ML Archiv: [OM] Re: Some interesting commentary on sensor size,

Olympus-OM

[OM] Re: Some interesting commentary on sensor size,

from Moose

Subject:	[OM] Re: Some interesting commentary on sensor size,
From:	Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Sun, 20 Apr 2008 14:09:12 -0700

Paul Laughlin wrote:
> And if the satelodge does't coincide with the sidiphyte then the rataset 
> won't work.  And about now I am so confused that I don't know whether to 
> wind my ass or wipe my watch.
>   
Both

Moose

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
[OM] Re: Some interesting commentary on sensor size,, Jan Steinman [OM] Re: Some interesting commentary on sensor size,, Winsor Crosby [OM] Re: Some interesting commentary on sensor size,, Marc Lawrence [OM] Re: Some interesting commentary on sensor size,, Andrew Fildes [OM] Re: Some interesting commentary on sensor size,, Chris Barker [OM] Re: Some interesting commentary on sensor size,, Andrew Fildes [OM] Re: Some interesting commentary on sensor size,, Winsor Crosby [OM] Re: Some interesting commentary on sensor size,, Paul Laughlin [OM] Re: Some interesting commentary on sensor size,, Moose <= [OM] Re: Some interesting commentary on sensor size,, Chuck Norcutt [OM] Re: Some interesting commentary on sensor size,, Marc Lawrence [OM] Re: Some interesting commentary on sensor size,, Andrew Fildes

Previous by Date:	[OM] Re: Some interesting commentary on sensor size, pixel pitch and r, Andrew Fildes
Next by Date:	[OM] Re: (om) Some NZ images, usher99
Previous by Thread:	[OM] Re: Some interesting commentary on sensor size,, Paul Laughlin
Next by Thread:	[OM] Re: Some interesting commentary on sensor size,, Chuck Norcutt
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]