" see IR, but to
be able to predict it better.

What better way to learn IR than to actually walk around and see it?

My IR prints have become more and more successful over the years, and I've
shot enough film to predict the effects on particular foliage and species
under similar conditions, and seasons of the year.

But-- I like the idea of "real time" IR motion pictures, even if it is not
being recorded on film as I'm seeing it. A real, practical way to "do" IR.

Thanks very much Glenn, for some valuable information. I hope you will post
this info to the IR mailing / discussion group. If you
don't plan on it, please allow me to do so.

Regards,
Sid Barras

PS:I post occasionally to the IR list, and have been working on a system of
exposuring IR film that is unique, unorthodox, and, best of all, successful.
The addition of this pair of movie goggles could improve my photography 10x
fold.

Re: Manual focus and proud of it

[frank theriault]

Please watch your language on the list, Cotty!  Tsk tsk.

-frank,
self appointed list morality watchdog

Cotty wrote:

> No scitten Bob?
>

--
"I don't believe in God, but I do believe in pi" - Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: OT: Seeing IR

[frank theriault]

I already stick out in a crowd as it is.  Putting on those goggles and
walking around in public will cause children to flee in terror.  Women
will faint.  Men will turn their heads in disgust.

Sounds like fun!  

Hey, after three days of cloud, rain and drizzle, the sun's shining this
morning!  Woo-hoo!  (I know this last paragraph's a complete
non-sequitor, but it's put me in a rare good mood, but wasn't worth a
separate post).

cheers,
frank

"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote:

> Fallen behind on reading PDML yet again, but wanted
> to share a URL I tripped over.  Apparently human
> eyes _are_ sensitive to near-IR, just not very much
> so.  This page describes wandring around wearing
> welder's goggles with IR filters in them so that
> one's eyes get accustomed to the low levels of
> light (relative to the retina's sensitivity at
> those wavelengths); what the author describes
> seeing matches the results of shooting Kodak HIE
> with a filter (except for the red tint to everything).
>
> -- Glenn

--
"I don't believe in God, but I do believe in pi" - Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: Manual focus TTL flash

[Rfsindg]

Nothing else until you get to autofocus Pentax...
Bob S.
In a message dated 7/13/03 2:03:20 AM Central Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Which manual focus Pentax bodies support TTL flash ? So far I have only 
>  found LX and Super A/Super Program. Did I miss any other ?

Re: My first long telephoto prime: advice sought

[Pentxuser]

Great photo essay Jerome. You have a great imagination, are a fine writer and 
you captured the Gorillas with great intimacy. It's obvious you spent time 
getting to know your subjects...
Vic 
 
In a message dated 7/12/03 8:29:28 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

>http://www.exposedfilm.net/g1_essay.htm

Re: OT: Seeing IR

[brooksdj]

> Sid said:
> 
> What better way to learn IR than to actually walk around and see it?
> 
> My IR prints have become more and more successful over the years, and I've
> shot enough film to predict the effects on particular foliage and species
> under similar conditions, and seasons of the year.
> 
> But-- I like the idea of "real time" IR motion pictures, even if it is not
> being recorded on film as I'm seeing it. A real, practical way to "do" IR.
> 
> Thanks very much Glenn, for some valuable information. I hope you will post
> this info to the IR mailing / discussion group. If you
> don't plan on it, please allow me to do so.
> 
> Regards,
> Sid Barras
> 
> PS:I post occasionally to the IR list, and have been working on a system of
> exposuring IR film that is unique, unorthodox, and, best of all, successful.
> The addition of this pair of movie goggles could improve my photography 10x
> fold.

Sid.
I thought there might be a IR group out there.How does one join these folk???Is there a
google link??
I think this is a great idea too.I am at the point,as you said,i can look at the area 
to
be
photographed and get a good idea of what it will look like.(ie placing a shot with
buldings willows and 
coniferious to get good contrasts)   and this sounds interesting.
Thanks Glenn

Dave

Film/slides and eyes

[brooksdj]

I have gotten back in the last 2 or so weeks several RG 200 
negs and prints.(i

should mention the film ex date is 04/04 and is kept on the labs shelves not a 
fridge)and
when i looked 
at the first one,not the exposure mistakes, but the relativaly good ones,they all seem
soft to out of 
focus to me.I then shot a roll of Provia 100F same camera and lenses and mostly same
subjects and 
under a loupe with light table all look fine.Well exposed,good colour and relativaly
sharp.
Even though the film has a year left on its shelf life,could it be starting to "go".I
cannot tell from the neg 
if its sharp or not(looks properly exposed) but the slide film proved the lenses are 
still
good

Any thoughts or comments on this or am i just getting to old and to critical.Even the 
6x7
colour proofs 
look "soft",but focused, to me but the B&W and chromes look fantastic.>

Dave

RE: Digital delay

[Jens Bladt]

Hi
The awaited arrival of the *ist D gives me 6 weeks to part from my 4 K&M
mount Pentax lenses - as well as other stuff - to get the money for the *ist
D.
Actually - I am a little short of time...
Jens

test

[frank theriault]

test

--
"I don't believe in God, but I do believe in pi" - Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: test

[frank theriault]

Damn it!  My tests come through immediately.  My humourous posts made an
hour and 1/2 ago still aren't through.  I guess I'll see them this
afternoon, if ever.  Mind you, when you all see them, you'll say, "Frank
thinks these are humourous?"  

-frank, responding to his own post ('cause if I don't, no one else will)

frank theriault wrote:

> test
>
> --
> "I don't believe in God, but I do believe in pi" - Henri Cartier-Bresson

--
"I don't believe in God, but I do believe in pi" - Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: OT: Seeing IR

[Ed Matthew]

I thought there might be a IR group out there.
http://www.cocam.co.uk/CoCamWS/Infrared/INFRARED.HTM

http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm

Regards,
Ed
_
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

Re: Photo Essays

[Rfsindg]

Bill,
You asked for comments and criticism so here goes...
Terrific and inspiring idea! ...We can all do this somewhere.
Your subject matter isn't as exotic as Paul's walk thru Paris.
67 sides is too many, I made it thru 20 before I went to thumbnails.
The shots were better towards the end than at the start.
...Too confusing, too many things going on in the pictures to start.
The shots with fewer people in the scene seemed to work better.
(I understand how hard it is to isolate people in a busy market, but...)
Fruits, vegetables, and flowers are always an interesting change of pace.
I salute you for trying this out ... no better way to learn and grow.
Regards,  Bob S.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>  Inspired by Paul Stenquist's wonderful "Walk Around Paris",  I finally got
>  off of my lazy butt and completed a project I've wanted to do for some 
time:
>  A photo essay of one of my favorite places, Detroit's Eastern Market. It's
>  more than 150 years old, and on the weekends, is flooded with people from
>  every walk of life that can be found in this multicultural,
>  immigrant-attractive city.  I hope for this to be an ongoing
>  "work-in-progress", to which I can add each time that I visit.
>  Your thoughts, criticism and suggestions are welcome and solicited.
>  
>  http://groups.msn.com/wsawyerphotography/shoebox.msnw

Re: OT: Seeing IR

[Ed Matthew]

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I thought there might be a IR group out there.How does one join these folk?
To subscribe to the infrared photography discussion group, send an e-mail 
to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

In the body of the message:
SUBSCRIBE INFRARED
if you prefer the digest:
subscribe infrared-digest
Regards,
Ed
_
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer

[Mark Cassino]

Great job, Ken - I'll have to get down to the news stand and grab a copy!

- MCC

At 03:20 PM 7/12/2003 -0400, you wrote:
Had a pleasant surprise today. Got a nice check from Outdoor Photographer
for an image of mine (posted in the July 01 PUG
http://pug.komkon.org/01jul/IceFlwr.html). I had submitted it last year for
a section called "Your Gallery". I was contacted & told it would be
published in an upcoming issue. Well time marched on & it was months later &
it still hadn't appeared. I called & was told there was good news & bad
news. The bad news was they hadn't had enough free space to include any
"Your Gallery" feature in recent issues & it would be a while until they
would. The good news was that my image was already published in the June
issue (pages 68 & 69) & used as the background photo for an article,
"Keeping Cool". The really funny part was I had already read that issue &
never noticed my image. The amount I received was 4 times what I will get
when the image appears in "Your Gallery".
I guess now that I am getting paid for my photography ( a professional ?
har, har) I will sell my Pentax gear & get professional grade equipment. <
VBG>
Kenneth Waller
- - - - - - - - - -
Mark Cassino
Kalamazoo, MI
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- - - - - - - - - -
Photos:
http://www.markcassino.com
- - - - - - - - - - 

RE: FS Saturday

[tom]

> -Original Message-
> From: jerome [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Quoting Mark Cassino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 
>  
> > Are we to assume that you made your decision 
> > to flip from Pentax to another brand?
> 
> Yep. She bought a Canon Elan 7e (I think I read that last 
> week). In fact, I 
> think I saw her hanging out with Andre Agassi at Wimbeldon 
> last week. And Pop 
> Photo has already offered her a job 

She's looking pretty hot these days too.

tv

Re: Pentax Image in Outdoor Photographer

[Mark Roberts]

Ken wrote:

>Had a pleasant surprise today. Got a nice check from Outdoor Photographer
>for an image of mine (posted in the July 01 PUG
>http://pug.komkon.org/01jul/IceFlwr.html).

