My main concern is cold and internal fogging.
So many surfaces, so difficult to maintain.
LF lenses are easily disassembled. Not so with this class of equipment.
Of course there are always ziplock bags.
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
While there may be less to go wtong on an LF camera. They lack the weather
protection of tme contemporary DSLRs. My K3 and K1 have been soaked repeatedly
with no apparent ill effects. I wouldnt dare dov hat with my Speed Graphic.
Paul
> On Jan 6, 2024, at 7:35 PM, John Francis wrote:
>
> On S
On Sat, Jan 06, 2024 at 02:56:36PM +, coll...@brendemuehl.net wrote:
> Back in the day
>
> I was less concerned for my LF equipment out in the cold and snow than I am
> for this 35mm-class equipment.
Well, there's a whole lot less to go wrong on a large format camera than on a
modern setup
Am 06.01.24 um 20:51 schrieb Doug Brewer:
Guess it depends on the 35mm-class equipment you mean. I've done a
number of shoots in raging thunderstorms with nary a hiccup. Both my
K3 and K1 have powered through.
Same here. K7, K5, K3 mostly on the North Sea cost, in storm, rain,
sleet and snow,
Guess it depends on the 35mm-class equipment you mean. I've done a
number of shoots in raging thunderstorms with nary a hiccup. Both my K3
and K1 have powered through.
On 1/6/24 9:56 AM, coll...@brendemuehl.net wrote:
Back in the day
I was less concerned for my LF equipment out in the cold an
Summer temps in the low 40's are the norm here but 47 - sounds like Dubai
(or the Gibson?).
Alan C
-Original Message-
From: Rob Studdert
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 1:09 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Weather Out of Whack!
We've had some shocker days t
We've had some shocker days this summer, back to a far more relaxed
and pleasant 24 deg C currently :)
On 23 February 2017 at 02:24, Gonz wrote:
> Yikes! I hope its not that bad when we visit!
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 4:01 AM, Rob Studdert wrote:
>> It was 47 deg C at Sydney Olympic Park l
Yikes! I hope its not that bad when we visit!
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 4:01 AM, Rob Studdert wrote:
> It was 47 deg C at Sydney Olympic Park last week, walking out of an
> A/C shack into the hot wind was like walking into a fan forced oven,
> not nice.
>
>
>
> On 15 February 2017 at 08:56, Mark
It was 47 deg C at Sydney Olympic Park last week, walking out of an
A/C shack into the hot wind was like walking into a fan forced oven,
not nice.
On 15 February 2017 at 08:56, Mark Roberts wrote:
> Alan C wrote:
>
>>"I'm more worried about muscle strain than heart attack — I still run
>>40-50
Alan C wrote:
>"I'm more worried about muscle strain than heart attack I still run
>40-50 miles a week so my fitness is pretty good (though I've been
>closer to 30 miles a week for the past month, for obvious reasons)."
>
>So presumably you race a few marathons? My running has nose-dived in the
) draped over a fan, a sort of home
brew evaporative cooler with limited success.
By the middle of March the worst should be over.
Alan C
-Original Message- From: P. J. Alling
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2017 9:47 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Weather Out of Whack!
I've e
"I'm more worried about muscle strain than heart attack — I still run
40-50 miles a week so my fitness is pretty good (though I've been
closer to 30 miles a week for the past month, for obvious reasons)."
So presumably you race a few marathons? My running has nose-dived in the
last year & I'm st
er a fan, a sort of home
brew evaporative cooler with limited success.
By the middle of March the worst should be over.
Alan C
-Original Message-
From: P. J. Alling
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2017 9:47 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Weather Out of Whack!
I've expe
I've experienced swamp coolers in temperate climates, and they're what
I'd call marginally ineffective. Better than nothing but not much. In
a desert they work a bit better but mostly at hydrating the air. Unless
you have cold water they don't really seem cool anything.
On 2/13/2017 10:28
When I was in Iraq, we had several days where the temperature went over
60 deg C (140 deg F). I hope I never experience anything like that again.
On 2/13/2017 7:14 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
My mistake. I hadn't read the entire thread. Those Australian temps are insane.
