Hi!
a> big scary text snipped...
It is bad enough as it is. There is no real need to frighten your
fellows .
---
Boris Liberman
www.geocities.com/dunno57
www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625
Hi Henry,
on 20 Jan 03 you wrote in pentax.list:
>I have used the target plate supplied by the January 2003 issue of CAPA
>magazine (Japan) to test the AF accuracy of the individual AF sensors of my
Really interesting test. Could you scan the test target and write
something about the test proc
Dnia 20-01-2003 o godz. 4:31 tom napisal(a):
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Kevin Waterson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >
> > At a recent camera club meeting some slides were
> > shown in black and white, this caught my eye as
> > I had not thought such a film was available?
> >
> > Is th
Iren wrote:
IHC> I generally agree with Mike's argument that pixel count isn't everything.
IHC> But he did miss the following points:
IHC> 1. Higher pixel count will likely to enhance the colour accuracy of the
IHC> current RGB mosaic type CCD sensors. More pixel will increase the
IHC> informa
Dear all,
As you can see from my photos, the target is very simple. It consist of a
vertical plate with a big black cross on it. The plate is mounted on 2
rulers tilted 30 degrees to the horizontal. The scale printed on the ruler
is so calibrated to read the horizontal distance in front of o
Hi,
Monday, January 20, 2003, 5:49:06 AM, you wrote:
>>>At a recent camera club meeting some slides were
>>>shown in black and white, this caught my eye as
>>>I had not thought such a film was available?
>>>
>>>Is this the case? If so, how is this effect created?
>>>
>>It's probably a film ca
http://www3.telus.net/wlachan/SMC.jpg
regards,
Alan Chan
_
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
Hi,
> My result shows that the AF sensors of my MZ-S in average locked focus at
> about 5-10mm in front of the target plate. The result agrees quite well with
> the similar testing carried out in the Dec 02 issue of CAPA Magazine, using
> MZ-S and FA*85/1.4 lens. Is it due to the problem of m
This one time, at band camp,
Bob Walkden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I use Scala quite a lot and I really like it. I'm lucky enough to work
> within easy walking distance of the lab that processes it, so if
> necessary I can get a quick turnround on processing. The 2 major
> downsides of Scala fo
Hi Fred,
Have you received my e-mail with some questions?
Please answer me directly,
Alek
Użytkownik Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał:
>> Incredibly good result [snip] Once again verified to me just how
>> good the lens is. [snip] If you ever see this lens-- grab it...
>
>> If you are careful, this
Nice shot.
I believe you'll find the collective noun for a group of shags is an "orgy"
Simon
-Original Message-
From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, 20 January 2003 3:37 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: 5 more of those whatyamacallit birds
Decided to test my
Mike wrote:
> It's an ACTUAL EXAMPLE. She's a real person. She exists. I've known her for
> most of my life. And if you'll recall the original post, I stated that she
> refuses to switch to digital, because she is comfortable with her
> point-and-shoot camera, happy with her drugstore prints, not
Mike wrote:
> This is just plain complete ignorance. For your information, Pål, the
> manufacturers care a hell of a lot more about grandmothers than they care
> about YOU.
For digital? I seriously boubt that grandmothers are buying a significant share of the
digital cameras sold. Grandmothers
I seem to be getting multiple emails from the PDML - from 2 to 4 of the same
one. Is it me (I mean - my PC :) or is the list having hickups?
Łukasz
===
www.fotopolis.pl
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
internetowy magazyn o fo
Now, if we can quickly wrap up that tarp, we'll have faux goose for dinner!
"J. C. O'Connell" wrote:
>
> Decided to test my 85-210 F4.5 SMCPZ lens
> with some TMAX 100 today. To my surprise
> I spotted 5 more of the same birds resting
> on a temporary construction divider:
>
> http://jcoconnell.