Great shot! (One of my all-time PUG favorites, in fact.)
Congratulations!

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: Sliding legs on 3036 bogen

[Lon Williamson]

I don't own this tripod, but we do have 2 other Bogen tripods
and two Bogen monopods.  In each case, these have been shipped
with a plastic and/or metal tool to tighten leg nuts.  Newer
units have a plastic tab over some of these:  they are the
offending bits that have to be tightened.  I don't know what
size they are, but I'm sure a standard socket set has the
appropriate socket.  Firm those guys down and remember to carry
at least one of the Bogen sockets in the field.
This is the "curse" of the Bogen system.

BTW, thanks for your reply to ZooPrimes.  Haven't decided what
to do yet
jerome wrote:
Whats the deal?! My bogen 3036 has leg-slide disease... is there a cure?!

Re: OT: Street Photography

[Lon Williamson]

A lot of "street photographers" seem to work this way.
There were a lot of rangefinder 35mm cameras made with
iris shutters and 35mm focal length that are small and
very quiet.  I own an Olympus XA that would fit this
bill.  Has markings for hyperfocal settings, and can't
be heard at all unless the area is dead silent to
begin with.
Bob Walkden wrote, in part:

A local photojournalist round here called Linda Sole often shoots from
the hip with a Leica M6 and 35mm lens. Her work is very good; it has
been quite widely published and has won numerous awards. She tries to
keep the camera hidden so that her subjects don't know what she's
doing.

Re: Sliding legs on 3036 bogen

[jerome]

Thanks to all that replied. I went home and tried to tighten the clamps with 
the tool from my other Bogen (the one that slides didn't come with it). This 
seemed promising at first, and a silly oversight on my part... but 
unfortunately it didn't work (not yet anyway). 

The little rinky-dink tool bent each time before any of the nuts even budged. 
And as of now, the legs still slide. 

But Lon mentioned:

> I'm sure a standard socket set has the
> appropriate socket.  

I guess that's what I'll have to look for. Or some kind of power tool that'll 
fit in there. Well, thanks again. At least I know that all is not lost with my 
3036, and I know what I need to look for.

- jerome

Re: My first long telephoto prime: advice sought

[T Rittenhouse]

Good advice, Jerome.

As an aside, I used to do a bit of zoo photography with a 135. Sure it was
too short for some of the smaller animals, but with a little patience I got
quite a few good shots. I would think a 300 would be adequate for most zoo
shots. Also should work for a lot of game preserve shooting. In the wild a
300 would be marginal.

Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto


- Original Message -
From: "jerome" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> I haven't read all of the emails, but rather caught the above blurb from
> someone's response. However, I felt compelled to mention that the more I
read,
> the more this is starting to sound moreso like a need for better technique
> rather than better equipment (even though both may very well be the case).
By
> technique, I mean a few things:
>
> a) perhaps being more patient. If the animal is not in a good vantage
point
> (e.g., not close enough) then sometimes you just gotta wait it out.
Sometimes
> seconds, sometimes minutes... sometimes it just means "maybe another day".
In
> some instances it can simply mean finding a better point to shoot from.
But of
> course this is not always possible. Sur, You may be able to reach things
that
> you couldn't before but keep in mind: 1) f2.8 + 2x TC + at least 1 stop
for
> good measure (or even 2 for DOF) = your right back at f8 or f11. and 2) as
Mark
> pointed out, dealing with that 2x TC can really knock your image quality
down a
> few notches anyway.
>
> b) Learn the behavior of your subjects. The reason I say this is because
you
> seem unsatisfied with a 1/125 sec. shutter speed, and suggested that this
> makes "many shots...impossible". This kinda baffles me since I can't
remember
> the last time I was able to shoot above 1/100 with either the 300mm f2.8
OR the
> 400 f2.8..
>
> Given that the best zoo photos are typically on overcast days and/or with
> animals shying away from direct sunlight, I usually live around the 1/30
to
> 1/60 range, with 1/15 not being unusual. Granted, I use ISO 100 film...
but the
> point is that it (slow speeds) works, and few shots are "impossible"
unless
> you're specifically trying to freeze action. You just need timing. And a
whole
> heap of patience for that right moment (which may literally last 1 second
as
> the animals pauses for thought or changes direction).
>
> I kinda sensed the "if I had a big fast lens, then click click click and
> excellent photos are mine" syndrome for a second there. So I just thought
I'd
> mention this since I'd hate for you (or anyone) to spend a heap of money
on
> fast primes and be totally disenchanted when they find that the equipment
> additions didn't "save the day".
>

Re: My first long telephoto prime: advice sought

[Lon Williamson]

Nope, that ain't it.  I've waited a total of 24 hours now
for ONE tiger shot and haven't fired yet.  Many animals
prefer shade, which puts me, all too often, in shutter
speeds of 1/8 to 1/30 second, with all the attendant
focusing difficulties of an f8 mirror.  I need a long
lens to help isolate background:  I don't like shots
where fences, fake stone enclosures, etc. are revealed.
Believe me, I know some of these critters by name.  Where
they like to hang out, which ones are "hams", which ones
have babies, etc.
A 500 mirror just doesn't cut it much of the time, and a 300
is often not going to isolate well enough.  A fast 300 with TCs
would probably do the trick, though
jerome wrote:
Using a 500 mirror (which is NOT too long for zoo shots, btw) 
gives me a max shutter speed of about 125 with 800 speed 
film in most situations on bright days at noon.  Many shots 
are impossible with such a slow lens.


I haven't read all of the emails, but rather caught the above blurb from 
someone's response. However, I felt compelled to mention that the more I read, 
the more this is starting to sound moreso like a need for better technique 
rather than better equipment (even though both may very well be the case). By 
technique, I mean a few things: 

a) perhaps being more patient. If the animal is not in a good vantage point 
(e.g., not close enough) then sometimes you just gotta wait it out. Sometimes 
seconds, sometimes minutes... sometimes it just means "maybe another day". In 
some instances it can simply mean finding a better point to shoot from. But of 
course this is not always possible. Sur, You may be able to reach things that 
you couldn't before but keep in mind: 1) f2.8 + 2x TC + at least 1 stop for 
good measure (or even 2 for DOF) = your right back at f8 or f11. and 2) as Mark 
pointed out, dealing with that 2x TC can really knock your image quality down a 
few notches anyway. 

b) Learn the behavior of your subjects. The reason I say this is because you 
seem unsatisfied with a 1/125 sec. shutter speed, and suggested that this 
makes "many shots...impossible". This kinda baffles me since I can't remember 
the last time I was able to shoot above 1/100 with either the 300mm f2.8 OR the 
400 f2.8.. 

Given that the best zoo photos are typically on overcast days and/or with 
animals shying away from direct sunlight, I usually live around the 1/30 to 
1/60 range, with 1/15 not being unusual. Granted, I use ISO 100 film... but the 
point is that it (slow speeds) works, and few shots are "impossible" unless 
you're specifically trying to freeze action. You just need timing. And a whole 
heap of patience for that right moment (which may literally last 1 second as 
the animals pauses for thought or changes direction). 

I kinda sensed the "if I had a big fast lens, then click click click and 
excellent photos are mine" syndrome for a second there. So I just thought I'd 
mention this since I'd hate for you (or anyone) to spend a heap of money on 
fast primes and be totally disenchanted when they find that the equipment 
additions didn't "save the day".

Re: OT: Street Photography

[T Rittenhouse]

I don't consider this "street photography", I consider it "stealth
photography", and the same as using a telephoto lens to take pictures of
people who don't know you are doing it. In my opinion most "victims" would
like to mob the photographer that does this kind of stuff, luckily for the
photographer most victims are not motorcycle gangs . I did that kind of
stuff when I was a teenager, but finally realized that giving people the
opportunity to wave me off if they really didn't want their picture taken
was more honest. You may feel safer, but you are really in a lot more danger
when doing stealth photography.

Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto


- Original Message -
From: "Lon Williamson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2003 10:00 AM
Subject: Re: OT: Street Photography


> A lot of "street photographers" seem to work this way.
> There were a lot of rangefinder 35mm cameras made with
> iris shutters and 35mm focal length that are small and
> very quiet.  I own an Olympus XA that would fit this
> bill.  Has markings for hyperfocal settings, and can't
> be heard at all unless the area is dead silent to
> begin with.
>
> Bob Walkden wrote, in part:
>
> >
> > A local photojournalist round here called Linda Sole often shoots from
> > the hip with a Leica M6 and 35mm lens. Her work is very good; it has
> > been quite widely published and has won numerous awards. She tries to
> > keep the camera hidden so that her subjects don't know what she's
> > doing.
>

Re: My first long telephoto prime: advice sought

[Lon Williamson]

Jerome, if you ever get a chance, visit the Cincinnati Zoo.
The male silverback (Colossus by name) is one of the largest
in captivity and is stunning.  The enclosure has a few vines
at the back to give green, rather than grey, backgrounds.
Colossus has three places he likes to hang out.  The best for
photographers is an enormous fallen tree that hee likes to
sit on, at the far left side.
I usually set up aimed at the tree and wait.  Last time I was
there, I waited 2 hours and he finally obliged.  I ripped off
about 12 shots.  I'll post one for the next PUG.
jerome wrote:

My most recent project involved the gorilla photos that I posted in this 
thread. Yes, that involved a 400mm f2.8, and a handful of TC's... but it also 
involved 2 rainy days at the zoo, for about 5 hours each day... all spent at 
the same exhibit. And even though I was there for a collective 12 hours, I 
likely shot for a combined 45 minutes. That's just how it is sometimes. The 
thing is, that exhibit is HUGE (I think the first or second largest in the 
country), so those gorillas can spend the whole day out of sight if they want 
to. 

.

After 10 hours with the gorillas, I have to say that I really learned 'em! And 
am looking forward to spending similar time with them some day soon. By now, I 
can damn near tell you when one is about burp or hiccup . Heck, with shutter 
speeds of 1/30 sec., I simply had to figure these things out. But in all, the 
experince was great. For one, I bonded with my subjects (as absurd as that 
sounds), learned a lot, and walked away with tons more than a few photographs. 
Heck, it was even enough to warrant a short essay on the trip.

Re: Manual focus TTL flash

[Lon Williamson]

It's a short list, and I think you named both.
Lottsa griping here on PDML from time to time
because "they should have put it on the ZX-M, too".
Bo-Ming Tong wrote:
Which manual focus Pentax bodies support TTL flash ? So far I have only 
found LX and Super A/Super Program. Did I miss any other ?

Re: Auto 110 index tab

[Michel Carrère-Gée]

I found a 110 film cartridge shema in this page:
http://rawhiti.tripod.com/110cassette.html
Michel

50mm f/1.4 Super Takumar

[Michel Carrère-Gée]

Comment démonter un 50mm f/1.4 Super Takumar pour nettoyer ses lentilles.
How to strip down a pentax 50mm f/1.4 Super Takumar lens to clean.
http://retina.topcities.com/pentax50mmf1.4.html

Michel

Re: My first long telephoto prime: advice sought

[Mark Cassino]

At 12:48 PM 7/12/2003 -0400, Lon Williamson wrote:

Got three replies so far; I DO want a fast lens for the following
reasons:  I'm probably going to buy ONE and ONLY ONE telephoto prime
and use TCs to extend its range.
That was my logic in getting the 400 f2.8.  I figured that with 
teleconverters it would provide a range of focal lengths, all useable.

Using a 500 mirror (which is NOT too long for zoo shots, btw) gives
me a max shutter speed of about 125 with 800 speed film in most situations
on bright days at noon.  Many shots are impossible with such a slow lens.
If your subject was in the sun, I'd expect you to have a much faster 
shutter than that at noon (based on the sunny 16 rule.)  But the contrast 
would be murder!

I shoot mostly ISO 100 and am pretty comfortable if the shutter is 1/30th 
or  greater.  At 1/30th I lose a lot of shots due to subject motion 
though.  At 1/15th and slower I start losing shots to camera shake at 
subject motion both.

I'm afraid I'd run into similar problems with a f4 or f4.5 prime and
TC combination, so I think I'm going to get the 300 or 400 f2.8
to make sure slapping on a TC doesn't result in a "too slow" lens.
IMO, fill flash is really a necessity in a lot of situations.  The range 
your flash can reach is determined by your F stop setting.  A fast lens 
lets you get the most distance out of your flash.

Mark, I've got a Giottos M3000 ball head rated at 33 lbs.  Subtract
10 lbs.  from that to be on the safe side and the tripod, not the head, is
my suspected problem.  Have you ever used a tube with the 400 to get
closer focus?
I've not used a tube with the 400, though there were times when I wished I 
had broguht one.  With the 1.7x you have about 1/15th magnification at the 
closest focusing distance - which is pretty workable.

Good luck!

- MCC
- - - - - - - - - -
Mark Cassino
Kalamazoo, MI
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- - - - - - - - - -
Photos:
http://www.markcassino.com
- - - - - - - - - - 

RE: Film/slides and eyes

[Butch Black]

Hi Dave;

It sounds like your lab's printer is slightly out of focus. If you're
dealing with a quality oriented lab as opposed to a drugstore 1 hr lab bring
in some samples of both and show them the difference. Machines can slowly
drift out of focus and nobody noticed. Be forewarned that some labs,
especially wedding/portrait labs will sometimes run their machines slightly
soft on focus on purpose as it hides minor blemishes etc. When I first got
my 645 I was not impressed with the prints I was getting from it. I was
using a wedding lab. I shot some B&W and all the benefits of MF were
evident. I then took a color neg to the minilab I worked at and it too was
tack sharp, noticeably sharper then the proof I got from the wedding lab.

BUTCH

Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself.

Hermann Hess (Demian)

Re: FS Saturday

[Eactivist]

> -Original Message-
> From: jerome [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Quoting Mark Cassino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 
>  
> > Are we to assume that you made your decision 
> > to flip from Pentax to another brand?
> 
> Yep. She bought a Canon Elan 7e (I think I read that last 
> week). In fact, I 
> think I saw her hanging out with Andre Agassi at Wimbeldon 
> last week. And Pop 
> Photo has already offered her a job 

>She's looking pretty hot these days too.

>tv

Hehehehe.

Yes, bought the Elan 7e. But I am remaining on list because of the *ist D and 
I may get a MX and a manual focus lens for macro work.

Hey, with the battery grip on the 7e it's a BIG BLACK CAMERA, and you know 
about those. ;-)

Marnie aka Doe 

Re: Zooms vs. primes (WAS: Re: Let's talk about the FA 28-105/4-5.6 PZ (now abit long))

[Mark Roberts]

"whickersworld" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Alan Chan wrote:
>
>> My friend's Nikkor AF 80-200/2.8D sucked when shooting at
>> 200/2.8. Everything was diffused. Didn't know what's wrong.

>They all do that, Alan, especially when focused close.

The FA*80-200/2.8 performs wonderfully wide open, even close up. I often
use mine with an extension tube to get even closer. (I have an old
non-auto-diaphragm Pentax extension tube that I keep in my bag at all
times for emergencies.)

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: Let me see if I've got this straight...

[jerome]

This may be helpful. An old post from Mike Johnston:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg27961.html

Re: stalking animals (was: Re: On cheerleading)

[Mark Cassino]

At 10:28 AM 7/11/2003 -0400, Christian wrote:


Written by the man with a 400/2.8 and teleconverters  HAR! :-)
(I know, I know, you get really close to your subjects, evidenced by
frame-filling shots of songbirds)
I guess I should of seen that one coming :-0

But seriously - in this day of 500mm IS lens with 2x teleconverters and 
DSLRS with a 1.5x magnification factor there are a lot of birds shooting 
with the equivalent of a 1500mm rig.  A while back I saw what appeared to 
be a fine bird image taken with an effective 1700mm setup.  Now THOSE are 
long lenses!

- MCC
- - - - - - - - - -
Mark Cassino
Kalamazoo, MI
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- - - - - - - - - -
Photos:
http://www.markcassino.com
- - - - - - - - - - 

Re: Using NiMh batteries in BG1- grip with MZ-S?