You would only see that h
Alan -
Would a swamp cooler work for you? Much less expensive to purchase and
operate compared to conventional A/C.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evaporative_cooler
-p
On 2/13/2017 9:07 AM, Alan C wrote:
40°C+ is hardly exciting, in fact totally debilitating. At the moment
our house doesn
40°C+ is hardly exciting, in fact totally debilitating. At the moment our
house doesn't even cool below 30°C at night. The pitched roof houses the
mines built here are totally unsuited to the Lowveld climate with that huge
mass of hot air above the ceiling (very nice in "winter", mind you). Flat
My mistake. I hadn't read the entire thread. Those Australian temps are insane.
You would only see that here in the deserts of the southwest and only very
rarely.
Paul via phone
> On Feb 13, 2017, at 4:58 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
>
> They're talking g in degrees Fahrenheit, Alan. The tempera
They're talking g in degrees Fahrenheit, Alan. The temperatures aren't extreme,
they're just warmer than usual for February.
Paul via phone
> On Feb 13, 2017, at 2:59 AM, Alan C wrote:
>
> Unbelievable, and we grumble when it creeps over 40. Take care.
>
> Alan C
>
> -Original Message---
Unbelievable, and we grumble when it creeps over 40. Take care.
Alan C
-Original Message-
From: mike wilson
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2017 9:16 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Weather Out of Whack!
Someone I know from the Perth hills in Australia was going to go for
Stan Halpin wrote:
> On Jan 1, 2010, at 3:41 AM, D. Glenn Arthur Jr. wrote:
> > Then she complained that my macro shot of a pomegranate
> > seed looked like "somebody's liver".
>
> Everyone is a critic. And it will do no good to explain your artistic
> intent - if she doesn't get it, she just does
>
> On Jan 2, 2010, at 11:45 PM, Bob W wrote:
>
> >> I'm working on it. Currently enjoying a bottle of cider that our
> >> goldfishes gave me for xmas.
> >
> > I'm surprised they remembered.
>
> Myth busted :)
>
> http://mythbustersresults.com/episode11
>
Sorry - some bloke called Jamie te
On Jan 2, 2010, at 11:45 PM, Bob W wrote:
>> I'm working on it. Currently enjoying a bottle of cider that
>> our goldfishes gave me for xmas.
>
> I'm surprised they remembered.
Myth busted :)
http://mythbustersresults.com/episode11
Dave
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http:/
>
> > Until someone tells you your liver looks like pomegranate
> seeds, I wouldn't worry about it.
>
> I'm working on it. Currently enjoying a bottle of cider that
> our goldfishes gave me for xmas.
>
I'm surprised they remembered.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://p
On Jan 2, 2010, at 2:24 PM, John Sessoms wrote:
> Until someone tells you your liver looks like pomegranate seeds, I wouldn't
> worry about it.
I'm working on it. Currently enjoying a bottle of cider that our goldfishes
gave me for xmas.
Dave
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
ht
From: D. Glenn Arthur Jr.
> >
> > Then she complained that my macro shot of a pomegranate
> > seed looked like "somebody's liver".
Until someone tells you your liver looks like pomegranate seeds, I
wouldn't worry about it.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/
Happy New Year! Hope you're feeling better. Cheers, Christine
- Original Message -
From: "D. Glenn Arthur Jr."
To:
Sent: Friday, January 01, 2010 3:41 AM
Subject: Weather
I've been staying at my mother's house for a while, after
having gotten pneumonia after the flu (doing much
Boy was I chuckling while reading this. My wife does the same thing
to me when I take a picture of clouds. She says, "It's just a
picture of clouds..." - basically if there aren't people in it she
knows, then why bother taking a picture.
--
Bruce
Friday, January 1, 2010, 1:41:17 AM, you wrote:
On Jan 1, 2010, at 3:41 AM, D. Glenn Arthur Jr. wrote:
>
> Then she complained that my macro shot of a pomegranate
> seed looked like "somebody's liver".
Everyone is a critic. And it will do no good to explain your artistic intent -
if she doesn't get it, she just doesn't get it. Hopefully she
On 9/12/06, Mike Hamilton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Shel, I wasn't complaining by any stretch!
You were so!
Stop tapdancing.
cheers,
frank
--
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdm
On Sep 13, 2006, at 12:10, P. J. Alling wrote:
> O ring seals that caused the Challenger to explode...
> (Sort of non sequitur in this context thought).
>
Well incorrectly-used O-ring seals, in any case. They were being
asked to do much more than an o-ring ought to do.
