Hi devnull,
on 11 Dec 02 you wrote in pentax.list:
>I wanted o get a MZ-3 as my first Pentax camera but did try the MZ-S for an
>hour...too bad
:-))
>I will have only one question : does the MZ-S need to "beep" whenever it gets
>the AF blocked ?
No, you can disable the beep (it's the same wih
on 11.12.02 3:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I wanted o get a MZ-3 as my first Pentax camera but did try the MZ-S for an
> hour...too bad
Welcome :-) I had the same problem - my Z1P got sold very quickly after
playing a little with MZ-S :-)
>
> I will have only one question
Treena wrote:
>
> Flavio, thanks for posting that police car -- I've got to show it to my
> husband.
My pleasure.
> His police vehicle is a Jeep Cherokee that's seen better days (good
> for the bad weather here in the Boston Mts.). The only way this could be
> more cool is as a convertible. I'd
Michael wrote:
MC> Manually setting the aperture at f/5.6, the shutter speed doesn't go
MC> lower than 45 in either Program or TV. Would it be better to set the
MC> shutter speed at 30 in Manual mode to get a little more ambient light?
Hi Michael,
Capturing a bit of the ambient light wil
Hi,
Yesterday, I was waiting at a roundabout and noticed a Smart
approaching with two, errr, voluptuous persons of a certain age
on board. The driver had to brake hard (on high grip surface)
for the last few feet of approach to the roundabout, due to
unexpected actions from another road user.
Th
Hi,
Alek wrote:
> How do you assess SP 500/8 Tamron?
Sharp optics, easy to use hand-held (with resultant degradation
of performance) small and light for the optical reach, cheap
secondhand. IIRC, focuses oppositely to Pentax lenses.
Very easy to dismantle and clean when filled with river water
- Original Message -
From: "Ann Sanfedele" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> and NEw York guys - anywhere I can get these cartridges for less than
> $20.00 each?
I don't live in NY but I know www.all-ink.com has good quality ink
cartridges at bargain prices if you are not opposed to ordering on-line
Tom wrote:
> Hum...? Same old polite friendly Pal, I see.
Why should one be friendly when you are being extremely rude by saying you have the
right to abuse mailing list at your whim and by insulting 99% of the list subscribers
by telling they fit into two categories; 1) people who are here
> I will have only one question : does the MZ-S need to "beep" whenever it gets
> the AF blocked ?
No. You can turn it off.
>
> grr in France MZ-S are 300 Euros costier than in Germany ( 950 Euros ) ..
>
> i shall sell one or two Nikon AI-s lenses to get the MZ-S...am i right ?
>
> MZ-3 MZ-S
Have anyone tried the combination of the FA* 300/2.8 and the 1,7X AF converter? Just
curious.
Pål
Hello everyone!
I've been in the list for 1 week.
I've semi switched back to Pentax, using the ME my father bought in 1976 and
the SMC-M50/1.7 K that was mounted onto.
I recently acquired the SMC 135/2.5 K (6 elements, 6 groups version) and the
SMC-M 50/1.4 for 80 euros (approx. 80USD) for both.
Thanks, Danke, Merci all of you
i think i'll go for the MZ-S + its grip (it reminds me of my former
beloved Contax RTS-III , but lighter) and a zoom : the rest will be
2nd-hand manual lenses...
Now the only thing i shall miss will be the Zeiss Distagon 1,4/35mm
Jean-Baptiste
Thanks for the brief yet concise explanation, Bruce!
I've just never made the connection, but is's ~so~ obvious - pros only use 35mm!
You're
right, I've never noticed a PJ with a view camera. And, the only pros are PJ's, right?
cheers,
frank
Bruce Dayton wrote:
> frank,
>
> Much simpler tha
It's an important question. How could one possibly take a photograph without
knowing the answer?
-frank
Peter Alling wrote:
> Only here could someone take a flip remark and complicate it so. (Someone
> is thinking
> way too much about this). I think the short answer is yes.
>
--
"The optimi
Best darn description I've heard in over 30 years!!!
Mark Mangum
>Graywolf wrote:
>Pro camera -- one you can not afford.
>Am camera -- one you have.
Hi, Tom,
I think we only went through this debate 2 or 3 times since you've left. As you
undoubtedly recall, it comes up on a regular basis, in it's various
incarnations. I love your definition, though, as it applies particularly to me
Of course, this thread is (at least from my perspective),
Alek wrote:
> Thank you! so for the price K35/3.5 is great and if one can afford to buy FA version
>it pays.
