Good point Tim. I don't use tinyurl as often as I should. I should also rewrite my php photo album program to be more url friendly.
Michael On Dec 2, 2006, at 5:39 PM, Tim Øsleby wrote: > TinyURL.com is the answer. Pretty strait forward to use. > > > Tim > Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of > Michael Chan > Sent: 3. desember 2006 00:40 > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: 16-50 f2.8 > > Sorry about the chopped URLs; if someone wants to tell me how to > embed them properly so they don't line break that, I'd appreciate > it. Also, if you see the dust spots, so did I. I performed my first > sensor cleaning (heart-attack, but successful) after seeing those > spots. > > On Dec 2, 2006, at 3:29 PM, Michael Chan wrote: > >> John, >> >> I have a 10-17 and love shooting with it. It's an awesome lens. I'm >> continually impressed with what it produces, but it is a fish with >> all it's corresponding caveats. Here are several images shot with >> the Pentax 10-17 fish on the ist-DL: >> >> http://www.mcmm.net/viewimage.php? >> set=CoastJuly2006&i=IMGP1428.jpg&s=m >> http://www.mcmm.net/viewimage.php? >> set=CoastJuly2006&i=IMGP1429.jpg&s=m >> http://www.mcmm.net/viewimage.php? >> set=CoastJuly2006&i=IMGP1430.jpg&s=m >> http://www.mcmm.net/viewimage.php? >> set=oceanside_20060722&i=IMGP1604.jpg&s=m >> http://www.mcmm.net/viewimage.php? >> set=oceanside_20060722&i=IMGP1601.jpg&s=m >> http://www.mcmm.net/viewimage.php? >> set=Yankees_Seattle_20060824&i=IMGP2058.jpg&s=m >> http://www.mcmm.net/viewimage.php? >> set=lost_lake_august_2006&i=IMGP1752.jpg&s=m >> http://www.mcmm.net/viewimage.php? >> set=lost_lake_august_2006&i=IMGP1753.jpg&s=m >> http://www.mcmm.net/viewimage.php? >> set=lost_lake_august_2006&i=IMGP1759.jpg&s=m >> http://www.mcmm.net/viewimage.php? >> set=lost_lake_august_2006&i=IMGP1773.jpg&s=m >> >> I have decided to buy the 16-45 and hope I get the rebate fulfilled >> (though I do not have faith in rebates), and then see what price the >> 16-50 comes out at, and sell the 16-45 if it seems like the thing to >> do. I really like the kit lens; I'm not really all that disappointed >> in it at all despite my earlier comment, but when I want _sharp_ I >> use my 28-m or 50-m normal (50 FA is finally on it's way from BH). >> >> Michael >> >> On Dec 2, 2006, at 11:12 AM, John Francis wrote: >> >>> >>> I was almost convinced I wanted the 16-45 until the announcement >>> of the 16-50/f2.8. I never got round to buying the previous >>> (film-camera) short zoom to go with my 80-200, but this time I'm >>> probably going to get both of them. >>> >>> My problem is what to do until the 16-50 is available, especially >>> since I might want something wide before then for a couple of >>> events. >>> I've got an old Vivitar manual focus zoom, but that's only a 21-35. >>> I'm considering picking up the fisheye 10-17 (especially with the >>> rebates extended until Jan 9th.), but that leaves me with a bit of >>> a gap in the mid-wide-angle range. I suppose I could buy the 18-55 >>> kit lens with a K10D, but I'm not sure how much I'd use it once the >>> 16-50 comes along. The size isn't likely to matter much on a K10D, >>> especially with the grip, but I suppose I could hang on to it as a >>> walkaround lens to keep on the *ist-D. >>> >>> Decisions, decisions ... What would you do? >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 07:48:57AM -0800, Michael Chan wrote: >>>> I have been restraining myself from buying the 16-45 for months >>>> now, >>>> anticipating the weather-sealed lenses. I had not heard about a >>>> 16-50 2.8, which would likely be out of my budget range anyway, and >>>> with the rebate it's getting really difficult for me to control my >>>> LBA shakes. Is the 16-45 that far head and shoulder above the kit >>>> lens? I've been pretty impressed with the kit, but it definitely >>>> has >>>> its shortcomings. >>>> >>>> On Dec 2, 2006, at 7:20 AM, David J Brooks wrote: >>>> >>>>> Quoting John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 08:11:40PM -0500, David J Brooks wrote: >>>>>>> Anyone heard if its happining. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would love to get this lens and the K10d >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dave >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Equine Photography in York Region >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The new lenses aren't due until March of next year. >>>>>> Realistically this probably means I won't be able to get my >>>>>> hands on one before my Las Vegas trip in early April :-( >>>>> >>>>> We are heading there in late April for our 25th wedding >>>>> anniversary, >>>>> so maybe i'll be able to get one by then. >>>>> >>>>> Dave >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Equine Photography in York Region >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> [email protected] >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
