Finally captured the elusive shot of Petkal

Over the years there has been much speculation over what Petkal looks like. He has posted several images purporting to be of himself. All of which were simply ruses, in my opinion.

Well, yesterday, I finally captured an image of him. I promised not to divulge the location, but rest assured, it's him.

You can see that, even though he had something in his eye, he was having quite a good time.

Later in the day I caught him yelling at the children.

No prime L glass? What about his latest venture into wedding photography? I would imagine this would be a very interesting way to create exposure.

JSolie wrote in post #3632092
No prime L glass? What about his latest venture into wedding photography? I would imagine this would be a very interesting way to create exposure.

He had his minions carrying his glass for him. I think he was on his way to shoot his first wedding. That's why his disposition is so charming in these shots.

TD, I send you on a simple mission, and what results:

A case of: Mistaken Identity.

That's Ronald, not Peter.

Send a boy to do a man's job.

me

T.D. wrote in post #3632111
He had his minions carrying his glass for him. I think he was on his way to shoot his first wedding. That's why his disposition is so charming in these shots.

accounts for his snappy attire too ...

That's as close as one could get, but no cigar.
However, the distinguished looking gentleman could be my body double.
Great photography and a fine snooping instinct, Toronto Dominion.
BTW, you a cop in your "normal' life ? (Obviously, in your case I am stretching the meaning of "normal")

MDJAK wrote in post #3632126
TD, I send you on a simple mission, and what results:

A case of: Mistaken Identity.

That's Ronald, not Peter.

Send a boy to do a man's job.

me

LOL! I think the only mistaken identity here is with you, Doc. I'm positive this is our man Pet.

Have we seriously never seen a pic of Peter?

kathy.patterson wrote in post #3632516
Have we seriously never seen a pic of Peter?

No, we have not, cutie pie.

PetKal wrote in post #3632534
No, we have not, cutie pie.

ahh- my Pet. . . You ran away at the start of my little CFPP and you never found out what surfaced did you?

PetKal wrote in post #3632534
No, we have not, cutie pie.

Ahh, point of clarification....We have not seen a photo of Pet UNTIL NOW! :p

kathy.patterson wrote in post #3632516
Have we seriously never seen a pic of Peter?

PetKal wrote in post #3632534
No, we have not, cutie pie.

Hey, I offered to do the deed, but nobody would "define" the payoff

Now I'm indebted to Pete for the wonderful 300 lens, so, I guess it won't be me doing the dirty deed.

JAZZ D.P.G. wrote in post #3633013
Now I'm indebted to Pete for the wonderful 300 lens, so, I guess it won't be me doing the dirty deed.

You are da man, Jazzy.
Any time you need a lens, and if I have it available, you are the one to get a deal on it.