> I shall try to find old for beginning.
The "problem" with AF lenses (most of them anyway) is that they are AF lenses; loose,
rattly, and focuses past infinity. Unfortunately, I've dis
Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Have anyone tried the combination of the FA* 300/2.8 and the 1,7X AF converter?
>Just curious.
I've only tried the 1.7x AF teleconverter with my Sigma EX300/2.8 APO -
worked very well with that lens.
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech
From: "Jean-Baptiste Fargier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Now the only thing i shall miss will be the Zeiss Distagon 1,4/35mm
Replace it with the Pentax FA 31/1.8 Limited
Pål
"Pascal Guillaumet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hello everyone!
>
>I've been in the list for 1 week.
>I've semi switched back to Pentax, using the ME my father bought in 1976 and
>the SMC-M50/1.7 K that was mounted onto.
>
>I recently acquired the SMC 135/2.5 K (6 elements, 6 groups version) and t
Frank wrote:
> I think we only went through this debate 2 or 3 times since you've left. As you
> undoubtedly recall, it comes up on a regular basis, in it's various
> incarnations. I love your definition, though, as it applies particularly to me
Actually, there is an industry "standard" of wha
Hey folks,
Just wondering does anyone own any of these lenses?
FA* Zoom 250mm-600mm f/5.6 ED [IF]
A* 1200mm f/8 ED [IF]
M Reflex 2000mm f/13.5
I'm really quite curious!
Brad
**
Brad W. Dobo, HBA (Eds.)
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ#: 165
...via Mike Johnston's column, of course:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-12-09.shtml
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com
On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:48:11 +0100
Jean-Baptiste Fargier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks, Danke, Merci all of you
>
> i think i'll go for the MZ-S + its grip (it reminds me of my former
>
> beloved Contax RTS-III , but lighter) and a zoom : the rest will be
>
> 2nd-hand manual lenses...
Oh
Hi,
Belated Happy Birthday, Anne.
You asked about using the cartridges until they go dry. Epson
specifically advises against this.
A charity I work with used the carts in its Photo EX until they
went dry as a matter of course. After about 2 years, the heads
needed replacing. Maybe linked, may
On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 04:52:46 -0500, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
> Boy, the matte heavyweight paper gobbles up ink fast -
> Is there any evidence that glassy papers abosorb less ink?
My experience has been that matte papers, in general, use more ink than
glossy ones.
> DO you epsonites milk the cartridg
On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:54:10 +0100, Thomas Heide Clausen wrote:
> they'd rather make a lover profit than no profit atall.
^
You sure have a closer relationship with your "photo pusher" than I
have! :-)
TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Mark wrote:
> ...via Mike Johnston's column, of course:
>
> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-12-09.shtml
A pity though that someone manages to chase him off this list...:-(
Pål
Brad wrote:
> FA* Zoom 250mm-600mm f/5.6 ED [IF]
We had acouple of PDML's who owned this lens. I'm not sure they are with us anymore...
>
> A* 1200mm f/8 ED [IF]
I would like to own this lens although I can come up with no logic justification for
buying this lens. I guess logic has nothing
Mark wrote:
> I've only tried the 1.7x AF teleconverter with my Sigma EX300/2.8 APO -
> worked very well with that lens.
The FA* 300/2.8 with and without the AF converter seems like a nice outfit for hand
held telephoto shoothing. It is an alternative to buying a Canon 300/4 IS lens plus
body
Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Mark wrote:
>
>> ...via Mike Johnston's column, of course:
>>
>> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-12-09.shtml
>
>A pity though that someone manages to chase him off this list...:-(
He'll be back (we're just too damned lovable...for the most p
For those, like me, who were totally unsuccessful, there's a nivce photo
of tis years Leonid storm on the Astronomy Picture of the Day site:
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html
The Geminids are coming up, but are not predicted to be strong.
Dan
Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Brad wrote:
>
>> FA* Zoom 250mm-600mm f/5.6 ED [IF]
>
>We had acouple of PDML's who owned this lens. I'm not sure they are with us anymore...
