representing those "some who like it" -- been using one as a main lens
for over 5 years, and imo, it's quite well built. very smooth, very solid
(of course, not quite as solid as a super-tak). no problems whatsoever.
very sharp. i would recommend it without any reservations.
mis
i have K200/2.5 and K135/2.5 and consider them some of the very best
lenses. definitely way above average.
best,
mishka
On 9/17/05, Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Not very long ago, someone posted a very nice shot (brown/yellow leaves)
> > made with this lens. About the
you mean, "no one in 35mm, except nikon, zeiss, voigtlaender and leica"?
if so, i think i agree.
mishka
On 9/18/05, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No one is going to make any new film cameras. If Pentax promised more
> film cameras, you can't blame them for backing down on that one.
Those are mutually contradictory statements. Both cannot be true at the same
time.
mishka
On 9/18/05, Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It takes 10+MP to exceed 35mm film under idea; conditions, and as the 1Ds
> mkII
> has shown you can match 120 film with 17MP.
VC 12/5.6?
mishka
On 9/19/05, Glen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The Nikkor 13mm f5.6 superwide?
>
> http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/speciallenses/13mm.html
>
> http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/ultrawides/13mm.htm
&
now that's just plain... strange comment.
what exactly would be the reason preventing the owners of the
aforementioned truckloads of K/M lenses looking to buy into
Digital (or DigitaL)?
mishka
On 9/19/05, Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> While the lenses do exist, the nu
the sky in falling.
as far as support goes, i cla'd my lx last year -- that's the 25 years
old hand-assembled camera. kinda hard to complain.
mishka
On 9/19/05, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Cant you understand? How many times
> do I have to post thi
btw, speaking of compatibility, imo, the aps sized sensor effectively makes more
damage than open vs. stop-down metering. at least, for those who are
not interested
in super-teles (99% of users? -- of course, including myself. without
that it would have
been only 97%)
best,
mishka
do the math (the simple kind: multiplication and division)
mishka
On 9/19/05, Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> They do not contradict at all. When used under ideal conditions, 35mm
> film is still exceeded by a 10+MP sensor (All other things being equal
> and using glas
se: CV making m42 and ltm cameras (although film). i am willing to
bet that in a few years there will be a digital one as well. if
interested, i'll post
the spreads.
best,
mishka
best,
mishka
On 9/19/05, Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Simple. Most of those truckloads of lense
mediocre to mediocre)
so according to your own numbers, 17MP is the lower bound on
120 format(s) -- the smallest one (645) under average conditions.
this is again, according to your own post.
in other words, "17MP" is bullshit.
mishka
On 9/19/05, Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
why? please enlight. what's gonna happen @Q1 2006 or shortly thereafter?
mishka
On 9/20/05, Herb Chong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> it. anyone who is not profitable in the digital camera game by 1Q 2006 isn't
> ever going to be.
most were surprised to see F6 from Nikon and Ikon from Zeiss too.
so? life is full of surprises.
mishka
On 9/19/05, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would be surprised if we see another new film camera from Nikon.
> Leica, perhaps if they manage to stay in business. W
g in camera business?
mishka
On 9/20/05, Herb Chong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Zeiss and Voigtlander can appeal to the retro market as they have done in
> the past. they will release new film cameras with small changes from their
> basic chassis. most of the diff
herb,
i like your pictures a lot, but with this statement...
you are either naive or an idiot, or trying to pretend you are.
or an analyst, which would be the worst case.
mishka
On 9/20/05, Herb Chong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> no, i look at the underlying data that the analysts are
they have cell phones, so they, at least theoretically, can
get on the web with GPRS.
mishka
On 9/20/05, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/20/05, John Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > He makes the Amish look positively groovy.
>
> Is
on the screen, the brick walls on both shots seem about equally sharp
to me, except the bricks on the foreground @5.6. can it be a dof effect?
best,
mishka
On 9/21/05, Jim King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Cotty-
>
> Thanks for the links; your lens looks good at f16, but so d
summer'02, when Brotherhood was all the rage.
happy anniversary!
mishka
at least:
full frame sensor
12MP
full K/M compatibility
intercahngeable screens
IS in the body
N (N>5) RAW buffer
nice to have:
open source firmware
auto sensor cleaning
wifi
mishka
no wonder -- they had every concievable bit of technology built in F5 already...
mishka
On 9/20/05, Kenneth Waller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A Nikon sponsored pro has told me that the F6 is the last Nikon film camera...
>
> Kenneth Waller
>
or $50K, if it were to be made a few years ago.