[Wolfgang Höll]

Hi,

I'm using NiMh-batteries in the BG1 for about 1,5
years.
Some NiMh battery types don't supply enough voltage
and don't work at all. 
So I use the german "Haehnel" batteries with 2000 mAH
capacity. They advertise with 1,25 volts per battery.
One fully loaded set is sufficient for about 20 to 30
films.

Sometimes my MZ-S has problems with the film
transport.
I think it's not the power supply but the way the film
is inserted into the transport system. In case I put
in the film (Fuji Sensia) somewhat too long into the
transport cogwheel the transport always 
sounds strained. After about 20 photos the transport
stops and the camera tries to rewind the film. But it
often gets stuck and the rewind fails. After such a
problem I finally have to pull out the film in the
darkroom... Has anybody of you the same problem?

Regards 
 Wolfgang

__

Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - http://mail.yahoo.de
Logos und Klingeltöne fürs Handy bei http://sms.yahoo.de

Re: Let me see if I've got this straight...

[John Dallman]

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (jerome) wrote:

> This may be helpful. An old post from Mike Johnston:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg27961.html

OK, that's much clearer. 

--- 
John Dallman [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: GS Find

[Bill Owens]

Don't forget I also got the 65mm in the same deal. :-)

Bill

- Original Message - 
From: "T Rittenhouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 6:01 PM
Subject: Re: GS Find


> Well, Bill Owen got that Black Mamiya 23 Super w. 100mm, 6x7 back, and a
> Metz 45cl for almost nothing, the rat . Is that close enough?
>
> Ciao,
> Graywolf
> http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 11:46 AM
> Subject: Re: GS Find
>
>
> >   > I know folks who find all kinds of neat and valuable stuff
> > at yard/garage
> > > sales. Me, like you Dave, I only find old baby clothes, junk
appliances,
> and
> > > knicknacks
> >
> > Sounds like you and i go to the same yard sales,Tom.LOL
> > I did manage to get to a few auctions nearby last summer that had
cameras
> listed,but they
> > were mostly
> > P&S's or very badly broken box type cameras.I'm hoping to find a 6x7 200
> or 300 for a
> > couple of bucks
> > though(HEY i can dream right)
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
>
>
>

Re: Zooms vs. primes (WAS: Re: Let's talk about the FA 28-105/4-5.6

[Keith Whaley]

Just a few thoughts on zoom photography in general...
I have just recently "discovered" the ease a small zoom gives me when
I'm on vacation, and the help in framing it provides.
As I get older, while I still love walking among the rocks and along the
seashore, camera at the ready, I am not as much a mountain goat as I
once was, and I find the lens does a lot of the walking for me...

Considering the past two trips I've taken, with photography a tie for
first consideration in sight-seeing, I used my 135mm f/2.5, my 19mm
f/3.8 a lot, and in between, the Pentax-A 35-80mm zoom was always on the
camera. In lieu of one of my 50mm f/1.4s...
This is the first time I've used the zoom extensively, and found it a
real boon to help me get just a little closer, or include just a little
more in the frame, when I couldn't move to accomplish the same thing...

The enjoyment while taking the photos was one thing, and enjoy the trip
I did.
However, when I got back and had the prints made, I suddenly realized a
significant change had taken place in my vacation trip photography.
With few exceptions, there was little difference visible, or better
said, to distinguish between, the 19mm, the 35-80 zoom or the 135mm
prime in the prints. I had no particularly unusual angles, or such, that
would favor the use of one over the other, other than remembering that
in this shot, I needed the 19mm to get what horizontal expanse I needed, etc.
But, other than that, all were just good representative examples of
portraying where we'd been,what we did, and what we saw along the way.

There was none of the "Oh yeah, that was the 135mm," or "...that was
definitely the 19mm." All images seemed to fit the subject, with rare
exceptions, and there's no other way to say it but that there was no
sense of the lens chosen. No particular uniqueness to any given shot.
All just about s good and well framed as I would have expected them to be...
Maybe you've experienced that, but this is the first time I haven't
changed prime lenses back and forth like musical chairs, and quite
frankly, it was a real pleasure! All to my purchase of that little 35-80
zoom I got on eBay!

I have one other low range zoom, a Pentax-A 35-70mm f/4.0 that I got
from one of our PDMLers, but it was in having a CLA done on it while I
was on this trip... I look forward to using it next trip. Thing is, I'm
now hooked on good quality low range zooms like that, and fine them very useful!

Just my take on the matter...

keith whaley


Mark Roberts wrote:
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Dallman) wrote:
> 
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >(Mark Roberts) wrote:
> >
> >> For those who haven't checked this week's "Sunday Morning Photographer"
> >> yet, Mike has a few things to say on the subject of "Zooms vs. Primes":
> >> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-03-07-13.shtml
> >
> >Thanks; I've not seen his writing before. I think I agree with him on this
> >subject - when I've tried using zooms, there always seems too much to
> >fiddle with, and hunting for a zoom ring seems more complicated than a
> >step back or forwards.
> 
> I generally agree with him on this, too. I only have two zooms, a
> 28-70/2.8 and an 80-200/2.8, only the latter of which sees general use.
> The 28-70 comes out only when I know I'll be doing a lot of shooting in
> a situation in which I won't be able to switch lenses conveniently.
> 
> --
> Mark Roberts
> Photography and writing
> www.robertstech.com

Re: Sliding legs on 3036 bogen

[Kathleen]

Thanks, Pat.  I'm going to check it out.  When out to a local arboretum this
morning to take photos, and struggling with the wingnuts on my tripod legs
really made the morning difficult.  It's time to do something about this.
Kathy

- Original Message -
From: "Pat White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 4:20 PM
Subject: Re: Sliding legs on 3036 bogen


> The nice thing about the Manfrotto/Bogen tripods and monopods is that you
> can adjust the tightness of the leg clamps.  Over time, the clamps may
> loosen slightly, but they're easy to adjust.  On each clamp, there is an
> upper nut and bolt, which secures the clamp to the larger tube.  Then
there
> is a lower nut and bolt, which you can use to increase or reduce the
> tightness of the clamp, by using a slot-head screwdriver to tighten or
> loosen the bolt.
>
> Try tightening it just half a turn.  If it still creeps downward under
load,
> give it another half-turn.  As long as you're able to snap the locking
lever
> into the lock position without too much effort, it's not too tight.  This
> applies to the series just before the present line.  The new-style clamps
> may be a little different.  I haven't looked closely at them.
>
> As for Kathy's wing-nut style clamps, they do require more force to
tighten
> than is comfortable for most people.  My 190 Short would creep downwards
> even when tightened firmly, so I finally found another set of legs (190QC)
> with flip-style leg locks and slipped the center-post onto them.  Much
> better setup.  Take a look at the new-style Manfrotto tripods with the new
> larger flip-levers.  They should be easier to use, and more comfortable.
> Hope this is helpful.
>
> Pat White
>
>

RE: OT: Street Photography

[Amita Guha]

> Twice last year i meet up with the good folks of the TOPDML 
> and i brought my plain old Y-M with me 
> with some B&W film.

Yep, the YM is a perfect camera for this sort of thing. I did it once
myself. It was great because it seemed that most people on the street
didn't even know it was a camera. 

Tokina 80-200 2.8

[Okipentax]

I have considered purchasing the Pentax 80-200 2.8 for a while now, but the $1350 
price, while I'm sure fair, isn't pocket change. Tokina's 80-200 can be had from the 
NYC dealers for about $599, and there is a $60 rebate available, bringing the cost to 
$540 or so. My question is this: Should I save the money for the Pentax, or get the 
Tokina. I have always steered clear of third-party lenses, but I have heard good 
things about this one, and the price is right. Any thoughts? Thanks, Pete.

Re: Will Digital SLRs improve consumer 35mm zoom lenses?

[Alan Chan]

My impression is that most who have tried Velvia 100F are dissapointed as 
it has neither the sharpness or the color palette of the original Velvia. 
It is probably a good film anyway but apparently doesn't meet the 
expectations the Velvia name bring.
It seems like the most important design parametres for slide film in this 
digital age is small grain and the ability to scan well.
And the test in Japan CAPA magazine also indicates the 100F doesn't have the 
characterictis of the 50. In fact, some of the pics shown were quite 
differemnt in colour rendition. They aren't as vivid as the original.

regards,
Alan Chan
_
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: Zooms vs. primes (WAS: Re: Let's talk about the FA 28-105/4-5.6 PZ (nowabit long))

[Alan Chan]

They all do that, Alan, especially when focused close.
They are excellent in the 80-135mm range, increasingly
mediocre after that unless focused at infinity and
stopped down more than one stop.
Actually I shot them at near infinity. But one stop down, the improvement 
was dramatic. It made me wonder if I made an error.

regards,
Alan Chan
_
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*   
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Shoot first, ask questions later.

