[dtrego]

I came across some old Pentax literature recently, including a Spotmatic owner’s manual printed in 1968. In the manual were a couple of interesting items: someone’s warranty card for a Spotmatic purchased in 1970, a folded poster-sized quick reference guide/sales brochure for the available lenses, and this - a letter describing the risk of using an un-named brand of third party lenses:



So be careful with those old non-Pentax lenses!

[PJ1]

Sounds like the "Ricoh pin" which, considering today's ownership, makes it somewhat bizarre!!

[boriscleto]

Sounds like the "Ricoh pin" which, considering today's ownership, makes it somewhat bizarre!!

Not at all. More than a decade too early for one thing...

[photolady95]

Moved to the correct forum. As the sticky in General Talk says, no photography talk there allowed, this is now in the General Photography forum.

[Jonathan Mac]

Interesting to see this. I've never had a stop-down pin come loose (or encountered one that looks like it might) but I suppose it's something to bear in mind. I'm sure they could have named the culprits they found but much better from a marketing point of view to just state that all non-Takumar lenses are to be avoided.

[UncleVanya]

Sounds like the "Ricoh pin" which, considering today's ownership, makes it somewhat bizarre!!

I'm sure it refers to the pin on an m42 mount that permits open aperture use of the lens. The pin may have been badly attached in a cheap 3rd party lens. It certainly doesn't appear to be a common problem but may have been a short term issue with one or two lenses etc.

[tvdtvdtvd]

That's a nifty artifact from a bygone age. Blatant fear mongering without substantiation and not hint of a legal disclaimer, (aside from referencing
the warranty).

Asahi has gone as far as identifying the problem but rather than helpfully detailing which lenses and brands appear to be problematic,
they decide to flaunt the fear of no warranty support should one contemplate the heinous act of brand disloyalty.

Despite the details in the header, (To: Asahi Pentax Customers), the last paragraph suggests this letter was not sent directly to customers
but rather to retailers, who presumably were left with the task of tactfully reinforcing the dangers of using inferior gear.

In other news, 4 out of 5 dentists recommend Trident and smoking cigarettes is good for asthmatics.



(Disclaimer: I'm not bashing Asahi. I'm as loyal to their products as anyone. Variations of that letter were issued by many a company
in regard to many a problem across many a product, from cars to washing machines to cameras. One can argue until they're blue in the
face whether today's rambling legalese is any better than fire and brimstone fear mongering.)

[Not a Number]

It would have been cost and time prohibitive for Asahi to examine every make and model of third party lens to publish a specific warning list. Especially since many of the same 3rd party lenses were sold under different brand and model names even variations depending on the sales region. Not to mention potential lawsuits. A blanket warning seems reasonable to me. And who's to say that an addendum with makes and models was not later published?

I wish Adam or somebody would create a centralized library where good quality scans of documents like this could uploaded and accessed.

[photoptimist]

That's a nifty artifact from a bygone age. Blatant fear mongering without substantiation and not hint of a legal disclaimer, (aside from referencing
the warranty).

Asahi has gone as far as identifying the problem but rather than helpfully detailing which lenses and brands appear to be problematic,
they decide to flaunt the fear of no warranty support should one contemplate the heinous act of brand disloyalty.

IANAL but I doubt the company could list the problematic lenses and brands without risk of being sued for defamation by the lens maker. If it was user-abuse that caused the third-party lens pin to break, then Asahi's list of bad lenses would be unethically damaging the reputation of the third-party lens maker.

Moreover, if Asahi did publish a list of "bad lenses," that would create implicit warranty that other third party lenses not on the list are OK. Later customers could complain that Asahi failed to warn them of other "bad lenses" that should have been on the list.

The only ethical strategy is for Asahi (or any maker of equipment) to clearly state that they cannot be held accountable for damage caused by third-party add-ons because Asahi has no control over the quality of the design and manufacturing of those third-party add-ons. It is the third-party that must be held responsible for damage caused by third-party add-ons.

[tvdtvdtvd]

Good points. Though I disagree naming names would imply the unnamed are granted official warranted status. There would be
three categories; known safe and official, (Asahi products), known unsafe, (the identified culprits), and the unknown. Identifying
a known unsafe doesn't give status to unknowns either way. Agreed that legally proving a product is unsafe would be a tricky
act, and thus generically suggesting anything un-Asahi 'might' be unsafe is the safest course of action for Asahi.

[photoptimist]

Good points. Though I disagree naming names would imply the unnamed are granted official warranted status. There would be
three categories; known safe and official, (Asahi products), known unsafe, (the identified culprits), and the unknown. Identifying
a known unsafe doesn't give status to unknowns either way. Agreed that legally proving a product is unsafe would be a tricky
act, and thus generically suggesting anything un-Asahi 'might' be unsafe is the safest course of action for Asahi.