> Eventually, digital camera will evolve into an optimal design, like
> film sizes in traditional film camera. In the traditional film, 35mm format
> is the most balanced design. If one want to go for better quality, you can
> have 645 or 67, while for more compactness we have the APS format. Bu
Dear Alan,
According to the official lenses catalogue of Pentax Japan, the coating
colour of FA*200/2.8ED should be pale green (the lens at the centre of the
cover), rather red:
http://www.pentax.co.jp/japan/product/catalog/pdf/35_lenses.pdf
The coating colour of the front element of my FA*300
I think grins are kind of idiosyncratic. I use: = "little tiny grin",
= "grin", = "great big grin", and sometimes = "light
chuckling". Smiley faces :) are kind of outdated amongst serious internet
users and tend to indicate someone who isn't quite with it. A search for
"internet acronym's" shou
Thanks Bob I'll do it next time...
Vic
I used to own this lens way way back. It was actually the lens I bought with
my first kit. It's a good lens. If I recall it has 1:4 close focusing
capability. I would not pay a lot for it but if you can get it for a good
price.. give it a try..
Vic
May well be, there originally was a photo of some candy or or friut or
something there, they took it off.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: "Antti-Pekka Virjonen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 1:5
Yes Jose with a max ap of 2.5, if you're shooting wide open your depth of
field is quite small. I used a monopod and shot wide open at 250 sec. I was
shooting precision skating so they were certainly moving at a good clip for
most of the program. The 250th was sufficient speed to stop them most
>In fact, virtually the only film size that could be said to be either
"designed" or
> "evolved" is the least popular--APS--and it was designed to meet the
> existing usage parameters of the lowest common denominator consumers.
I sometimes wonder if APS had been designed with 35mm, rather than 24m
Dear Mike,
I presume that consumers are intelligent in choosing what they think the
best film format for them. 35mm format is the most popular choice which is
a balanced design with mobility, choice of lenses, choice of DOF and
affordable price. Consumers voted "no" to APS in SLR market altho
More than likely they were shooting SCALA. It is unbelievably beautiful
stuff. Nothing touches this stuff for beautiful blacks and fine gradations.
It's only downfall, It's expensive and it can only be developed by
specialized labs. If you are into B&W you own it to yourself to try this
stuff.
>Because I suspect that digital photography will follow the distribution on
>the personal computer whose density is very unevenly distributed.
>Unfortunately, this distribution doesn't mimic the distribution of cameras
>on a global basis.
Interesting. I would have said that DSLR purchasers wou
>This is both a fair and an unfair comparisons, and I think it underlines
>the real problem with traditional photography.
>It is both difficult and expensive to get top quality repeatable results
>from wet processing technology.
>It is relatively easy to get top quality results from digitally proc
No auto-focus system is perfect. A long time ago it seems Modern
Photography tested
and found that out. If I remember correctly Popular Photography did the
same thing
much more recently and discovered the same result. I guess people who
expect it to
be perfect will always be disappointed. Mo
>It is same with my cameras.
>With a digital camera, you'll know whatever camera you buy today can be
>had for significantly less money in maximum six months time. Or you can
>buy a significantly bettter camera for the same money in six months.
Fact: here in the UK, The Canon D60 was introduced
That is the COOLEST lens! I want one, I want one!~
IL Bill
Fred wrote:
[was: Vivitar Series One 28/1.9 PK for $60?]
there is at least another rare VS1 zoom - the 70-210/2.8-4 QDOS
novelty.
What`s the deal on this lens, I have a 70-210/2.8-4 (used it
tonight as a matter of fact),
I'm still looking for Maxwell's web site, where they may mention their
bright screen screens!
No luck yet... Maybe they quit making them...
keith whaley
smcforme wrote:
>
> I'm having an awful time reading the numbers on the
> bag. It looks like 1F640-245, or IK6Y0-245 or some
> combination ther
On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, Mike Johnston wrote:
> --JOHNSTON with a "T," of lowland Scots origin rather than English
Every day I fight with people who insist on spelling my last name with a K
instead of the correct CH.
I refuse to give up the fight.
--
http://www.infotainment.org <-> more f
Hi Henry and others,
I have taken the liberty to translate your experiment descriptions in Dutch
and posted it on a Dutch newsgroup on photography. I asked whether other
brands (nikon, minolta, canon...) had the same problem. If so, it is
interesting to know.
Btw: if you're interested in this
..and if you cant figure out why it isnt firing, you would be asked to shut
off and restart, which will work 95% of times and nobody can convincingly
tell you why.