[Gregory L. Hansen]

I missed what might have been one of my best shots so far.  I was at the
construction site working on the fox kits that live there, but I didn't
see anything.  Finally gave up and walked out, using my tripod as a
monopod "just in case".  Just in case happened, one of the kits was ahead
of me, I took a photo or two and he started moving away.  I don't know if
he was running from me or if he just wanted to be somewhere else.  At one
point he went right past the front end loader that was sitting there, and
I was so busy trying to fine-tune the focus, which was probably fine, that
I didn't think until the moment had passed to hit the shutter release.

A fox skulking past a front end loader.  That would have been a great
juxtaposition shot: the big, hard, and man-made contrasting with the
small, fuzzy, and natural.  Even Marnie's photography teacher might have
approved of that one.  I'll be watching for a second chance at that one,
but it's not going to happen.  I can only hope I'll be alert to the next
opportunity.  When a second recognizable thing is in the viewfinder I
should just hit the shutter release as by reflex.  Maybe it won't be a
great shot, but it's more likely to be than one that doesn't have a second
recognizable thing in it.

I've discovered the camera can act as an impromptu blind; animals don't
recognize humans as easily when there's a camera in front of your face.  I
noticed that with the neighbor's cat, who hesitated to come to me until
I'd lowered my camera.  I got very close to a woodchuck because I was able
to keep a big tree between us, and I leaned over and took some shots while
the woodchunk just sat there and stared at me, until I'd lowered my
camera, then the woodchuck ran.  At the construction site before the event
I'd described above, I was standing out in the open on razed ground, using
my tripod as a monopod, and a doe didn't know what to make of me.  She
actually started walking right toward me!  Until I hit the shutter
release, then she ran.  I should have waited to see how close she'd get.
I guess that's one instance where "shoot first, ask questions later"
doesn't really apply.  Since the doe was also on open ground, I was
essentially in control of the situation and could have afforded to wait.
But the damned flies kept biting my ankles.

Today, coming home, I saw some deer go into the little woods on top of the
hill in our neighborhood.  There's never kids in the playground when you
need them, but I got my roomie to help.  I set up on one side of the
woods, he went into the other side and just walked through.  Deer came
running and leaping out in side view.  Then some kids walked by on the
sidewalk on the other side, and they ran back into the woods and gave me
another chance.  I've always wanted to try that.  I'll see how the
pictures turned out tomorrow.

I was going to send this to Marnie by e-mail because I know she likes
animals, but then I thought maybe someone on the PDML would be interested.
And even if I'm just being totally stupid, at least it's bandwidth not
used on abortion, homeless people, or the death of Pentax.

Re: Manual focus TTL flash

[Alan Chan]

It's a short list, and I think you named both.
Lottsa griping here on PDML from time to time
because "they should have put it on the ZX-M, too".
The #1 Pentax rule applies again - no Pentax camera should be too perfect.  
:-)

regards,
Alan Chan
_
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: Film/slides and eyes

[Alan Chan]

AFAIK, the first thing you would notice on "bad" colour films is colour 
shift (toward magneta as I have seen myself). If that doesn't happen to 
yours, I don't think it's the age of films. More like poor printing I guess.

regards,
Alan Chan
should mention the film ex date is 04/04 and is kept on the labs shelves 
not a fridge)and
when i looked
at the first one,not the exposure mistakes, but the relativaly good 
ones,they all seem
soft to out of
focus to me.I then shot a roll of Provia 100F same camera and lenses and 
mostly same
subjects and
under a loupe with light table all look fine.Well exposed,good colour and 
relativaly
sharp.
Even though the film has a year left on its shelf life,could it be starting 
to "go".I
cannot tell from the neg
if its sharp or not(looks properly exposed) but the slide film proved the 
lenses are still
good

Any thoughts or comments on this or am i just getting to old and to 
critical.Even the 6x7
colour proofs
look "soft",but focused, to me but the B&W and chromes look fantastic.>
_
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

Re: Let me see if I've got this straight...

[Alan Chan]

M - introduced with the MX/ME series, generally smaller and lighter than
the K series for the same focal length/aperture.
I think many M lenses had newer designed optics.

A - Adds an AE aperture setting to K- or M-specs, for cameras with
shutter-priority or programmed exposure modes. These came in after I
switched from working in camera shops to being a computer programmer, so I
don's know the models or dates.
The aperture coupling lever is liner too, the K/M aren't. Many designs were 
borrowed from the M series, plus a few high quality A* & newly designed high 
quality zoom lenses. There were 2 series belonged to the A series lenses:

1) Super A/Program (the most advanced), Program A/Plus, A3000
2) P50/5, P30/3, P30n/3n, P30T/3T?
F - Adds autofocus to A-specs.
Many designs were borrowed from the A series, but with many holes in the 
line. FA series is more completed.

regards,
Alan Chan
_
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*   
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

super program screen

[Daniel Liu]

Anyone know if the focusing screen in the program plus is the same one 
in the super program?

Re: Using NiMh batteries in BG1- grip with MZ-S?

[Kenneth Waller]

I've had similar problems with my PZ1P & PZ1. Only realized the cause after
sending both to Pentax for repairs (transport motors were replace etc) &
still having the issue. Since then, I pay more attention to the amount of
leader I insert and I haven't had the problem re-occur on either body.

Kenneth Waller

- Original Message -
From: "Alan Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Subject: Re: Using NiMh batteries in BG1- grip with MZ-S?


> >Sometimes my MZ-S has problems with the film
> >transport.
> >I think it's not the power supply but the way the film
> >is inserted into the transport system. In case I put
> >in the film (Fuji Sensia) somewhat too long into the
> >transport cogwheel the transport always
> >sounds strained. After about 20 photos the transport
> >stops and the camera tries to rewind the film. But it
> >often gets stuck and the rewind fails. After such a
> >problem I finally have to pull out the film in the
> >darkroom... Has anybody of you the same problem?
>
> I think someone has the same problem with Z-1p too, although I have never
> experienced such. I always pull the film no further than the red colour
> label on the camera.
>
> regards,
> Alan Chan

Re: Using NiMh batteries in BG1- grip with MZ-S?

[Alan Chan]

I've had similar problems with my PZ1P & PZ1. Only realized the cause after
sending both to Pentax for repairs (transport motors were replace etc) &
still having the issue. Since then, I pay more attention to the amount of
leader I insert and I haven't had the problem re-occur on either body.
But I still can't figureout how this could cause the problem??? The film is 
going to be winded anyway. Why? Any idea?

regards,
Alan Chan
_
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

Re: super program screen

[Ken Archer]

I don't know if they are the same, but they can be switched.  The repair 
shop did that to one of mine and it looks great, the focus is fine and 
the meter works as it did before the repair.

On Monday 14 July 2003 01:21 am, Daniel Liu wrote:
> Anyone know if the focusing screen in the program plus is the same
> one in the super program?

-- 
Ken Archer Canine Photography
San Antonio, Texas
"Business Is Going To The Dogs"

Re: OT: Street Photography

[Paul Stenquist]

Lon Williamson wrote:
> 
> A lot of "street photographers" seem to work this way.
> There were a lot of rangefinder 35mm cameras made with
> iris shutters and 35mm focal length 

Of course Leica is probably the most common "street photographer"
camera, and it is a focal plane shutter. Yet it is very quiet. It's the
mirror that creates most of the noise in an SLR. I shot this with my
ancient Leica iiif sitting on the table in a Paris cafe. The woman at
the next table, who was no more than four feet away, never glanced my
way. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1542479
Paul

Re: OT: Street Photography

[Paul Stenquist]

T Rittenhouse wrote:
> 
 I did that kind of
> stuff when I was a teenager, but finally realized that giving people the
> opportunity to wave me off if they really didn't want their picture taken
> was more honest. 

Yeah, but you don't get the shots. If the subject knows you're shooting
them, they pose or react in some other way. If you want to capture a
slice of life, you have to sneak up on them. It sucks, I don't like
doing it, but it's the best way to get good street shots.
Paul

OT - Anyone else notice missing posts?