DSLR (unblike SLR) is electronic, which means, it's $50 + sensor cost + mark up.
mishka
On 9/21/05, Herb Chong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> unfortunately, i think you have just spec'd a $4K camera, ignoring the noise
> requirement.
>
> Herb
good.
mishka
On 9/22/05, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Im getting tired of arguing
it a tie if they increase their sales numbers by as little as 1%!
> Because hardly anyone is using 30 year old stuff. Just like hardly anyone are
> using 30
> year old hi-fi equipment. Those who do, do it BECAUSE it is old and they have
> rarely any
> interest in compatibility with new equipment.
looks like JCO VIRUS IS CONTAGIOUS.
>
> Pål
mishka
how about, canon runs its production to 100% of what it can produce, and
introducing an FD mount dslr would mean making fewer EF dslrs, which
in turn would mean, fewer new lens sales?
mishka
On 9/22/05, Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That is not the point. If there is such a d
very pretty camera.
best,
mishka
On 3/9/07, Jens Bladt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Porr mans Pentax?
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72157594579668840/
> Regards
>
> Jens Bladt
>
> http://www.jensbladt.dk
> +45 56 63 77 11
> +45 23 43 85 77
>
&g
big foto lens?
On 3/10/07, David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/11/07, Christian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > William Robb wrote:
> > > It's this big:
> > >
> > > http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/temp/71bd.jpg
> > >
> >
> > It looks like a gun from an ultra violent video game... Or a
try this:
http://tinyurl.com/yvvekn
(my apologies if i spoiled someone's bidding...)
best,
mishka
On 3/13/07, Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've never seen a bad report on any macro lens. It seems to be something
> that is simple to design.
>
> Of course
magnification on a digital sensor is a moot point anyway.
how do you measure it?
suppose you have 24x36mm (FF) sensors: one is 2x2 pixels
and one is 20MP. does it make any sense to compare 1:1 mag
images made on them?
best,
mishka
On 3/14/07, John Whittingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
&
absolutely correct.
mishka
On 3/15/07, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> NOPE, magnification in macro or actually any
> photo, macro or otherwise, is the ratio of the actual object size
> to the lens image size of that actual object, PHOTOGRAPHIC "FORMAT"
i didn't say "the mag. in two cases is different". i did say that comparison
is meaningless, although, technically, they have the same mag.
best,
mishka
On 3/15/07, mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You could use the same argument to say that an image made on ASA25
incorrect. a 1:1 reproduction of an object 10mmx10mm is 10mmx10mm
regardless whether it is on a sensor, a piece of film or a wall.
size of the format does not enter the equation.
best,
mishka
On 3/15/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So at 1:1 magnification, a Pentax
ter.
however, unlike zenitar, rear filter is not required to be there all
the time.
-- it's PK, not PKA mount.
imo, for the money, it's a good buy.
best,
mishka
On 3/17/07, Sandy Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There's a 20 mm F2.5 that looks tempting for use i
just got off ebay an spII with 50/1.4 smc tak (i was after the lens,
and the camera
came almost for free with it -- but it looks fantastic and 100%
working, including the meter)...
what a beauty -- both, the camera and the lens, almost objects of art!
best,
mishka
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail
speaking of portraits, i have found that i like Helios 85/1.5
screwmount (older version, black) a lot. it's quite a bit soft at f1.5,
but quite beautifully soft and with very nice bokeh.
see also here:
http://www.dantestella.com/technical/helios.html
best,
mishka
On 3/21/07, Minelli F
Looks like they have 35/2 and 50/1.4 as well
best,
mishka
On 3/21/07, Igor Roshchin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> For the period of at least 2 hours I saw 77/1.8 black on the B&H
> being listed as in stock. I just looked there, and it is already listed
> as "out of
what's completely beyond me, is why anybody would offer rebates on things
that sell so quickly (except for sheer idiocy). any ideas?
mishka
On 3/22/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What I find interesting is that I received e-mail notification from them
> that it wa
he can counter sue.
On 3/25/07, Jim King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What a travesty to make of the legal system! Good luck, and may your
> lawyer tie them in knots!
>
> Regards, Jim
>
> BTW, can you recover your legal fees if, as hoped, the judge tosses
> the case out of court? It seems to me
i guess, that means that used p645 glass will soon follow
k-mount stuff and start disappearing from keh .
best,
mishka
On 3/26/07, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> According to a poster on the DPReview Pentax forum, the latest (April)
> issue of Chasseur d'Images
These things seem to be virtually impossible to find now:
http://stores.ebay.com/Camerasharp_Voigtlander-Lens-SL_W0QQcolZ4QQdirZ1QQfsubZ108009QQftidZ2QQtZkm
and BIN price is quite reasonable. I've got one myself (supposed to be
delivered today)
best,
mishka
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail
ize images, so this question is irrelevant.