- Original Message -
Subject: if microsoft made cameras
>"Official statement from Canon is that the D60 has been discontinued.
>The newcomers !!! are The EOS 3 based, 8megapixel D80 full size camera.
>The D40 based on a smaller camera features a 4 megapixel APS size chip. The
>price on the latter should be app. USD 1500,- + tax.
>Both cameras are to be
I always thought that - I would have probably bought in to it!
It certainly would have made film scanning, especially batch scanning,
far simpler!
I did actually get an APS once, but when I saw the grain from the tny
neg I woke up to the stupidity of it all... This was just the gadgetman
in me g
Well unfortunately if Apple made cameras they would take a standard size film
and produce a negative that would somehow not work in a standard size negative
carrier.
At 09:53 AM 1/20/2003 -0600, you wrote:
And that's why I'm THANKFUL I own a Macintosh.
The funniest one of these I've seen over t
>Nice shot.
>I believe you'll find the collective noun for a group of shags is an "orgy"
>Simon
LOL!
The collective noun we use for a group of cameramen is... a 'focus'.
...and a 'whinge' of journalists.
I can't possibly repeat the noun for sound recordists on this list!
Cotty
Here's a question for those who have used Pentax cameras with both an
RTF flash and a separate flash unit.
Let's say you have a PZ-1 or PZ-1p, which has the built-in RTF flash
and can do true contrast-control flash with some of the newer flash
units (using TTL flash and a slightly slower shutte
More, in German. Plus a pic:
http://www.akam.no/nyheter/2003_01/canon_speilrefleks.html
Cotty
Oh, swipe me! He paints with light!
http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/
Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at
http://www.macads.co.uk/
>More, in German. Plus a pic:
>
>http://www.akam.no/nyheter/2003_01/canon_speilrefleks.html
>
>Cotty
D'oh - it's Norwegian. Babelfish doesn't translate Norwegian. Anywhere
that does?
Cotty
Oh, swipe me! He paints with light!
http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/
__
I doubt very much i'll get rid of the 2.74 Meg pixel D1 soon either Cotty.I t is
producing nice prints in the 8x10 max range i and my clients are asking for,
and arew happy with.
As some one said the other day its up to the printer to be able to utilize those
14 Mega's.If it cannot,its wasted spac
> What we have is Mike proselytizing for digital
Not really. I'm just making a few points, and then I get backed into a
corner because people give me such a hard time. In fact, I'm really on the
fence myself.
--Mike
This begs the question of optimized for what. Attempts were made by Kodak
to do
just that, using a variety of formats, 828 roll film was an attempt to
remove the
double sprocket holes to result in a more efficient use of the same width
stock as
35mm, 110 was optimized to give 4x5 or 8x10 enlarg
The recent DSLR thread (DSLR Lifespan) has me thinking.
For those of you who own one - and those of you who make money with it -
how do you get prints for your clients?
Do you get them "professionally done" by a lab or do you print them
yourselves? If you do get them done by a lab, at what char
I think you're both correct. You will see digital distribution following
photographers
but primarily where personal computers are available. I doubt you'll get a
lot of
digital cameras where PC's/MAC's are not readily available. You can do
traditional photography
where there is no modern infr
I just want to make one correction before someone jumps down my throat
about it,
yes I know 35mm for still cameras wasn't developed by Kodak and second I
have no
Idea who developed the 120/220 film format. I just assume it was Kodak
since they
first produced almost every other film format I know
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> For those of you who own one - and those of you who make money with
> it - how do you get prints for your clients?
Neither do I have to earn money with my photos nor do I own a DSLR , but I
can tell you of a friend of mine ;-)
He is a professional photographer using Pen
test
===
www.fotopolis.pl
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
internetowy magazyn o fotografii
***r-e-k-l-a-m-a**
Chcesz oszczedzic na kosztach obslugi bankowej ?
mBIZNES - konto dla firm
http://epienia
Hi David.
I,for the most part,print my self.I did a rough,in the head calc, when
i found out how many pictures per
set of tanks, and it runs about $4-4.50 Canadian per 8x10 print.I have
wanted to have Aaron do one for me,but have not.One day
I charge $20.00 for an 8x10,using the rule of thimb of 3
david,
I don't have one yet, but I would have the lab print them for my
clients. Another way to consider it is based on volume. Home
printing is great for single prints, but in volume it sucks rocks. Way
too slow. So an occasional fine art print or proof could be done at
home. But in quantity
Mike wrote:
> I fear that I do not have the trust in "intelligent evolution" that you do.