[frank theriault]

Well, you wouldn't notice the actual posts, because they haven't
arrived.  But, this evening, I've seen at least two posts that replied
to posts that I haven't received.

This morning, I whined about a couple of my posts that didn't come
through after about 2 hours - they still haven't.

Something up with the list?  Or is it just me?  Not that I'm paranoid or
anything...  

ciao,
frank

--
"I don't believe in God, but I do believe in pi" - Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: Photo Essays

[Paul Stenquist]

Great stuff, Bill. My favorites are 003, 004 (a great shot), 010, 011,
021, 032, and 047 -- among others. You got right in there and shot. Did
anyone hassle you? Did you ask permission at any time? Seems like you
didn't, which is probably the best way to go. Thanks for sharing. I
enjoyed it immensely.
Paul

Re: OT: Street Photography

[Paul Stenquist]

Don't worry about permission. It spoils the moment. Just shoot.
Paul

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> I am interested in doing more macro, and landscape, and wild life. But there
> was a woman in my last photography class who did B&W street photography in San
> Francisco that I found pretty interesting (when it included people, that is).
> I think if I do it, I'd try it color (well, I got a lot of color film now to
> use up) and locally -- smaller city.
> 
> Anyway, if I try some street photography (probably more buildings than
> people, but people too), any suggestions? Shoot from the hip? Get permission of
> subjects? Don't worry about permission? Focal length suggestions, etc.?
> 
> Anything is welcome.
> 
> Marnie aka Doe :-)

Re: OT: Western Canada

[Dan Matyola]

Thanks for the advice. . .

Keith Whaley wrote:

When you head west, and you get to the "Western Canada" sign, turn on
your camera and start taking pictures. Fan it and feed it, as the farm
boys used to say. When you reach "West Vancouver," take a lot of photos
of the setting sun over the Pacific, and NOW you can turn off your
camera, blow away the smoke and re-change batteries... Film at 11.

Re: OT: Street Photography

[frank theriault]

Hi, Paul,

As I already commented, I love that shot!

You're right about the Leica - my CL (which is apparently one of the
loudest Leica RF's) is pretty quiet.  But, my two Yashicas, both with iris
shutters (a Mat and an Electro 35) are almost silent compared to the CL.

I wonder if the whole noise issue is a bit overblown, though.  Usually
there's enough ambient noise on the streets that a small mechanical SLR
would be hard to hear, too.

That being said, I was taking photos in a cafe today (of dogs, not people),
and the owners didn't notice me taking the shots - even after I'd snapped,
no one looked up (I did see the dogs' ears perk up, though).  That Leica is
pretty quiet.

To get back to the whole "stealth" thing, I tend to agree with Tom, in that
usually, I prefer to have some reaction to to the camera, so I don't often
take stealth shots.  Except this month's PUG.  Or this one (which was taken
with a telephoto zoom):

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1502413&size=lg

But, generally getting a reaction is what I want in street photography -
not that I'm good at it yet, but I'm trying;

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1204193&size=lg

cheers,
frank






Paul Stenquist wrote:

> Of course Leica is probably the most common "street photographer"
> camera, and it is a focal plane shutter. Yet it is very quiet. It's the
> mirror that creates most of the noise in an SLR. I shot this with my
> ancient Leica iiif sitting on the table in a Paris cafe. The woman at
> the next table, who was no more than four feet away, never glanced my
> way. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1542479
> Paul

--
"I don't believe in God, but I do believe in pi" - Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: Tokina 80-200 2.8

[Doug Franklin]

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 19:29:16 -0400, Mat Maessen wrote:

> H... anyone have recommendations for a decent tripod that'll support 
> this lens, or my Sigma 400/5.6? Bonus if it'll support a decent-sized MF 
> camera/lens as well.

Don't know about tripods, but my Bogen 3218 monopod with 3262 ball head
works just fine with the Sigma 400/5.6 on an MZ-S or ZX-5.

TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ

Re: OT: Street Photography

[Paul Stenquist]

I guess it works both ways. I love the reaction you got from the chess
player. And I've sometimes gotten a good reaction when I've alerted the
subject. Generally, though, I'd still prefer to go stealth much of the
time. 
   In regard to Leicas and noise, it seems that the CLA has a lot to do
with how loud they are. More lube, and they're very quiet. But a dry
mechanism can make quite a bit of noise. 
Paul

frank theriault wrote:
> 
> Hi, Paul,
> 
> As I already commented, I love that shot!
> 
> You're right about the Leica - my CL (which is apparently one of the
> loudest Leica RF's) is pretty quiet.  But, my two Yashicas, both with iris
> shutters (a Mat and an Electro 35) are almost silent compared to the CL.
> 
> I wonder if the whole noise issue is a bit overblown, though.  Usually
> there's enough ambient noise on the streets that a small mechanical SLR
> would be hard to hear, too.
> 
> That being said, I was taking photos in a cafe today (of dogs, not people),
> and the owners didn't notice me taking the shots - even after I'd snapped,
> no one looked up (I did see the dogs' ears perk up, though).  That Leica is
> pretty quiet.
> 
> To get back to the whole "stealth" thing, I tend to agree with Tom, in that
> usually, I prefer to have some reaction to to the camera, so I don't often
> take stealth shots.  Except this month's PUG.  Or this one (which was taken
> with a telephoto zoom):
> 
> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1502413&size=lg
> 
> But, generally getting a reaction is what I want in street photography -
> not that I'm good at it yet, but I'm trying;
> 
> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1204193&size=lg
> 
> cheers,
> frank
> 
> Paul Stenquist wrote:
> 
> > Of course Leica is probably the most common "street photographer"
> > camera, and it is a focal plane shutter. Yet it is very quiet. It's the
> > mirror that creates most of the noise in an SLR. I shot this with my
> > ancient Leica iiif sitting on the table in a Paris cafe. The woman at
> > the next table, who was no more than four feet away, never glanced my
> > way. http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1542479
> > Paul
> 
> --
> "I don't believe in God, but I do believe in pi" - Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: OT: Street Photography

[frank theriault]

I don't think there's a right or wrong here.  Some shots you have to shoot
without asking, because you'll simply miss the moment (see my shot this month
in PUG - not that it's a great shot, but I would have never gotten the shot if
I'd have asked everyone if I could take the pic):

http://pug.komkon.org/03jul/ken_pug.html

But, Paul, in your Paris folder, some of those cafe shots ~depend~ on the
subjects reacting to the camera, for instance:

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1542497&size=lg

I guess my point, is that both stealth photography and having the subject aware
of and reacting to the camera are both valid, and important parts of street
photography.  Both are "slices of life".  And to do street photography, both
the photographer and camera should be capable of both, imho.

regards,
frank

Paul Stenquist wrote:

> T Rittenhouse wrote:
> >
>  I did that kind of
> > stuff when I was a teenager, but finally realized that giving people the
> > opportunity to wave me off if they really didn't want their picture taken
> > was more honest.
>
> Yeah, but you don't get the shots. If the subject knows you're shooting
> them, they pose or react in some other way. If you want to capture a
> slice of life, you have to sneak up on them. It sucks, I don't like
> doing it, but it's the best way to get good street shots.
> Paul

--
"I don't believe in God, but I do believe in pi" - Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: Western Canada

[Dan Matyola]

I'm taking a train over the Rockies, from Vancouver to Banff.  We love 
trains.  We will rent a car in Banff, and I intend to drive up to Lake 
Louise and Jasper.  the Icefield is on my list, but I hadn't heard of 
Johnson's Canyon, but I'll definitely check it out!

Thanks for the advice.

Dan

Re: OT: Western Canada

[Dan Matyola]

Good advice, David.  Thanks a lot.

Are those articles available online?

Dan

David S. wrote:

The Rockies is my late summer playground.  I take topographical maps and trail books
with me and recommend 2 excellent articles by Darwin Wiggett.
1.  "A Photographers Guide to Banff National Park" in May 1996 Photo Life Magazine.
2.  "A Photographers Guide to Jasper National Park" in July 1996 Photo Life Magazine.
Try to get copies of those articles if you can.

Re: Western Canada

[Herb Chong]

warning. you are going to be in the middle of the busy season. long, long lines and 
many people at the popular places. maybe not as much as Yellowstone and Yosemite, but 
close. if you are going to be driving, pick up the books Parkways of the Canadian 
Rockies, a Road Guide by Brian Patton, and Canadian Rockies by Graeme Pole.