>>
>> A* 1200mm f/8 ED [IF]
>
>I would like to own this lens although I can come up with no logic justification for
Hi Pl,
On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:44:28 +0100, Pl Jensen wrote:
>Have anyone tried the combination of the FA* 300/2.8 and the 1,7X AF converter? Just
>curious.
I have only used it with the A* 300mm, almost the same optically I think,
but of course that is not an AF lens.
The combination works ve
har har, small survey, not small lenses silly! ;-)
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 9:17 AM
Subject: Re: Small lens survey
> Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Brad wrote:
> >
> >> FA* Zoom 25
<< > I would say generally that mirrors are never quite going to perform
like
> regular lenses, however if you can provide a stable platform that will
help
> considerably.
You know, I've seen this opinion expressed many times. It's a very
common opinion within photographic circles. I'
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hi,
> Maybe I was shooting at the place where bohek looked quite good. Maybe in different
>one it would show its bad face as you wrote. I do not argue with you just exchange
>opinions.
What is judged good or bad bokeh depends only on the lens, not the
subject's s
On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:55:08 -0500
"Doug Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:54:10 +0100, Thomas Heide Clausen wrote:
>
> > they'd rather make a lover profit than no profit atall.
>^
>
> You sure have a closer relationship with your "photo pu
I dunno, if they knocked off a couple of hundred bucks . . . ;-)
Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA 24450
(540) 458-8873
FAX: (540) 458-8878
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12/11/02 08:55AM >>>
On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:54:10 +0100, Thomas
In a message dated 12/11/02 4:58:34 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< Boy, the matte heavyweight paper gobbles up ink fast -
Is there any evidence that glassy papers abosorb less ink?
DO you epsonites milk the cartridge right down to the very end? I seem
to be getting
ok stuff after it has told
True. The best we could do would be a Harley with the dog in sidecar .
. .
Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA 24450
(540) 458-8873
FAX: (540) 458-8878
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12/10/02 10:48AM >>>
No, American police officer woul
Hey Everybody,
I thought up of a great new topic for discussion:
Flash Guns, Flash Guns and more Flash Guns.
How many flash guns are enough and why? How big and
powerful do you want your flash guns to be? ect.
I'm not sure where I got the idea from, What do you
think?
Ryan
In a message dated 12/11/02 8:28:33 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< FA* Zoom 250mm-600mm f/5.6 ED [IF]
A* 1200mm f/8 ED [IF]
M Reflex 2000mm f/13.5
I'm really quite curious!
Brad
>>
No but a friend has the 135-600f/6.7 mint with carrying case etc that he
wants to sell to me for $1200
If you family doctor was on vacation, and treated a skinned knee,
would you say it was treated by a amateur?
Once a doctor, always a doctor.
The same analogy applies. If you're good enough to be ABLE to make
money with your photography, and if other photographers consider you a
professional, you're
on 12/11/02 8:30 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In a message dated 12/11/02 4:58:34 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> << Boy, the matte heavyweight paper gobbles up ink fast -
> Is there any evidence that glassy papers abosorb less ink?
>
No,
> DO you epsonites milk the c
In a message dated 12/11/02 9:45:22 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< Hey Everybody,
I thought up of a great new topic for discussion:
Flash Guns, Flash Guns and more Flash Guns.
How many flash guns are enough and why? How big and
powerful do you want your flash guns to be? ect.
I'm not sure wh
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
>
>
> In a message dated 12/11/02 9:45:22 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> << Hey Everybody,
>
> I thought up of a great new topic for discussion:
> Flash Guns, Flash Guns and more Flash Guns.
> How many flash guns
> I recently acquired the SMC 135/2.5 K (6 elements, 6 groups
> version) and the SMC-M 50/1.4 for 80 euros (approx. 80USD) for
> both. I 'm still waiting for the film to be developped to see if
> these lenses are lemons or not.
Well,I can't say whether those particular samples you have are
"lemons
Comments within.
Mark Roberts wrote:
>
> Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Boy, the matte heavyweight paper gobbles up ink fast -
> >Is there any evidence that glassy papers abosorb less ink?
>
> Yes, glossy paper uses less ink.
>
> >DO you epsonites milk the cartridge right down
Not only did my first shots disappoint me, but way too many of my current shots do.
And that's not because I'm more critical, AFAIK. On the other hand, sometimes the
PhotoGods are with me and I snag a "good 'un". From my point of view, Pentax
Photography
(and there is no other, I AM a Mild Bigot
Brad Dobo wrote:
> Hey folks,
> Just wondering does anyone own any of these lenses?
