Lenses: Is This Your Final Answer?

**c.a.m** · 01-02-2014, 01:52 PM

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

As per the first post in this thread - we're just trying to help out the OP (and poor Larry/crewl1 who thought he had stumbled onto something big; and jsherman, who's trying in vain to defend the honour of the mind control device).

normhead · 01-02-2014, 02:00 PM

Well you guys have covered everything nicely, except I heard the radioactive versions need to be stored in lead boxes, I'm looking for someone with a Geiger counter to see if that's true. Also has anyone blown up the images to 400% to see if the magnetic field the lens emits affect purple fringing or CA?

And no, Im not going for the "What's a Henworth?" (Oh about 5 bucks). I have the Henway version. (As in "what's a Henway? oh about 5 pounds.")

causey · 01-02-2014, 02:12 PM

Originally posted by clackers

I dunno. The Endgadget reviewer didn't like it ...

And you believe the guy? Soft borders even at f11? For God's sake, this lens was originally designed for medium format! Not the first time a reviewer mixes up character and softness.

Now, I don't know what camera to buy for my copy. Since I have the "pearl and diamond" edition, I was thinking this one would do:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/L-New-Pentax-LX-Gold-Version-w-50mm-f-1-2-Limited-30...item485dca9b7f

**clackers** · 01-02-2014, 06:35 PM - **1 Like**

This has been so much fun ... writer Bill Bryson claims his fellow Americans don't get irony/sarcasm, but from a number of posters that's clearly not true!

**c.a.m** · 01-02-2014, 06:59 PM

Originally posted by normhead

Also has anyone blown up the images to 400% to see if the magnetic field the lens emits affect purple fringing or CA?

Several comprehensive user tests using the slanted metre (yard) stick technique clearly showed the negligible effect of the magnetic field. And posts by many users on that other forum have hotly debated this issue over and over, so I think we can put this one to bed. Although, to be fair, they only looked at enlargements of 300% or less.

**crewl1** · 01-02-2014, 07:01 PM

Originally posted by causey

And you believe the guy? Soft borders even at f11? For God's sake, this lens was originally designed for medium format! Not the first time a reviewer mixes up character and softness.

Now, I don't know what camera to buy for my copy. Since I have the "pearl and diamond" edition, I was thinking this one would do:
L New Pentax LX Gold Version w 50mm F 1 2 Limited 300 Pieces | eBay

I wouldn't get that camera if I were you.
It is obvious the seller already used a similar lens on it due to the yellowing of the body.

Everyone knows the radioactive elements react with crocodile skin and will make any nearby metal corrode yellow.
That camera has been abused since the lens instructions say specifically not to use it near crocodiles.

I would bet the shutter is corroded beyond even Eric's skilled capabilities.

Only bodies with synthetic accents should be used.

dansamy · 01-02-2014, 07:06 PM

I just came in here looking for cheese & bacon. But I think that party's just two doors down.

**c.a.m** · 01-02-2014, 07:13 PM

Originally posted by crewl1

Everyone knows the radioactive elements react with crocodile skin and will make any nearby metal corrode yellow. That camera has been abused since the lens instructions say specifically not to use it near crocodiles.

Wow, you certainly know your stuff!

But, now that we're totally OT and talking about the camera - take a closer look. I think it's a Ricoh leak. I can't see a mirror in any of the pics (especially in the picture of the front mount), and that's clearly an LCD on the back (it's small, but definitely an LCD. I betcha they're trying out that new Panasony 3.2 Mpixel backlit display)! Oh, I think causey's opened a whole new thread.

panoguy · 01-02-2014, 07:17 PM

Originally posted by c.a.m

Don't bother. I think it's the same ad I saw. I drove the five hours to Toronto yesterday to look at the gear, in particular that lens. Turns out the grandfather used to live on the west coast (Vancouver Island), and the whole kit is fungus city. Etched right in. Lots of corrosion on the mount and on both aperture blades. I'd say not worth the risk.

So what you're saying is that it's in pristine condition but you didn't have the cash left after the holidays, and the seller only promised to hold it for you until this weeked...

Besides, those early 2-bladed aperture versions underexpose on most modern bodies.

Originally posted by dansamy

I just came in here looking for cheese & bacon. But I think that party's just two doors down.

None of that here! This is a serious discussion, with technical bits and everything...

But, sometimes cats are also beards:

SpecialK · 01-02-2014, 09:23 PM

Originally posted by rbefly

OK, let's clarify...My version and David's also (yes, he sent me photos and specs) is the 2-element, 4 group, non-radioactive, red-stripe, non-gossamer, submersible/W/R/DC/AM/FM/Underwater, firmware 1.02, ghost-resistant but vampire-tolerant, non-LTD version.

Metal or plastic mount?