> It's just as likely that convention, inertia, compatibility, ignorant
> prejudice, and the vested interests of those who wield the most power will
> determine the eventual standardization of the technology.
Henry wrote:
> According to the official lenses catalogue of Pentax Japan, the coating
> colour of FA*200/2.8ED should be pale green (the lens at the centre of the
> cover), rather red:
>
> http://www.pentax.co.jp/japan/product/catalog/pdf/35_lenses.pdf
>
> The coating colour of the front elem
Mike wrote:
> Sorry friends, *I* was the one who was feeling grumpy late last night, when
> I wrote my latest batch of dispatches to the list. My bad.
I think they must have been lost in cyberspace as I haven't any grumpy mails...
Pål
In case you've no heard, Minolta & Konica are merging.
Collin
> Pentax DSLR buyers, take note. I doubt seriously you will be keeping such
> a camera for only 6 months, and if you do, i wish I had your income!
>
> .02
Cotty,
More like a shilling than two pence (I have no idea what I'm talking about).
You're right, is what I'm trying to say.
My brother's a m
A good article in the new issue.
Shows visual comparisons of the various
digital levels as compared to 35mm.
Looks like 9mp might compare favorably.
Collin
> Holy moly!
>
> I think this puts the Pentax DSLR in with a chance of being a full frame
> chip eh?
I thought Pentax had already announced that the new camera will have an
APS-sized chip?
--Mike
Cotty wrote:
> Interesting. I would have said that DSLR purchasers would be primarily
> photographers, despite the fact that a computer is a fundamental part of
> the digital photography process. Ipso facto, DSLRs will IMO follow a
> photographic-orientated existence instead of a computer-orien
Cotty wrote:
>
> I think this puts the Pentax DSLR in with a chance of being a full frame
> chip eh?
I don't think so. I believe the news has already been dropped that it won't be full
frame...
Pål
In a message dated 1/20/2003 1:46:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
> I believe that there is an optimal size of an image sensor which a balance
> must be strike between the resolution, greater choice of DOF, optimal design
> for both wide-angle and telephoto lenses, and th
Cotty wrote:
> To think that one will buy a DSLR and then sell it or trade it in against
> a newer one only six months down the line is lunacy! I have no intention
> of doing so. I will reasonably expect to keep my current DSLR for at
> least 5 years!
My point was that digital cameras at cu
Cotty wrote:
> D'oh - it's Norwegian. Babelfish doesn't translate Norwegian. Anywhere
> that does?
I do.
Basically its just rumors. Here is the essence (not much):
No D90. D80 will have 8Mp, 3480x2320 NOT full frame but larger than the sensor of the
D60. The camera will have the AF system fr
adphoto wrote:
> Let's imagine for a moment that Microsoft buys out C and N and made
> cameras
(snip, snip)
Didn't need to read any more than that to gasp in horror :) But I'm glad I did
-
I've hardly read any mail for a few days cause im down with a nasty cold in the
frigid NYC area and
- Original Message -
From: "Pål Jensen"
Subject: Re: DSLR lifespan (was: Re: Ze Masked Enabler Strikes Again!)
>
> My point was that digital cameras at current seem too follow computers in
planned obsolence. Hence, I find it likely that consumers will treat them
similarly.
>From what I
Found this on rec.photo.marketplace.35mm
Contact "Steve Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://johnsonadv.home.attbi.com/pentax.htm
http://www.news2web.com/cgi-bin/dnewsweb.exe?cmd=article&group=rec.photo.mar
ketplace.35mm&item=435574&utag=
T Rittenhouse wrote:
> Think of a pirate laughing Har, har, har It has become a PDML term that
> means. "I am pulling your leg". When I came on the list Weathfield Willie
> (Bill Robb) was using it a lot, but he says he picked it up from another
> list member.
>
> Ciao,
> Graywolf
> http://pag
In a message dated 1/20/2003 1:24:03 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> My point was that digital cameras at current seem too follow computers in planned
>obsolescence. Hence, I find it likely
> that consumers will treat them similarly.