-Charles
--
Char
Actually, it was the lack of them that caused it (Seal failure).
-Adam
P. J. Alling wrote:
> O ring seals that caused the Challenger to explode...
> (Sort of non sequitur in this context thought).
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
>>In a message dated 9/12/2006 12:25:23 PM Pacific Daylight Tim
O ring seals that caused the Challenger to explode...
(Sort of non sequitur in this context thought).
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>In a message dated 9/12/2006 12:25:23 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>>From the diagram in Steve's digicam, lens mount appears to have an O ring
>
Op Wed, 13 Sep 2006 00:05:42 +0200 schreef K.Takeshita
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> When gazing at the picture of the K10D with a lens attached, mounting
> surface does not appear visible (lens looks like attached close to body
> surface). If that's the case, as someone pointed out, only new lenses
Just tell them to take the back off their Rolex and look at it. Then
send the watch back to Rolex, or take it to a good dive shop, to have it
recertified .
--
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---
The LX has a seal between the mount and the body, so Pentax has been
there before.
Paul
On Sep 12, 2006, at 5:15 PM, Cotty wrote:
> On 12/9/06, Douglas Newman, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>> I think you will find that the 1-series D-SLRs (and
>> the EOS-1V) have gaskets on the lens mount, as w
On 9/12/06 5:53 PM, "Digital Image Studio", <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I didn't get to see this famed leaky release but looking at the huge
> press kit photos I see no gasket of any kind on the very visible
> mount.?
You are probably right. See my later post. IMO, Pentax cannot possibly put
a
On 9/12/06 5:19 PM, "Cotty", <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I wonder how canon is doing it.
>
> There's a rubber seal on the back of L lenses that fits flush with the
> lens mount.
Hmm, that's interesting. I wondered why they did not seal the body side but
when taking a look at my canon body, I
On 13/09/06, K.Takeshita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/12/06 5:03 PM, "K.Takeshita", <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > It would be a dovetail-like groove to which the rubber O ring is pushed in
> > and
> > only a very slight amount is protruding outside.
>
> Someone questioned if all lenses cou
On 12/9/06, K.Takeshita, discombobulated, unleashed:
>I wonder how canon is doing it.
There's a rubber seal on the back of L lenses that fits flush with the
lens mount.
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
___
On 12/9/06, Douglas Newman, discombobulated, unleashed:
>I think you will find that the 1-series D-SLRs (and
>the EOS-1V) have gaskets on the lens mount, as well:
>http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1dsmkii/page5.asp
Aha. The Pentax K10D seal is around the lens mount-to-body position,
then.
On 9/12/06 5:03 PM, "K.Takeshita", <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It would be a dovetail-like groove to which the rubber O ring is pushed in and
> only a very slight amount is protruding outside.
Someone questioned if all lenses could be sealed. That's a good question
because the retaining the O r
On 9/12/06 4:57 PM, "K.Takeshita", <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If it's on the mount surface, any lens can be sealed. It may be bit harder to
> retain the ring in place but O rings are usually very easy to replace.
If it's on the mount surface, it could be a very thin rubber ring, like 1mm
dia wh
On 9/12/06 4:32 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]", <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please clarify. I clueless about what an O ring type seal is.
O ring is usually made of rubber (for most low presure applications.
sometimes a thin tubular metal etc) with a circular cross section. It is
used to seal the circu
In a message dated 9/12/2006 12:25:23 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>From the diagram in Steve's digicam, lens mount appears to have an O ring
>type seal.
Indeed it does. That's interesting. Canon put the seal on the back of
the lenses (L). With the K10D you can seal camera
--- Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<< Indeed it does. That's interesting. Canon put the
seal on the back of the lenses (L). With the K10D you
can seal camera to any lens. >>
I'm not so sure about that.
I think you will find that the 1-series D-SLRs (and
the EOS-1V) have gaskets on the lens mou
On 12/9/06, K.Takeshita, discombobulated, unleashed:
>From the diagram in Steve's digicam, lens mount appears to have an O ring
>type seal.
Indeed it does. That's interesting. Canon put the seal on the back of
the lenses (L). With the K10D you can seal camera to any lens.
(calm down, I'm not int
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Mike Hamilton wrote:
> replacing the fairly recent 16-45/4 lens with a 16-50/2.8 (aside from
> the minor aperture and focal length differences). Don't you think?