**rbefly** · 01-02-2014, 11:56 PM

Funny you should ask that, it came with the normal hybrid polymer/graphite/carbonfiber-reinforced (OK, plastic!) mount, but squeeked badly when mounting to the body, scaring the dog and other small animals. So, considering the value and rarity of the lens, I chopped up an FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited and used that mount. A good trade-off, wouldn't you say?
Now it doesn't squeak!
Ron

**c.a.m** · 01-03-2014, 07:06 AM

Originally posted by rbefly

I chopped up an FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited and used that mount. A good trade-off, wouldn't you say?

Yeah, that plastic mount was well known to cause serious squeaks, especially in the cold. Surprised you didn't use the mount from a FA 31 Ltd - it's supposed to have a slightly tighter tolerance on one of the mounting blades. I guess one uses whatever's on hand. Good job.

Did you also grind and polish the focus ring to give it a 'zebra' appearance? I hear it looks great on the Silver K-5/K-3.

- Craig

**rbefly** · 01-03-2014, 09:02 AM

Hi Craig,
Wow, I didn't know the 31mm mount was a better fit, I'll get chopping right away! Too bad I tossed the remains of the 77mm, I'll go see if the trashman has picked up yet...ooopps, I hear the truck now, missed it. Oh, well, at least I got to use it for a few years.
I'll have to try the zebra grinding, that sounds great, thanks for the tips!
Ron

**monochrome** · 01-03-2014, 09:48 AM

Originally posted by rbefly

A good trade-off, wouldn't you say?

Wow! - that worked? I thought you had to use the mount from a SMC Pentax-FA* 200mm F4 Macro ED [IF]. Good to know.

Thingo · 01-03-2014, 10:12 AM

Originally posted by panoguy

Besides, those early 2-bladed aperture versions underexpose on most modern bodies.

.. and that's why I've cunningly held onto my *istD !
The green button (well it's not green next to the Henworth any more: I think there's protoplasm leaking out of mine (anyway sorry for the digression)) does a treat capturing in manual mode. But the flash metering, even TTL (none of that new-fangled P-TTL) is thrown off by the protoplasm, so I'll be pleased when it's all dissipated.

01-02-2014, 02:12 PM	#48
causey Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Arlington, VA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,757	Originally posted by clackers I dunno. The Endgadget reviewer didn't like it ... And you believe the guy? Soft borders even at f11? For God's sake, this lens was originally designed for medium format! Not the first time a reviewer mixes up character and softness. Now, I don't know what camera to buy for my copy. Since I have the "pearl and diamond" edition, I was thinking this one would do: http://www.ebay.com/itm/L-New-Pentax-LX-Gold-Version-w-50mm-f-1-2-Limited-30...item485dca9b7f Last edited by causey; 01-02-2014 at 02:47 PM.

01-02-2014, 07:17 PM	#54
panoguy Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Washington, D.C. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,327	Originally posted by c.a.m Don't bother. I think it's the same ad I saw. I drove the five hours to Toronto yesterday to look at the gear, in particular that lens. Turns out the grandfather used to live on the west coast (Vancouver Island), and the whole kit is fungus city. Etched right in. Lots of corrosion on the mount and on both aperture blades. I'd say not worth the risk. So what you're saying is that it's in pristine condition but you didn't have the cash left after the holidays, and the seller only promised to hold it for you until this weeked... Besides, those early 2-bladed aperture versions underexpose on most modern bodies. Originally posted by dansamy I just came in here looking for cheese & bacon. But I think that party's just two doors down. None of that here! This is a serious discussion, with technical bits and everything... But, sometimes cats are also beards: Last edited by panoguy; 01-02-2014 at 07:26 PM.

01-02-2014, 11:56 PM	#56
rbefly Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Denver, Colorado Photos: Albums Posts: 2,030	Now, It's Metal! Funny you should ask that, it came with the normal hybrid polymer/graphite/carbonfiber-reinforced (OK, plastic!) mount, but squeeked badly when mounting to the body, scaring the dog and other small animals. So, considering the value and rarity of the lens, I chopped up an FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited and used that mount. A good trade-off, wouldn't you say? Now it doesn't squeak! Ron

01-03-2014, 09:02 AM	#58
rbefly Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Denver, Colorado Photos: Albums Posts: 2,030	Better Mount? Hi Craig, Wow, I didn't know the 31mm mount was a better fit, I'll get chopping right away! Too bad I tossed the remains of the 77mm, I'll go see if the trashman has picked up yet...ooopps, I hear the truck now, missed it. Oh, well, at least I got to use it for a few years. I'll have to try the zebra grinding, that sounds great, thanks for the tips! Ron

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Nature OK, here is the answer........	Heinrich Lohmann	Post Your Photos!	10	11-12-2013 10:27 PM
This is why your used gear is so expensive	scratchpaddy	Photographic Industry and Professionals	21	06-27-2013 12:47 PM
This is why your pictures suck	alamo5000	Photographic Technique	54	06-18-2013 05:52 PM
Can you answer this burning question?	jon404	Pentax K-01	8	02-21-2013 04:07 AM
This my friends is the problem but what is the answer?	seacapt	General Talk	76	09-08-2012 02:47 AM

01-02-2014, 01:52 PM	#46
c.a.m Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Ottawa, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,189	Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here. As per the first post in this thread - we're just trying to help out the OP (and poor Larry/crewl1 who thought he had stumbled onto something big; and jsherman, who's trying in vain to defend the honour of the mind control device).