> FA* Zoom 250mm-600mm f/5.6 ED [IF]
> A* 1200mm f/8 ED [IF]
> M Reflex 2000mm f/13.5
> I'm really quite curious!
Danger! Danger Will Robinson! Danger, Danger!
!8^D Bill
-
> -Original Message-
> From: Lon Williamson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
>
> I will speak up on the defensive for the Cosina-made
> Pentax/Phoenix/Vivitar/Soligar
> 100mm f3.5 Macro: It's cheap, it flares (in everything but
> mebbe the Pentax
> SMC version - I have the Phoenix), it is ligh
On Wednesday, December 11, 2002, at 10:46 AM, Fred wrote:
What is judged good or bad bokeh depends only on the lens, not the
subject's surroundings. What surrounds the subject may be judged
to be a good or bad choice of _background_, but whether the image
exhibits acceptable _bokeh_ depends ONL
Let's see, I currently have 2ea. Norman 200B (200 WS), 1ea. Vivitar 283.
1ea. Vivitar 2600. and 1ea. Vivitar 252. I would like to add a couple of
Strobotron 1200 packs with 4 heads, and a spare 283. Of course, if someone
wants to give me a hundred thousand dollars or so I would replace all that
wit
As with the new Subject line, which also has GUN in it, shows just how
un-intelligent such a non-reasoned stand is...
Most radical 'thinkers' react, sad to say ~ they don't do much
thinking or reasoning.
One would hope for better, from such otherwise nice folks...
keith whaley
Cotty wrote:
>
>
Dan Scott wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, December 11, 2002, at 10:46 AM, Fred wrote:
>
> >> What is judged good or bad bokeh depends only on the lens, not the
> >> subject's surroundings. What surrounds the subject may be judged
> >> to be a good or bad choice of _background_, but whether the image
Sure there's evidence. That's why there are settings in the printer setup
to tell it what kind of paper you are using. Try printing on glossy paper
using a matte or plain inkjet paper setting. That results in a print with
too much ink.
Len
---
From: Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply
>The "problem" with AF lenses (most of them anyway) is
that they are AF lenses; loose,
>rattly, and focuses past infinity. Unfortunately,
I've discovered that initially
>"tight" AF lenses develop looseness over time. It may
well be that some newer AF
>designs are potentially beter optically, but
http://www.photocritique.net/
http://www.photosig.com/
The two above are worth visiting.
Dan Scott
I agree with all those positive comments about the
30mm/2.8 lens (particularly about it's "great range of
tonality"). I just want to add that it also delivers
remarkably high quality over-life size macro shots (in
reverse mode on a bellows or extension rings). I have
used this lens for 4x or 5x lif
On Wednesday, December 11, 2002, at 06:22 AM, T Rittenhouse wrote:
Pro camera -- one you can not afford.
Am camera -- one you have.
How about
Pro camera generates more income than it cost
Am camera costs more every time you use it
Dan Scott
I Have had some success rejuvenating Epson heads by using a head-flush cartridge.
General opinion seems to be that it's not worth having heads replaced as Epson charges
as much as a new printer. The head-flush worked well for me and my '97 Stylus Colour
(err sorry, should that be color) 800 cont
Timothy wrote:
> This is an interesting idea: Could the choice of background *and* distance
> from main focus of interest in a photograph be more of an influence than
> lens design in the perception of "bad bokeh"?
Yes, but it is debatable whether we are talking about bokeh then or simply just
a
Leonard Paris wrote:
> Sure there's evidence. That's why there are settings in the printer setup
> to tell it what kind of paper you are using. Try printing on glossy paper
> using a matte or plain inkjet paper setting. That results in a print with
> too much ink.
>
> Len
> ---
>
It was my ins
On Wednesday, December 11, 2002, at 12:13 PM, Lon Williamson wrote:
Dan, you a resourceful Texan and all with no doubt, a big-ass Cowboy
hat, should have no problem. Use your big paw, and if that ain't
enough, the brim of your hat.
LOL
Dan Scott
www.naturephotographers.net and www.photocritique.net are both excellent sites!