>
> Shel
mishka
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
in an unrelated news, IT'S BETTER TO BE RICH AND HEALTHY
than poor and sick...
best,
mishka
> HIGHER DISPLAY NET RESOLUTION IS SIMPLY
> BETTER than lower NET display resolution...
> jco
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
price point.
the way i see it, the lack of reasonably priced processing/printing
basically forces digital down my throat. when i pay $20 to get a set of
lousy 4x6s that would make me want to yell, an inkjet starts looking
*very* attractive. oversharpened or not.
best,
mishka
On 4/16/05, Bob Bla
great shot!
mishka
On 4/16/05, John Celio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I shot this vertical panorama with the Cokin filter:
> http://www.neovenator.com/gallery/files/d2/infra_01.html
>
> John Celio
aven't you?
> William Robb
mishka
actually, afaik, it's not uncommon for mf lenses to be on par with the best
35mm ones, in terms of lpmm. rolleiflex tlr and some hasselblad lenses
certainly are,
easily resolving 70+ lpmm on (color slide) film.
best,
mishka
On 4/19/05, Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
it is completely pointless to talk about "automotive marques":
is mercedes american or german?
how about nissan? bentley? jaguar? crysler? skoda? lamborghini? vw?
btw, mercedes m is being made in Hamilton, ON. does that count for
a canadian car?
mishka
On 4/19/05, Godfrey DiGior
read editorials? to understand world finance and macroeconomy?
you've made my day!
why not read an editorial in NY Post? at least that's more fun.
mishka
On 4/19/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Read the editorial page in today's Wall Street
xposures of the same frame of the color film, through
the same filters. you'll be able to tweak exposure of each channel right
there on the spot.
of course, that assumes you can visualize the results.
which you probably can't.
best,
mishka
On 4/18/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED
opinions based on nothing are always fun, aren't they?
mishka
On 4/20/05, Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The Contax name is worthless imagewise for those under the age of 60.
Zeiss lenses were
> great 40+ years ago. The last 40 years all major manufacturers have made
&
facts are absolutely boring. zero fun. none at all.
best,
mishka
On 4/20/05, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/20/05, Mishka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > opinions based on nothing are always fun, aren't they?
>
> Well, if they were based on fact
very cool!
best,
mishka
On 4/20/05, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, Its a big file for not very much.
> Its 1.685 mb, but I don't have software to clip it down to size.
> http://www.komkon.org/~wrobb/IMGP0384.MOV
>
> William Robb
>
>
what do you mean, you haven't?
mishka
On 4/21/05, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Paul Stenquist"
> Subject: Re: Pentax 645
>
> > You should send it to Reichman.
>
> He'd probably think I'd glued the nickel down too.
>
> William Robb
>
>
KR...
he has just posted another one
"Epson 4990 Photo and 4990 PRO Scanner Review Test"
and then, later
"I haven't played with it yet. "
i think i see a pattern here...
mishka
On 4/20/05, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Exactly to whom might yo
i think this went far enough.
mishka
On 4/21/05, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why use a US one? Why not the Canuck Beaver? US one have a wider lip?
>
>
>
> cheers,
> frank
alright, nevermind then. i guess i've been hanging on the trading
floor for too long today.
best,
mishka
On 4/21/05, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/21/05, Mishka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > i think this went far enough.
>
> I was being seri
that's not a bad deal. i paid more for mine.
best,
mishka
On 4/21/05, Don Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> of crazed, glassy eyed, "spend whatever it takes" Pentax lens
> buyers on eekBay:
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=75092531
55mm?
mishka (never imagined there is a gap between 50 and 85...)
On 4/20/05, Don Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Any suggestions, other than the 77Ltd. (Which I can't afford)
> for manual focus primes to fill the gap between 50 and 85mm?
> I'm good down to 16mm
here you go!
mishka
On 4/21/05, Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 21 Apr 2005 at 22:46, frank theriault wrote:
>
> > Canadian nickels have a beaver on the obverse side.