Herb
- Original Message - 
From: "Dan Matyola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2003 22:32
Subject: Re: Western Canada


> I'm taking a train over the Rockies, from Vancouver to Banff.  We love 
> trains.  We will rent a car in Banff, and I intend to drive up to Lake 
> Louise and Jasper.  the Icefield is on my list, but I hadn't heard of 
> Johnson's Canyon, but I'll definitely check it out!
> 
> Thanks for the advice.
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> 

Re: Western Canada

[Dan Matyola]

Thanks for the offer Pat.  I'll contact you offline.  Unfortunately, 
I'll only be in Victoria 2 nights -- the shortest stop on my trip except 
for the overnight stop on the two day train ride over the Rockies -- but 
I'd love to get together if we can work it out.  I'll be there from Aug 
5 until Aug 7.

Dan

Pat White wrote:

Daniel, it's hard to go wrong when taking pictures in Banff and Jasper.
Those are beautiful spots.  Vancouver is nice, and, as Dave mentioned,
Victoria has quite a few picturesque buildings.
If you like, contact me off list and I can show you around Victoria while
you're here.

Re: Western Canada

[Herb Chong]

oh, i almost forgot. check out also 
http://users.bestweb.net/~hchong/NewThings/Calgary-06-2002/Calgary.htm
- Original Message - 
From: "Dan Matyola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2003 22:32
Subject: Re: Western Canada


> I'm taking a train over the Rockies, from Vancouver to Banff.  We love 
> trains.  We will rent a car in Banff, and I intend to drive up to Lake 
> Louise and Jasper.  the Icefield is on my list, but I hadn't heard of 
> Johnson's Canyon, but I'll definitely check it out!
> 
> Thanks for the advice.
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> 

Re: Western Canada

[Dan Matyola]

Yes, I know it's the middle of the tourist rush, but it's the only time 
we can get away, except for Easter week and President's week in Feb., so 
w have no choice.  I've been to both Yosemite and Yellowstone in the 
summer, so I'm prepared.

Thanks for the book recommendations.

Dan

Re: OT: Street Photography

[Eactivist]

But, generally getting a reaction is what I want in street photography -
not that I'm good at it yet, but I'm trying;

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1204193&size=lg

cheers,
frank

You're already pretty d__n good at if you ask me. Your shot in this month's 
PUG reaffirmed my desire to try it (after seeing the ones the woman in my last 
class did). I liked your PUG entry because it seemed to tell a story. Those 
are the best street photography shots IMHO (not knowing a whole lot about it), 
those that seem to be such slices of life that tell some sort of story. Even if 
a very short one. Including the one shown in the above link.

Course, I'll try color, but maybe someday I'll try B&W if I like doing street 
photography at all. Or maybe not, I do like color. My primary interest is 
wild life, but maybe in some ways people are pretty wild too.

Marnie aka Doe :-)

Re: OT: Street Photography

[Paul Stenquist]

> 
> To get back to the whole "stealth" thing, I tend to agree with Tom, in that
> usually, I prefer to have some reaction to to the camera,

I'm torn on this. I sometimes like the reaction, but more often I like
to see what people are doing in their own life without my intrusion. I
shot this yesterday morning. Not a great shot, but an interesting
moment. By the way, it was with a Voigtlander/Cossina 75/2.5 that I just
picked up for the screw mount Leica. The VC lenses seem to be quite a
bargain. The pic is at http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1614183
  BTW, I'm sure to get blasted on the ratings for this one :-). But
that's half the fun of PhotoNet.
Pai;

Re: OT: Street Photography

[Paul Stenquist]

frank theriault wrote:
> 
 Paul, in your Paris folder, some of those cafe shots ~depend~ on the
> subjects reacting to the camera, for instance:
> 
> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1542497&size=lg
>

You're right. But I only asked permission because I chickened out :-).
However, you may be right that the end result was better because the
subject was aware. Perhaps a mix is the best way to go. If you're in
danger of being beaten to death and losing your camera, ask permission
and hope for the best. If you think you can get away with a stealth
shot, fire away .
Paul

Re: OT - Anyone else notice missing posts?

[Paul Stenquist]

I also wonder about the inner workings of the list. My posts are always
well back in terms of the time notation.  I can send a post and it will
appear in advance of a dozen posts that were on the list before I hit
the send key. My computer clock is accurate, so I have no idea what
causes this.
Paul

frank theriault wrote:
> 
> Well, you wouldn't notice the actual posts, because they haven't
> arrived.  But, this evening, I've seen at least two posts that replied
> to posts that I haven't received.
> 
> This morning, I whined about a couple of my posts that didn't come
> through after about 2 hours - they still haven't.
> 
> Something up with the list?  Or is it just me?  Not that I'm paranoid or
> anything...  
> 
> ciao,
> frank
> 
> --
> "I don't believe in God, but I do believe in pi" - Henri Cartier-Bresson

Re: OT: Street Photography

[Paul Stenquist]

I'm very fond of the graffiti shot. There's a lot going on there, and
everyone is oblivious to the camera. I think that I like this kind of
photography more than the reactive shots. Once the subject ackowledges
you, it becomes a portrait. For better or worse. But quite frequently,
for worse.
Paul

frank theriault wrote:
> 
> I don't think there's a right or wrong here.  Some shots you have to shoot
> without asking, because you'll simply miss the moment (see my shot this month
> in PUG - not that it's a great shot, but I would have never gotten the shot if
> I'd have asked everyone if I could take the pic):
> 
> http://pug.komkon.org/03jul/ken_pug.html
> 
>

RE: Film/slides and eyes

[Butch Black]

Interesting thought.I 'v decided to experiment(shhh don't tell the SO I've
spent
enough this month)and send a neg,6x7 B&W and a do a interneg on the(35mm)
stuff in
question.It'll
cost a few schcels but could put my concerns to rest.

The interneg might not be a good test as every time you add generations you
loose a bit of quality. A good R-3  or ilfochrome done on an enlarger would
be a much better test.

BUTCH

Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself.

Hermann Hess (Demian)

Re: OT - Anyone else notice missing posts?

[Eactivist]

>Something up with the list?  Or is it just me?  Not that I'm paranoid or
>anything...  

>ciao,
>frank

My posts show up surprisingly quickly. I can wait five minutes and usually 
they are there. Course, lots of times I post at "off hours," on weekend mornings 
and at night (in the US). But sometimes I post in the morning on weekdays 
which should be prime hours.

It's more likely to be your ISP than anything else. The router server or 
whatever it's called. When I post to newsgroups, it takes much longer. Sometimes I 
haven't had my messages show up until the next day. That just means AOL's 
newserver router/server is not that great and their email router/server is 10X 
better (since I am using AOL). 

Well, something like that. I know how to computer program but I am pretty 
clueless when it comes to hardware and how things are routed around the web from 
server to server.

Marnie aka Doe 

Re: OT - Anyone else notice missing posts?

[T Rittenhouse]

Beats me too, I see this all the time and my computer clock is synced with
the National Bureau of Standards Time in Boulder. It is never more than a
few seconds off, but time stamps on PDML posts are all over the place. Often
I get replies long before I see the original post, my own and others.

Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto


- Original Message -
From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2003 7:23 PM
Subject: Re: OT - Anyone else notice missing posts?


> I also wonder about the inner workings of the list. My posts are always
> well back in terms of the time notation.  I can send a post and it will
> appear in advance of a dozen posts that were on the list before I hit
> the send key. My computer clock is accurate, so I have no idea what
> causes this.
> Paul
>
> frank theriault wrote:
> >
> > Well, you wouldn't notice the actual posts, because they haven't
> > arrived.  But, this evening, I've seen at least two posts that replied
> > to posts that I haven't received.
> >
> > This morning, I whined about a couple of my posts that didn't come
> > through after about 2 hours - they still haven't.
> >
> > Something up with the list?  Or is it just me?  Not that I'm paranoid or
> > anything...  
> >
> > ciao,
> > frank
> >
> > --
> > "I don't believe in God, but I do believe in pi" - Henri Cartier-Bresson
>

Re: OT: Street Photography

[T Rittenhouse]

Paul, I tend to think you missed my first post on the subject where I said I
grab the first shot when I see it and from there go by the subjects
reactions. Sure you miss some shots, but I guess I feel the subject should
have some input in the matter. I just object to the sneaky type of shooting,
it stinks of voyeurism or stalking to me.

As I said before street photography works best when the subjects know that
camera nut is about, but ignor him because he's harmless. One guy, I forget
the name, but he did a whole book shot in small towns across america, said
he would just sit down around the town folks and start fiddling with his
camera maybe talking to them then when they quit paying him any mind he
would quietly start shooting. Seemed to work well for him, and writing this
I just realized how much like Jerome's approach to zoo photography it is.
Patience is the key.

Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto


- Original Message -
From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2003 7:15 PM
Subject: Re: OT: Street Photography


>
>
> >
> > To get back to the whole "stealth" thing, I tend to agree with Tom, in
that
> > usually, I prefer to have some reaction to to the camera,
>
> I'm torn on this. I sometimes like the reaction, but more often I like
> to see what people are doing in their own life without my intrusion. I
> shot this yesterday morning. Not a great shot, but an interesting
> moment. By the way, it was with a Voigtlander/Cossina 75/2.5 that I just
> picked up for the screw mount Leica. The VC lenses seem to be quite a
> bargain. The pic is at http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1614183
>   BTW, I'm sure to get blasted on the ratings for this one :-). But
> that's half the fun of PhotoNet.
> Pai;
>

Re: Using NiMh batteries in BG1- grip with MZ-S?

[T Rittenhouse]

I would think that the film is not winding all the way through the last
frame (pulled all the way out against the tape) in these cases and thus
hanging things up. However, I have never used these cameras, so this is only
a guess on my part.

Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto


- Original Message -
From: "Alan Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2003 9:29 PM
Subject: Re: Using NiMh batteries in BG1- grip with MZ-S?


> >I've had similar problems with my PZ1P & PZ1. Only realized the cause
after
> >sending both to Pentax for repairs (transport motors were replace etc) &
> >still having the issue. Since then, I pay more attention to the amount of
> >leader I insert and I haven't had the problem re-occur on either body.
>
> But I still can't figureout how this could cause the problem??? The film
is
> going to be winded anyway. Why? Any idea?
>
> regards,
> Alan Chan
>
> _
> MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
>

Yet another digital question

[Caveman]

http://www.edzardpiltz.de/Minolta_DSMP.html

Could anyone try to explain it. I mean, something beyond "N is better 
than M". What exactly in the construction of the two machines could make 
them behave that differently.

cheers,
caveman

Re: Using NiMh batteries in BG1- grip with MZ-S?

[Michel Carrère-Gée]

Wolfgang Höll a écrit:
Hi,

I'm using NiMh-batteries in the BG1 for about 1,5
years.
Some NiMh battery types don't supply enough voltage
and don't work at all. 
So I use the german "Haehnel" batteries with 2000 mAH
capacity. They advertise with 1,25 volts per battery.
One fully loaded set is sufficient for about 20 to 30
films.
But how work low battery indicator with NiMh ?
You use Li setting on BG-10 grip ?
Michel

Re: super program screen

[Ryan Charron]

Anyone know if the focusing screen in the program plus
is the same one 
in the super program?



They are identical, I Know!!

Ryan

--


__
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com

Re: OT - Anyone else notice missing posts?

[Anthony Farr]

Yes, often I get follow up posts in threads for which I've never got the
opening post, or the opener arrives hours even days later.

The volume for the previous two days was very low, especially for a weekend,
and sometimes hours would pass when none or very few posts arrived.

Some threads seem to have terminated abruptly, normally a thread slowly
dries up over several days.

What's going on?

regards,
Anthony Farr

- Original Message - 
From: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> Well, you wouldn't notice the actual posts, because they haven't
> arrived.  But, this evening, I've seen at least two posts that replied
> to posts that I haven't received.
>
> This morning, I whined about a couple of my posts that didn't come
> through after about 2 hours - they still haven't.
>
> Something up with the list?  Or is it just me?  Not that I'm paranoid or
> anything...  
>
> ciao,
> frank
>

Re: Digital question

[Hans Imglueck]

Hi Dag,

It is clear that there is always an amount of subjectivity in everything
what men are doing - no absolute reality possible. So in this point we agree 
completely. 
And it is also clear that men can modify photographs. But as I mentioned
in my first email - digital makes it much more easy. I was not able to modify a 
photograph (except double exposure) after exposure before digital was available.
Now almost everybody can do it. And it is left to everybody to use it in the way he 
want. 

And in this way photography and painting are now connected - If you want it, you can 
paint in your photographs using a simple or a very sophisticated software.

>Sorry, but from my point of view there is more to photography than  
>technology.  Yes, it is partially technological, like playing the piano  
>or organ is, but not more.

I never said anything else. I changed only may terms. I think what 
counts is creativity. Our minds are creative (some more - some less). Without 
creativity digital or any new technology
won't change much.

Regards, Hans.

--- Dag T <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>På fredag, 11. juli 2003, kl. 22:27, Hans Imglueck:
>
>> May be I missed my point because I used the word painting. Let me
>> say it this way:
>>
>> We are already high quality intelligent stereoscopic digital
>> cameras equiped with a lot of incredible software.
>> Images are taken, modified and composed within. The only thing
>> what is missing is a USB 2.0 interface. Since the interface is missing
>> and the internal memory is limitied we need external cameras and
>
>Sorry, but from my point of view there is more to photography than  
>technology.  Yes, it is partially technological, like playing the piano  
>or organ is, but not more.
>
>> external memory. Formerly there was only painting to get the internal  
>> pictures outside. Then photography came up: The cameras were film  
>> based and the pictures couldn't be much modified afterwards.
>
>That´s not true.  After exposure manipulation is as old as the negative  
>- positive process, at least.  Look at the evolution of old photos of  
>the russian leadership, it´s an old art.
>
>> I think digital photography will win, because it is much closer to our  
>> internal way of viewing and composing. The amount of modification  
>> someone needs is very different - comparable with the amount of  
>> imagination people have in their minds.
>
>Look here:  http://www.uelsmann.com
>There is no significant difference in what i good craftsman can do,  
>digital or analog.  The technology is just different.
>
>> Some have more sense for reality - they will tend to photography as a  
>> mean of expression. Others will not be
>> content with the amount of modifications possible with a camera and
>> go for painting or whatever is related to their kind of imagination on
>> the cost of realism (expect some old painters like Dürer or Rafael -
>> they are just great in both: imagination and realism).
>
>What are these:  
>http://www.foto.no/cgi-bin/bildekritikk/ 
>vis_oversikt.cgi?brukerid=158&serieid=3204
>
>Reality, realism or imagination?  They are all manipulated at the event  
>of exposure.  Except for some (bad) contrast adjustment nothing was  
>done after the exposure.  I do not think that photography is an  
>objective representation of some reality, it can never be.
>
>My point is that photography is an independent way of making images.   
>Some use stone, some use paint, some use photography, all of them have  
>their limitations.  I think what suits me about photography is the  
>analytic part:  You have to see, analyze and remove, not build, to make  
>the image.  Also, some times I like the aspect of having the correct  
>timing, finding the right moment in time.
>
>
>Regards!
>
>Dag T
>
>
>>
>> --- Dag T <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Photography is an independent art form.
>>>
>>> Cartier Bressons images could not have the same impact if they were
>>> paintings. In fact he IS a painter, and his paintings and drawings are
>>> very different from his photographs.
>>>
>>> I photograph because it suits me, I have no intention to make anything
>>> looking like a painting.  If I didn´t have a camera I think I would
>>> prefer music before painting.
>>>
>>> DagT
>>>
>>> På fredag, 11. juli 2003, kl. 16:58, skrev Hans Imglueck:
>>>
 So what do you think about that? Would you take a camera, if
 you could paint a picture as good or better in the same time?
 Paint what your mind if full of? What you are dreaming about?

 Hans.

 --- Dag T <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Speak for yourself!
>
> .-)
>
> DagT
>
>
> På fredag, 11. juli 2003, kl. 15:55, skrev Hans Imglueck:
>
>> Never forget:
>> We are photographing because painting is that difficult.

 _
 23a mail

>>
>> _
>> 23a mail
>

Re: OT: Western Canada

[David S.]

Dan Matyola wrote:

> Good advice, David.  Thanks a lot.
>
> Are those articles available online?
>
> Dan
>
> David S. wrote:
>
> >The Rockies is my late summer playground.  I take topographical maps and trail books
> >with me and recommend 2 excellent articles by Darwin Wiggett.
> >
> >1.  "A Photographers Guide to Banff National Park" in May 1996 Photo Life Magazine.
> >2.  "A Photographers Guide to Jasper National Park" in July 1996 Photo Life 
> >Magazine.
> >
> >Try to get copies of those articles if you can.
> >

I do not know.  I also do not have a flatbed scanner, so I can not scan & email them to
you.

--
David S.
Nature and wildlife photography http://www.sheppardphotos.com