DG
At 10:30 AM 12/11/02 -0800, you wrote:
When you say "photography websites" are you thinking just in terms of sites
that discuss technique, or sites that include member galleries, or sites
that go into great det
On Tuesday, December 10, 2002, at 09:39 PM, frank theriault wrote:
Ah, but what if the pro is taking family snapshots on his day off? Is
he still a
pro? And would the camera he uses be a pro camera? What if he uses
the same
camera to take those snapshots as he does whilst working? Would i
I have noticed that on my ZX5-N & MZ-S Camera's, the exposure compensation
dial becomes a flash compensation dial if either the on-camera flash is
popped up or an external flash unit is attatched--that is, setting the
exposure compensation dial no longer changes the camera's shutter speed or
th
At 02:11 PM 12/11/2002 -0500, you wrote:
I have the Pentax version, and can vouch that it's a good value.
Haven't noticed any flare with mine, but I don't think I've used it in
many flarey situations.
Ditto with mine. (Vivitar version)
Gary J Sibio
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.earthlink.n
Hello Sylwester:
I sent some messages to the list about the problem you mention.
When you screw a filter to the back of the lens, the mirror in the MZ-S,
MZ-5 or MX gets stuck when it is returning to its normal position after
having fired the shutter.
If you press the bayonet release button and tur
> A pity though that someone manages to chase him off this list...:-(
No, I'm here. Just listening.
I apologize if my abrupt departure seemed like grandstanding. I simply
realized it is *not* my right to tell other people what to discuss...whereas
it *is* my right to decide what I will listen to
I seem to recall hearing good things about this TC, but a search of the
PDML archives didn't turn up anything useful. Has anyone got one? How
do you like it? If I did pick one up, I'd be using it with a 135/2.5
and a 50/1.7.
-Scott
Have you checked the prices at Costco? They have 2-packs of certain ink
cartridges for a little less.
Pat White
It's cheap (<$80 on ebay) and it rocks. There's even an "A" version so you
won't lose program mode if that matters to you. I don't have any examples to
show you at the moment, but others on the list may have some. Note that it
will siphon away two stops of light, so that 135/3.5 is going to be slo
> This is an interesting idea: Could the choice of background *and* distance
> from main focus of interest in a photograph be more of an influence than
> lens design in the perception of "bad bokeh"?
Tim,
In my researches (don't ask), a number of things affect the bokeh: lens
design, aperture sha
Mike Johnston wrote:
>
> > A pity though that someone manages to chase him off this list...:-(
>
> No, I'm here. Just listening.
>
> I apologize if my abrupt departure seemed like grandstanding. I simply
> realized it is *not* my right to tell other people what to discuss...whereas
> it *is* m
I use mine with a Tokina 300mm f2.8 and it is an excellant combo. The
SMC-A* 300mm f2.8 could only be better!
Cheers
Shaun
Pål Jensen wrote:
Have anyone tried the combination of the FA* 300/2.8 and the 1,7X AF converter? Just curious.
Pål
.
--
Well espoused, Mike. I'll look forward to the write-up with enthusiasm!
keith
Mike Johnston wrote:
>
> > This is an interesting idea: Could the choice of background *and* distance
> > from main focus of interest in a photograph be more of an influence than
> > lens design in the perception of "b
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Anybody do t shirt transfers? The recommended setting is the 360 dip ink
jet
paper setting which I actually used before checking that it was the "right"
one...
Anyone experiment with others?
<
the material spreads the ink a lot when it hits. lot
Boris,
You worry too much about progress. Digital Cams have a LOT of problems.
Tried them, don't like them. Most are still toys.
Give it 5 years, ok? Grin.
Lon
Boris Liberman wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> In my personal humble opinion the question of fate of film is more of
> philosophical than of pr
The M 100 4 Macro is a fairly small puppy.
This fact alone is worth keeping it, IMHO.
Got it, love it.
-Lon
Heiko Hamann wrote:
>
> Hi akozak,
>
> on 09 Dec 02 you wrote in pentax.list:
>
> >Interesting. According too many users K105 is much better.Maybe you had
> >bad lens, difficult to say.
This is a long way of saying Win: Good for #$%"* databases.
Mac: Good for pix.
Lon, who uses a PC these days, but is getting steadinly feebler.
Is there such a word as "feebler"?
T Rittenhouse wrote:
>
> Ahh Windows 95 and up ships with Kodak Professional Color Management. In
> 98 and up i
Does any one have experience with this?
Thanx, Tonghang.
You cain't. Some programs read the profile, some can not.
