All Forum Comments
Algernon wrote:
AF caught on slowly for everybody. At first it was probably taken up by beginners. Pro's and advanced amateurs have always been against automation.
I used to admire MF Nikon lenses but the prices were horrendous (eg £260 for 28mm f/2.8 )when the AF cameras came out the AF lenses were much cheaper and everyone was saying they can't be much use at that price. I thought the same at the time.
1988 prices:
Nikon 70-210mm f/4 AF Zoom £184
Nikon 70-210mm f/4 AF Zoom £254 diff model
Nikon 80-200mm f/4 MF Zoom £595
As the pros and amateurs were already happy paying the high price for MF lenses the only reason that they would have brought out cheaper AF lenses must have been they were aiming at the beginner. With magazines as well in the 80's the beginner was seen as the NEW market and a lot of excellent magazines such as the excellent US Petterson's and even AP were really dumbed down.
Those prices do seem quit high but as with Pentax would it be worth looking out for them now I have a few old manual focus lenses and Im very happy with all of them at a snip probably of there origanal price.AF caught on slowly for everybody. At first it was probably taken up by beginners. Pro's and advanced amateurs have always been against automation.
I used to admire MF Nikon lenses but the prices were horrendous (eg £260 for 28mm f/2.8 )when the AF cameras came out the AF lenses were much cheaper and everyone was saying they can't be much use at that price. I thought the same at the time.
1988 prices:
Nikon 70-210mm f/4 AF Zoom £184
Nikon 70-210mm f/4 AF Zoom £254 diff model
Nikon 80-200mm f/4 MF Zoom £595
As the pros and amateurs were already happy paying the high price for MF lenses the only reason that they would have brought out cheaper AF lenses must have been they were aiming at the beginner. With magazines as well in the 80's the beginner was seen as the NEW market and a lot of excellent magazines such as the excellent US Petterson's and even AP were really dumbed down.
Ian
Comment by philstaff posted on Old vs New at 13/07/2010 - 08:54
George Lazarette wrote:
Pentax was run by engineers. Canon was run by salesmen.
The human animal would always prefer to believe in pie in the sky rather than mundane reality.
G
So what your saying I think is George, the product was or is as good but they have failed to market it and were may be slow in getting off the mark when the digital age began.Pentax was run by engineers. Canon was run by salesmen.
The human animal would always prefer to believe in pie in the sky rather than mundane reality.
G
Ian
Comment by philstaff posted on Old vs New at 13/07/2010 - 08:31
rparmar wrote:
I believe that Pentax were slow to adopt auto-focus. They were also slow into digital.
Was this down to lack of resources or did they just fail to keep up with the technology and the changing market. If things had been different and they had invested in new technology at that point in time do you think things may be different today with may be Pentax enjoying a bigger slice of the cake. Im far from being competent enough to offer any real opinion into the quality of photos between the brands but from what I can make out is that Pentax cameras iq seems to be at least as good as the Canon or Nikon cameras of similar spec yet I never see any when I whatch TV clps of groups of photographers. At the air show last year there were hundreds out taking photos I think I was the only one with a Pentax camaera. Yet when I asked for advice on buying a dslr the brand was recommended to me by members of a camera club a few who are pro photographers. I believe that Pentax were slow to adopt auto-focus. They were also slow into digital.
ian
Comment by philstaff posted on Old vs New at 12/07/2010 - 22:39
johnriley wrote:
In those days the field leaders were Pentax and Nikon, with Canon coming up strongly behind them....
So how did Pentax fall so far behind the other two John.Quote:
Quite a lot of top photographers used Olympus
They did for a while and the picture of them all gathered together looked pretty impressive in the advertising. They all went back to Nikon and/or Pentax 67 though. I heard that the Olympus kit wasn't up to the rigours and they were fed up of it failing in heavy professional use.Quite a lot of top photographers used Olympus
In those days the field leaders were Pentax and Nikon, with Canon coming up strongly behind them....
Ian
Comment by philstaff posted on Old vs New at 12/07/2010 - 22:01
PeterMac wrote:
nice shots. i think he was just dancing for you
O realy nice shots. i think he was just dancing for you
Comment by philstaff posted on Swan attack at 12/07/2010 - 13:34
mowog wrote:
You big girl's blouse! - That's only a baby one. It won't have learned how to break a man's arm, with a beat of it's wing, yet.
Yes. Last shot is the best.
Thats easy for you to say you were not there, baby or not that was one big swan and I wasnt hanging around You big girl's blouse! - That's only a baby one. It won't have learned how to break a man's arm, with a beat of it's wing, yet.
Yes. Last shot is the best.
Comment by philstaff posted on Swan attack at 11/07/2010 - 17:11
http://www.freeserifsoftware.com/software/photoplus/photoplus-upgrade.asp
might be worth a look I got it as a free download and use this programe all the time.
Ian
might be worth a look I got it as a free download and use this programe all the time.
Ian
Comment by philstaff posted on Wanted: Adobe Photoshop Elements at 11/07/2010 - 11:16
[IMG]http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b399/philstaff/IMGP3990.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b399/philstaff/IMGP4011-1.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b399/philstaff/IMGP4002.jpg[/IMG]
Time to beat the re'treat.
Ian
[IMG]http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b399/philstaff/IMGP4011-1.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b399/philstaff/IMGP4002.jpg[/IMG]
Time to beat the re'treat.
Ian
Comment by philstaff posted on Swan attack at 11/07/2010 - 10:49
Ian