Minor? Pentax had a 28-70/4 and a 28-70/2.8 selling at the same time
in the recent past. I can't believe one was
I didn't deny the presence of that, just questioned where/what the source
was.
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Mike Hamilton
> As for the SSM, that was based on the speculation that has been
> circulating the list for some time. Aside from you, has anyone denied
> the presence of that?
My mistake just seemed that way from here ... glad to know that you
weren't 'cause the prize is on back order
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Mike Hamilton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Date: 9/12/2006 10:31:49 AM
> Subject: Re: R
>From the diagram in Steve's digicam, lens mount appears to have an O ring
type seal.
Ken
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On 9/12/06 12:44 PM, "Shel Belinkoff", <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Where has that be said ... can you provide a pointer?
There are all sorts of info floating around, accurate or false, but I do not
think people are posting the complete fabrication etc. Each person must
have reasons to tell thin
Actually, I do enjoy all the discussion and anticipation that surrounds
rumors. More interesting reading than some purely technical discussions,
such as how many photons can fit on the head of a pixel
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Tim Øsleby
> Rumours and/or documents being circulated u
On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 10:11:26AM -0600, Mike Hamilton wrote:
> What is the purpose of a weather sealed body without any sealed
> lenses? I imagine that the two upcoming lenses (16-50/2.8 being one)
> will be weather sealed. If so, that's going to be an expensive lens,
> given the super-sonic mo
Shel, I wasn't complaining by any stretch! I don't know what portion
of my message you interpreted as such. I was simply making a logical
connection that I hadn't seen discussed on PDML.
As for the SSM, that was based on the speculation that has been
circulating the list for some time. Aside fr
Mike Hamilton wrote:
> What is the purpose of a weather sealed body without any sealed
> lenses? I imagine that the two upcoming lenses (16-50/2.8 being one)
> will be weather sealed. If so, that's going to be an expensive lens,
> given the super-sonic motor and fast aperture... Perhaps Pentax's
On 9/12/06 12:36 PM, "Thibouille", <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 16-50/2.8 is said to be about 1000 dollars.
>
> 2006/9/12, Mike Hamilton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> What is the purpose of a weather sealed body without any sealed
>> lenses? I imagine that the two upcoming lenses (16-50/2.8 being one)
On Sep 12, 2006, at 9:11 AM, Mike Hamilton wrote:
> What is the purpose of a weather sealed body without any sealed
> lenses? I imagine that the two upcoming lenses (16-50/2.8 being one)
> will be weather sealed. ...
I fully expect that if they have gone the distance to a weather
sealed body,
Mail List
Subject: RE: Weather-sealed body
Y'gotta start somewhere.
You've won the prize for being the first person to complain about the new
camera. I wondered how long it would take before complaints and criticisms
started.
What makes you think the upcoming 16-50/2.8 will have a &q
I remember it being said before on this list... '-)
G
On Sep 12, 2006, at 9:44 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
> Where has that be said ... can you provide a pointer?
>
>> 16-50/2.8 is said to be about 1000 dollars.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pd
16-50/2.8 is said to be about 1000 dollars.
2006/9/12, Mike Hamilton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> What is the purpose of a weather sealed body without any sealed
> lenses? I imagine that the two upcoming lenses (16-50/2.8 being one)
> will be weather sealed. If so, that's going to be an expensive lens
Y'gotta start somewhere.
You've won the prize for being the first person to complain about the new
camera. I wondered how long it would take before complaints and criticisms
started.
What makes you think the upcoming 16-50/2.8 will have a "super-sonic motor"
- I don't recall seeing that announ
Where has that be said ... can you provide a pointer?
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Thibouille
> 16-50/2.8 is said to be about 1000 dollars.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
M Lenses aren't all that well sealed. On the other hand I've gotten a
couple of my M lenses fairly wet taking photo's in bad weather to no apparent
ill effects. Your lenses didn't go swimming did they, I would think that would
be bad.
At 06:17 PM 12/31/2002 +0100, you wrote:
Hi,
I have a few
From: "Frantisek Vlcek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Hi,
>I have a few questions to ask before leaving. I just returned from
>outside (-10celsius) where I photographed some dusk landscapes lit
>by multicoloured fireworks (I didn't plan on the fireworks, but
>they lit indirectly the lands
65 matches
Mail list logo