OTOH, I feel like posting pix on the web is kind of like taking
art in 2nd grade. "What? Dammit, Lon, you've gone outside the
lines. I'm gonna call your Momma."
Thankfully, my momma had and has bigger fish to fry.
-Lon
William Robb
Lon Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Not only did my first shots disappoint me, but way too many of my current shots do.
>And that's not because I'm more critical, AFAIK.
I'll bet you are getting more critical, whether you know it or not. Happens
to the best of us ;-) Shots that I would o
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>This is a long way of saying Win: Good for #$%"* databases.
Mac: Good for pix.<
it's not even that good for databases, at least ones that come from
Microsoft. one of the best image database programs for photographers is
deadly slow at certain t
Boris is cool.
-Lon
frank theriault wrote:
>
> Hi, Boris,
>
> You'll fit in nicely here!
>
> cheers,
> frank
>
> Boris Liberman wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Sorry, I am getting wordy again.
> >
> > ---
> > Boris Liberman
>
> --
> "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The
On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:53:28 -0600, Dan Scott wrote:
> I suspect "bokeh" is a not a common topic in Astronomy.
Hmmm. I hadn't thought too much about all of the subjects being at
"infinite" distance. So, how far away does a star have to _be_ to be
rendered out of focus. :-)
TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Good paper is expensive. In fact, the best paper (for many subjects)
>produces wonderful results, is quite expensive, and sucks up the ink as
>well :-). It's Ilford Fine Art Paper.
I'm told that Ilford no longer sells this paper but that it is available
On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:33:08 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In my experience [mirror lenses] seem to lack contrast.
Hmmm. I don't really need, that. But I would like a long lens that's
lighter. Refractive 400's and above get a bit heavy.
TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Herb Chong wrote:
>
> Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Ann, I've been using an Epson Stylus Photo for about 4+ years and run the
> printer till it will no longer print before I change cartridges. It has
> never quit in the middle of printing due to lack of ink. I've been get
I have found that most of my lenses display good to excellent bokeh for out
of focus objects behind the point of focus and poorer bokeh for OOF items in
front of the POF. One notable exception is my shift lens. It has good bokeh
for OOF objects in front of the POF, but (comparatively) poor for OOF
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Good paper is expensive. In fact, the best paper (for many subjects)
produces wonderful results, is quite expensive, and sucks up the ink as
well :-). It's Ilford Fine Art Paper. It's a textured watercolor-type
paper with a wonderful feel and look
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Herb, which program is that? I have written one using the Jet engine and
it
is lightning fast on it's data management: loads new records from files on
disk storage in nanoseconds! The slowest part of most image database
programs is when people t
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Please explain 'chipped cartridges.'
keith whaley<
the newer Epson cartridges have chips in them that report ink levels. when
they report the cartridge is out of ink, the printer refuses to print. as
many have pointed out here, that doesn't mean
On Wednesday, December 11, 2002, at 02:39 PM, Carlos Royo wrote:
Hello Sylwester:
I sent some messages to the list about the problem you mention.
When you screw a filter to the back of the lens, the mirror in the
MZ-S,
MZ-5 or MX gets stuck when it is returning to its normal position after
hav
On Wednesday, December 11, 2002, at 02:43 PM, Mike Johnston wrote:
A pity though that someone manages to chase him off this list...:-(
No, I'm here. Just listening.
I apologize if my abrupt departure seemed like grandstanding. I simply
realized it is *not* my right to tell other people what
Ann, I don't have a detailed list of what we've tried and what the results were
over the years, but one year we tried printing the calendars on card stock and
the ink consumption was RIDICULOUS.
When we use the coated paper (in our case, as I mentioned before, we print the
photos on "photo quali
On Wednesday, December 11, 2002, at 01:15 PM, Keith Whaley wrote:
As with the new Subject line, which also has GUN in it, shows just how
un-intelligent such a non-reasoned stand is...
Most radical 'thinkers' react, sad to say ~ they don't do much
thinking or reasoning.
One would hope for bett
frank theriault wrote:
>
> You're right, Keith,
>
> I was being tongue in cheek. It was sort of my take on the Python "Argument Sketch"
> (and a bad one at that):
>
> "Ah, if my time is up, why are you still arguing?"
>
> "I could be doing it on my own time!"
>
> or words to that effect...
1 - 100 of 152 matches
Mail list logo