>
> LOL, how do they get away with that :-)
>
>
> Rob Studdert
> HURSTV
and got rid of 85 altogether?
mishka
On 4/21/05, Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Pentax did, then they filled it with a 77 :-)
>
> But Don hasn't seen the light yet, he keeps mentioning cost ;-)
>
>
> Rob Studdert
yet another article:
http://www.forbes.com/2005/04/14/cx_ah_0414photo.html
mishka
if any company can pretend to be that, it should be cosina. not pentax
by any measure you can come up with (other than lack of market share).
best,
mishka
On 4/22/05, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Pentax is the 'Apple' of the camera industry." I lo
one step UP???
mishka
On 4/22/05, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Most camera store clerks are only one step up the ladder of knowledge from
> their customers. They form thir opinions about equipment the same way the
> customer does.
> I wonder which camera has taken the most interesting photographs.
>
> Shel
hasselblad. on the moon.
mishka
it's simple: Shel *is* a camera. an obscure defect in its winding
mechanism made it self- (and web-) aware. the rest is history...
best,
mishka
On 5/6/05, Kenneth Waller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "which camera has a higher ratio of interesting photos to duds?"
>
of course, a week ago when i was rummaging through a box of
some old old family pics, i have got some totally worthless baby
pics of my grandpa, almost a hundred years old now (pics).
absolutely no value. still wondering why i haven't
tossed them in garbage right away...
On 5/6/05, Shel Belinko
s=books&n=507846
for those who don't know who he is,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:YEVGENY_KHALDEI_-_RAISING_THE_SOVIET_FLAG_OVER_THE_REICHSTAG.jpg
no pentax content whatsoever.
best,
mishka
i used to value it a lot, but shel helped me to see the light...
mishka
On 5/9/05, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So you value your family history even less than I? ;)
>
> Tom C.
>
> >From: Mishka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdm
still, pretty interesting pics, aren't they?
:)
mishka
On 5/9/05, Christian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Mishka" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > > I wonder which camera has taken the most interesting photographs.
yes.
75 and 90 are not that far apart, and i am not sure if a true
macro is that important when travelling. if you need a *really* close focus
for some reason, a good close up lens (e.g. nikkon) is very high quality
and weights next to nothing.
best,
mishka
On 5/10/05, Amita Guha <[EM
That's probably the best answer.
Mike
On 5/11/05, Mark Cassino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you didn't plan on using it - why bring it?
>
> If you do plan to use it - bring it!
>
> - MCC
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Mark Cassino Photography
> Kalamazoo, MI
> www.markcassino.co
get 308!
I have been using one for a few years now, drowned it in a lake (had to change
the batteries and let it dry in the sun) -- still working like new.
I looked at 358 as well, but it is much bulkier and heavier and doesn't
really give *me* that much extra.
best,
mishka
On 5/12/05, F
if they never rate, give them a rating on the last day of 60 day period.
mishka
On 5/14/05, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5/14/05, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The lesson? Let the other party rate first.
>
> One of the reasons I
so increadibly smart making fun of someone who hasn't handled a dslr before...
is it just pentax users?
mishka
On 5/15/05, mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So I'm in Jessops looking at their list of film scanners and other bits
> and bobs and there's a perso
ing
through the online reviews, this is far from apparent.
so the guy is buying an mid-level dslr, so he hasn't handled one before...
so what?
if you only look at the questions people ask on photo.net forums wrt.
hasselblads
they already own...
best,
mishka
On 5/15/05, mike wilson <[EMAI
nt game. the
game making
money, which has little to do with "art" or anything else for that matter.
best,
mishka
(1) i have a bagful of snaps dating 60+ years back, and none of them
is anything even remotely fit any of the rules that guy proposes (2)
(2) i am sure that the folks in
Any good/not so expensive ones? I need to scan a few 35mm frames. Preferrably,
16bit 4000dpi or so.
Thanks,
Mishka
an a few 35mm frames.
> Preferrably,
> > 16bit 4000dpi or so.
> > Thanks,
> > Mishka
> >
>
> Miska.
>
> Brother Aaron is working out of the house soon. Sold his store. He will be
> more than
> helpfull and in
> a good price range.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
&
nope, i still am (and looks like forever will be) in NYC. but a friend of mine
is trying to find a place to scan a roll of 35m slides for me (and i
am paying :)
if i were coming to toronto, i would have definitely let you know!
best,
mishka
On 5/17/05, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
would be my pleasure!
mishka
On 5/18/05, Cesar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mishka,
>
> It looks like we will have to get together the next time I am up in NYC.
>
> Hoping it will be before July,
>
> César
> Panama City, Florida
>
> Mishka wrote:
&g
MX has a kinda mirror lock up. Just tap lightly the release button.