>
> Pål
Evolving technology means the
Paul Franklin Stregevsky wrote:
> Har is Hebrew for mountain.
>
> In English, it means, basically, "Ha!" or "Ha-ha!" The long version is
> "hardee-har-har!" I have no idea why, any more than Spock could understand
> why humans say to babies, "Kootchie-kootchie-koo!"
>
AH! "hardee-har-har" is som
- Original Message -
From: "Cotty"
Subject: Re: Kodak digital vs. 6x7 prints
> Speaking of which, William, whatever happened to the Great Canadian Grain
> Silo and Barn Mono Print Challenge?
I am so bad. All the submissions are quite safe, and unopened. With my lack
of organization, I
On Monday 20 January 2003 13:50, Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
> Found this on rec.photo.marketplace.35mm
>
> Contact "Steve Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> http://johnsonadv.home.attbi.com/pentax.htm
>
> http://www.news2web.com/cgi-bin/dnewsweb.exe?cmd=article&group=rec.photo.ma
>r ketplace.35mm&item=4
In a message dated 1/20/2003 1:14:09 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> This was about photography as global phenomenon. I doubt digital photography will be
>a globel phenomenon anytime soon like film photography. It will follow the
>distribution of personal computers which o
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 12:53 PM
Subject: Re: DSLR lifespan (was: Re: Ze Masked Enabler Strikes Again!)
> Evolving technology means they are continually developing new and better
technology. IMHO, it is really
Hu. Another reply that did not seem to make it.Hummm
I'll try again.
Begin Original Message
From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 12:22:52 -0500
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: OT: DSLR's and Printing Professionally
>The recent DSLR thread (DSLR Lifesp
There is another way to view DSLR obsolescence. The problems with PC's
is that new software gets bigger and new gizmos want a faster computer.
Also, many of us let junk build up on our computers which actually slow
them down. If you are satisfied with the image quality of a DSLR, then
it should l
Decided to test my 85-210 F4.5 SMCPZ lens
with some TMAX 100 today. To my surprise
I spotted 5 more of the same birds resting
on a temporary construction divider:
http://jcoconnell.com/temp/birds04s.jpg
TMAX 100
1/250 @ F9.5
~180mm setting
Nice "panoramic" shot!
I can say one thing, this lens
Ooops. Seems like I foirgot the 8D. Seems to be the same camera as the D80 but for the
fact that it comes in a metal body (based on the EOS1V perhaps?)
- Original Message -
From: "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 7:36 PM
Subject: Re
The only Scala developer in Canada,according to the Agfa
site, is TorontoImageWorks in Toronto.
I would like to try a roll this spring.
Dave
Begin Original Message
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 09:36:36 EST
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Mono chrome slides
More th
>I think you're both correct. You will see digital distribution following
>photographers
>but primarily where personal computers are available. I doubt you'll get a
>lot of
>digital cameras where PC's/MAC's are not readily available. You can do
>traditional photography
>where there is no mode
In a message dated 1/21/2003 2:02:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
> It doesn't matter if it is an evolving technology like computers and digital
> cameras, or a mature technology like automobiles and televisions,
> obsolescence is obsolescence. Manufacturers love evolving t
> > Can anybody show me some Webpage with pictures taken with
> > F* 300/4.5 ED IF or FA 300/4.5 ED IF ???
> THE bible:
> http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/
Well, but I wanted to see pictures taken WITH this lens,
NOT the lens itself...
===
Waldemar Krasowski
tel: +48 501087147
mai
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 1:00 PM
Subject: Re: DSLR lifespan (was: Re: Ze Masked Enabler Strikes Again!)
> So I think you are overlooking something. That LCD window. Very attractive
to the photographer. So what'
Begin Original Message
From: John Mustarde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 18:57:54 -0700
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: They will buy anything.was: The Siren Call of Digital
On Sun, 19 Jan 2003 15:41:44 -0500, you wrote:
>> > BTW anyone hav
In a message dated 1/21/2003 2:24:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
> From the POV of a long time photographer, I dispute your calling digital
> media less destructable than film. The things that will ruin film will also
> ruin digital media. Digital media can also be ruined
"The LCD, in my own opinion is a red herring of sorts. The image is too
small, and too low resolution for anything other than a gross
evaluation of
composition."