Except Asahi can't even be sure about the "known unsafe" category.

All Asahi knows is that strange parts sometimes get inside Pentax cameras and damage them. Those foreign parts may have come from a Crapitar third-party lens or some other thrd-party lens assuming the user confesses to using such a lens and accurate tells the brand and make. But maybe that Crapitar lens was abused by the user or it had a very rare quality control error and all other Crapitar lenses are safe.

Asahi can only say "known unsafe" if they invest the money and engineering time to buy and analyze third party lenses. Unless they make that investment, all that Asahi can do is have a two category list: known safe and official, (Asahi products), the unknown (all third party lenses) which is what this letter amounts to.

[PDL]

My Fujica EBC M42 lenses for my ST-801 have a pin on them that is used to activate the aperture blades. The pin does cause issues when attempting to put them on K-mount bodies with an adapter, I never tried to use the lenses on my cousin's Spotmatic. I even had to add in a little piece of plastic on my el-cheapo bellows so I could close down the aperture when shooting macros (a 55mm Fujica Macro with extension tubes cured the issue with the blade actuation).

Although both Pentax and Fujica were using the M42 mount, the lenses were not compatible between brands. Early on, on this forum, I had someone suggest that I superglue the "pin" into the lens body so I could use the lenses (28mm f3.5, 55mm f1.8, 55mm f3.5 macro and 135mm f3.5) with the Pentax adapter on my Pentax bodies. But, my Pentax SF-1 was stolen and I still have my Fujica bodies and once in a blue moon I still shoot film. I ain't gluing anything on my lenses. (And they produce very nice images)

[reh321]

My Fujica EBC M42 lenses for my ST-801 have a pin on them that is used to activate the aperture blades. The pin does cause issues when attempting to put them on K-mount bodies with an adapter, I never tried to use the lenses on my cousin's Spotmatic. I even had to add in a little piece of plastic on my el-cheapo bellows so I could close down the aperture when shooting macros (a 55mm Fujica Macro with extension tubes cured the issue with the blade actuation).

Although both Pentax and Fujica were using the M42 mount, the lenses were not compatible between brands. Early on, on this forum, I had someone suggest that I superglue the "pin" into the lens body so I could use the lenses (28mm f3.5, 55mm f1.8, 55mm f3.5 macro and 135mm f3.5) with the Pentax adapter on my Pentax bodies. But, my Pentax SF-1 was stolen and I still have my Fujica bodies and once in a blue moon I still shoot film. I ain't gluing anything on my lenses. (And they produce very nice images)

I have never owned a Spotmatic, but I did find a Spotmatic manual on-line
Pentax Spotmatic instruction manual, user guide
Under the section "Automatic Diaphram" I found

When the preview lever is in "A" (automatic) position, and the exposure meter is turned to "OFF", the fully automatic diaphragm is at its largest aperture at all times, except for the instant of exposure, no matter what aperture is set on the diaphragm ring. When you release the shutter, the diaphragm automatically stops down to the predetermined aperture and the shutter curtains start traveling instantly. When the exposure is completed, the diaphragm reopens to maximum aperture completely automatically and you are ready to compose, focus, and shoot your next pictures.

I also found a warning to turn the meter off before removing a lens.

In other words, the Spotmatic pushed this pin as appropriate, but Pentax did not try to replicate this functionality in their M42-to-K adapter.

[PDL]

Fujica m42 lenses do not have a "A" lever. The lens has a notch that matches with a pin coming out of the body to lock the lens into body. There is a button to press to retract the pin so the lens can be removed from the body. On the Fstop ring there is a flange that makes contact with a spring loaded switch that allows the user to match the exposure LED's in the viewfinder for exposure.

A Pentax M42 lens does not have these characteristics. Also the direction to set the aperture is the opposite from Pentax, not a real issue but that is the way it is. Anyway back in the day, I only purchased Fujica Lenses because most "Universal Lenses" did not work on my bodies.

[Jonathan Mac]

Fujica m42 lenses do not have a "A" lever. The lens has a notch that matches with a pin coming out of the body to lock the lens into body. There is a button to press to retract the pin so the lens can be removed from the body. On the Fstop ring there is a flange that makes contact with a spring loaded switch that allows the user to match the exposure LED's in the viewfinder for exposure.

A Pentax M42 lens does not have these characteristics. Also the direction to set the aperture is the opposite from Pentax, not a real issue but that is the way it is. Anyway back in the day, I only purchased Fujica Lenses because most "Universal Lenses" did not work on my bodies.

This is the problem with open standards like M42 and the old manual K-mount - eventually they diverge as different manufacturers opt to solve problems in different ways (Pentax/Fujifilm, Pentax/Ricoh).