It's a hack, but it works.
best,
mishka
On 5/20/05, E.R.N. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thibouille wrote:
>
> >MX has interchangeable screens while KX has mirror lock-up.
> >Make your choice. .
oh well...
On 5/22/05, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just testing Markus' theory.
> If this gets through, I did it right.
>
>
>
life is too short to have a job that's no fun. or, even,
"affords some fun".
there's an old joke: if drinking is ruining your career,
you should quit. it's a lousy job anyway.
best,
mishka
On 5/23/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For some.
why not move to texas?
mishka
On 5/23/05, Graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
found that there are a lot of people in the world who feel their
mission in life is making as many people unhappy as they can.
Unfortunately there is a law against shooting them.
>
> gra
yes. and love every minute of it! :)
mishka
On 5/23/05, John Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mishka,
>
> You've clearly never been to Texas. :-)
>
> John
>
> On Tue, 24 May 2005 00:13:41 +0100, Mishka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > why
of exactly the same scene (same magnification, to be
precise) and the same aperture
will be identical as far as DOF is concerned. regardless of format,
focallength or whatever else.
assuming perfect film/sensor, no diffraction, and so on.
see the "Shallow DOF with 6X7 lenses" from this July
best,
mishka
whose exactly?
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
... is really screwing up my digest formatting!
!!!
--
--
Collin Brendemuehl
KC8TKA
"Ron Santo deserves enshrinement in Cooperstown."
-- Me
--
i found kodak supra being pretty far from being a high saturation --
just plain normal.
superia works great here in foliage!
mishka
Amita Guha wrote:
I'm looking for some high saturation print film to take with me to New
England. I'll probably bring some Fuji Superia, but I want some
enough -- not another DOF thread!!!
mishka
graywolf wrote:
The strange thing is optics seems to be the area where the most
erroneous BS is accepted as "TRUTH!" in photography. And most of
optics is simply ratios, and no harder to understand than figuring out
how much ingredients y
"A perfect body with all the right accessories"
sounds like a *very* clever ad line to me.
best,
mishka
i have to admit, i haven't seen the ad. but , from the description,
once you put it *that* way -- i have to agree.
mishka
P.S. then again, i guess, i wouldn't mind holding a bunch of bags for a
lady with a perfect body
(not neccessarily an *istD), provided, i get to play with it
i do prefer a fisheye to a rectilinear wideangle. the pictures semm to look
more natural to me. i guess, i have been mc escher fan for waaay too long
best,
mishka
Ouch, that's an expensive way to provide a distorted wide angle view.
Rob Studdert
a few weeks ago i, accidentally, had my seconic L308B II take a dive in
a waterfall in white mountains. after it was recovered,
dripping with refreshingly cool mountain water, and dried for a couple
of days on my dining table, it kept working flawlessly.
i guess this speaks for itself.
mishka
more like "usedtobes"
mishka
> So americans are brits?
Wannabes...
> Cheers, > Bob
thank god america is much more populous! (that has nothing to do
with president of Iceland, you know)
mishka
For example, I met the president of Iceland at a kiosk the
other day.
elhams. at 11pm.
and the same on the way back.
mishka
Thus Americans tend to envision major towns connected by large, mostly empty,
highways, while the English think in terms of narrow, winding roads, with
massive congestion on the few limited-access highways.
c'mon, it's fun!
mishka
This topic has received way more attention than it deserved
Jerry in Houston
the way i heard it, the cops dig them at night to make sure no one is speeding.
the first time i went from jfk on van-vyck expwy (crawling at 5mph), and saw
the signs "speed limit strictly enforced", i realized new york cops do have a sense of
hunor.
mishka
There are lots of potho
does anything else matter? suppose i have a sensor with
10 billions sensors, and output 10 pixels...
their output is (1.5,1.5,3) M of independent pixels,
not 6M of RGB ones.
mishka
those are most likely OUTPUT pixels,
after the RBGG matrix. Stating the
number of sensors rather than output
pixels
s interpolated afterwards.
mishka
do the math, to get an output file of 2000X3000
pixels, each one being a 24 bit color, you need
24Msensors, 4 for each pixel.
JCO
my example was about camera with a red filter on. in that case,
you do lose 2/3 of data (as all green and blue pixels will be just
black).
or, equivalently, taking only red channel in photoshop.
of course, this is a border case.
mishka
This of course doesn't mean that taking a B&W p
1 - 100 of 1247 matches
Mail list logo