01-02-2014, 02:00 PM	#47
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Well you guys have covered everything nicely, except I heard the radioactive versions need to be stored in lead boxes, I'm looking for someone with a Geiger counter to see if that's true. Also has anyone blown up the images to 400% to see if the magnetic field the lens emits affect purple fringing or CA? And no, Im not going for the "What's a Henworth?" (Oh about 5 bucks). I have the Henway version. (As in "what's a Henway? oh about 5 pounds.")

01-02-2014, 06:35 PM - 1 Like	#49
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	This has been so much fun ... writer Bill Bryson claims his fellow Americans don't get irony/sarcasm, but from a number of posters that's clearly not true!

01-02-2014, 06:59 PM	#50
c.a.m Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Ottawa, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,189	Originally posted by normhead Also has anyone blown up the images to 400% to see if the magnetic field the lens emits affect purple fringing or CA? Several comprehensive user tests using the slanted metre (yard) stick technique clearly showed the negligible effect of the magnetic field. And posts by many users on that other forum have hotly debated this issue over and over, so I think we can put this one to bed. Although, to be fair, they only looked at enlargements of 300% or less.

01-02-2014, 07:01 PM	#51
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807	Originally posted by causey And you believe the guy? Soft borders even at f11? For God's sake, this lens was originally designed for medium format! Not the first time a reviewer mixes up character and softness. Now, I don't know what camera to buy for my copy. Since I have the "pearl and diamond" edition, I was thinking this one would do: L New Pentax LX Gold Version w 50mm F 1 2 Limited 300 Pieces \| eBay I wouldn't get that camera if I were you. It is obvious the seller already used a similar lens on it due to the yellowing of the body. Everyone knows the radioactive elements react with crocodile skin and will make any nearby metal corrode yellow. That camera has been abused since the lens instructions say specifically not to use it near crocodiles. I would bet the shutter is corroded beyond even Eric's skilled capabilities. Only bodies with synthetic accents should be used.

01-02-2014, 07:06 PM	#52
dansamy Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2013 Location: Alabama Posts: 2,450	I just came in here looking for cheese & bacon. But I think that party's just two doors down.

01-02-2014, 07:13 PM	#53
c.a.m Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Ottawa, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,189	Originally posted by crewl1 Everyone knows the radioactive elements react with crocodile skin and will make any nearby metal corrode yellow. That camera has been abused since the lens instructions say specifically not to use it near crocodiles. Wow, you certainly know your stuff! But, now that we're totally OT and talking about the camera - take a closer look. I think it's a Ricoh leak. I can't see a mirror in any of the pics (especially in the picture of the front mount), and that's clearly an LCD on the back (it's small, but definitely an LCD. I betcha they're trying out that new Panasony 3.2 Mpixel backlit display)! Oh, I think causey's opened a whole new thread.

01-02-2014, 09:23 PM	#55
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	Originally posted by rbefly OK, let's clarify...My version and David's also (yes, he sent me photos and specs) is the 2-element, 4 group, non-radioactive, red-stripe, non-gossamer, submersible/W/R/DC/AM/FM/Underwater, firmware 1.02, ghost-resistant but vampire-tolerant, non-LTD version. Metal or plastic mount?

01-03-2014, 07:06 AM	#57
c.a.m Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Ottawa, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,189	Originally posted by rbefly I chopped up an FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited and used that mount. A good trade-off, wouldn't you say? Yeah, that plastic mount was well known to cause serious squeaks, especially in the cold. Surprised you didn't use the mount from a FA 31 Ltd - it's supposed to have a slightly tighter tolerance on one of the mounting blades. I guess one uses whatever's on hand. Good job. Did you also grind and polish the focus ring to give it a 'zebra' appearance? I hear it looks great on the Silver K-5/K-3. - Craig

01-03-2014, 09:48 AM	#59
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by rbefly A good trade-off, wouldn't you say? Wow! - that worked? I thought you had to use the mount from a SMC Pentax-FA* 200mm F4 Macro ED [IF]. Good to know.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-03-2014, 10:12 AM	#60
Thingo Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: UFTG, Oz Photos: Gallery Posts: 77	Originally posted by panoguy Besides, those early 2-bladed aperture versions underexpose on most modern bodies. .. and that's why I've cunningly held onto my *istD ! The green button (well it's not green next to the Henworth any more: I think there's protoplasm leaking out of mine (anyway sorry for the digression)) does a treat capturing in manual mode. But the flash metering, even TTL (none of that new-fangled P-TTL) is thrown off by the protoplasm, so I'll be pleased when it's all dissipated.