Agreed. The E-10 lets you zoom in to a specificed size. This is what
you really need, e.g., look at the big picture to check compositi
If I understand correctly about full frame sensors, they would
cover the same area as a 35mm Negative. ie 24mm x 36mm.
If this is correct, can anything less still call itself a
35mm camera?
eg, if we assume the following film neg sizes...
8 x 11mm (Minox)
13 x 17mm (110)
24 x 36mm (35mm)
17 x
On Monday, January 20, 2003, at 01:52 AM, Antti-Pekka Virjonen wrote:
I wonder if Kodak is afraid to show us some nature or landscape sample
images
at this point...
This Japanese site mentioned on ProRental may give you some idea. It
took me several tries to connect to it so be patient:
http
For what you're getting it looks like a fair price.
At 03:08 PM 1/20/2003 -0500, you wrote:
On Monday 20 January 2003 13:50, Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
> Found this on rec.photo.marketplace.35mm
>
> Contact "Steve Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> http://johnsonadv.home.attbi.com/pentax.htm
>
> http:
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 1:40 PM
Subject: Re: DSLR lifespan (was: Re: Ze Masked Enabler Strikes Again!)
> > The LCD, in my own opinion is a red herring of sorts. The image is too
> > small, and too low resoluti
Thanks for noticing I was beginning to feel ignored and un-loved
At 07:16 PM 1/20/2003 +, you wrote:
>I think you're both correct. You will see digital distribution following
>photographers
>but primarily where personal computers are available. I doubt you'll get a
>lot of
>digital camera
Funny my smellchecker did not catch that. I use a smell checker because my
spelling stinks.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: "Ann Sanfedele" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 1:52 PM
Subject: Re: Mea
http://www3.telus.net/wlachan/animal7.jpg
http://www3.telus.net/wlachan/animal8.jpg
Bounced flash to ceiling, F*300/4.5 mounted on tripod near wide open.
regards,
Alan Chan
Can anybody show me some Webpage with pictures taken with
F* 300/4.5 ED IF or FA 300/4.5 ED IF ???
Somehow that reminds me of the unsuccessful dinosaurs that only lasted 200
million years compared to the so successful mammals that are still around.
Some of those unsuccessful film formats lasted 70 years or so.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
Thank you.
I used a different program to make a better looking album, but it
doesn't seem to work right with Netscape.
http://home.att.net/~b_rubenstein/isr_test/index.html
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bruce,
Nice work. I enjoyed them all. My favorites are the candle lighting, the
woman crouchin
Well, eventually, they will reach a point where the pixel size will be noise
limited. Then the only way to improve a sensor will be to make it bigger,
and once again you will have various formats just as you do in film. Right
now the technology is so new that things are changing as fast as they can
On Monday 20 January 2003 17:05, Alan Chan wrote:
> http://www3.telus.net/wlachan/animal7.jpg
> http://www3.telus.net/wlachan/animal8.jpg
>
> Bounced flash to ceiling, F*300/4.5 mounted on tripod near wide open.
>
> regards,
> Alan Chan
What was your working distance?
Christian
What was your working distance?
Near 2M because the pigs are quite small.
regards,
Alan Chan
_
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
On Monday 20 January 2003 17:26, Alan Chan wrote:
> >What was your working distance?
>
> Near 2M because the pigs are quite small.
>
> regards,
> Alan Chan
>
Which is pretty close to minimum focus distance on that lens, correct?
Nice lens.
christian
Mike,
You're jab is outdated. XP is wonderful. You're out of touch for liking Macs.
Have a great day!
-frank
Mike Johnston wrote:
> And that's why I'm THANKFUL I own a Macintosh.
>
> The funniest one of these I've seen over the years was one called "If
> Microsoft Made Automobiles." Does
Bob wrote:
> You could not be more correct. As the pixels go up and the prices come
> down, the cameras of next year will render those of today obsolete.
Pal wrote:
> My point was that digital cameras at current seem too follow computers in
> planned obsolence. Hence, I find it likely that cons
1 - 100 of 176 matches
Mail list logo
