[abruzzi]

Congrats, this is same rig I started with - be warned, you'll want a lot more lenses very soon...

True, but fortunately, most are pretty cheap these days. There are exceptions--75/2.8, 100/4 macro, all the later long lenses--but most are $100-200. The odd thing is while not expensive, the standards 90 and 105 are more expensive than most.

[Silent Street]

Be wary of the 90mm leaf shutter - prone to failure and you won't find out until the film is processed (been there, done that.) My favorite was the 45mm f4.

That would be the first ever comment about failure of the 90mm LS lens. And it is not true.
In fact perceived "failures" have been put down to incorrect operation e.g. not setting the sync speed on the camera to match the LS lens. In that case, of course you will get blank frames...

That would be the first ever comment about failure of the 90mm LS lens. And it is not true.In fact perceived "failures" have been put down to incorrect operation e.g. not setting the sync speed on the camera to match the LS lens. In that case, of course you will get blank frames...

It was common knowledge in the 70s, which is why the lens was discontinued. After mine failed, (and I had it set up properly) I brought it in and had the leaf shutter disabled. The tech told me that it was a flawed design. It was true for me, and I found out the hard way.

[Silent Street]

It was common knowledge in the 70s, which is why the lens was discontinued. After mine failed, (and I had it set up properly) I brought it in and had the leaf shutter disabled. The tech told me that it was a flawed design. It was true for me, and I found out the hard way.

Both the 90mm LS and the 165mm LS were made up to 1989 and included in the revised SMC Pentax 67-designated lens line-up.

On both lenses the leaf shutter is recommended to be held in the relaxed (springs closed) state when they are not used for some time. This is the only known precaution I am aware of that could affect reliability over the very long term. Maybe your early lens was fatigued. LS lenses of that earlier generation are still available in the used market, and many still would have seen heavy professional (studio) use.

---

Last edited by Silent Street; 06-25-2018 at 09:37 PM.

[johnha]

I've recently bought a 6x7 90/2.8 LS lens (it had been sat in the dealer for a number of months - spring storage state unknown). If production stopped in 1989, this lens is a minimum of 28yrs old. I've tested the leaf shutter at various speeds with both a P6x7 and 645D - my copy is still working.

[tuco]

My copy of the 90/2.8 LS is still working too.

[gofour3]

Ditto, my 90/2.8 LS is also ok.

Phil.

[desertscape]

The 90 Takumar LS was made up to 1988, at which time the 165LS took over in its place. The 165 superseded the 90. This is according to the many lens manuals I have.

[abruzzi]

does pentax make the shutters in the 90 and 165, or is it third parties like seiko or copal?

[klappers]

I have a Pentax 67 and the standard 105 f2.4 lens. Yes it is nice to shoot it wide open and have crazy thin depth of field, but much easier to use stopped down and get that real medium format pop. I like it. I am about to expand my collection to include 55mm f3.5 and the 150mm f2.8. Both of which should be great additions. I really don't think you can go to far wrong with any of the lenses in the 67 line up. They are all pretty good and much nicer to use than my 35mm film olympus gear

[rdenney]

does pentax make the shutters in the 90 and 165, or is it third parties like seiko or copal?

I can’t tell by looking, but I’ll bet they are Seikosha shutters.

Rick “just the way they sound” Denney

[Silent Street]

The 90 Takumar LS was made up to 1988, at which time the 165LS took over in its place. The 165 superseded the 90. This is according to the many lens manuals I have.

Most educational. The biggest problem newbies and even some photographically-experienced users of the 165LS have is understanding how it differs from the 90mm LS. The problem is finding documentation. With the 90 LS, MLU can be used in LS mode. Conversely, jumping to the 165LS, with MLU engaged along with LS, will cause a jam. Pentax did publish a dark warning to this effect (citing damage to the camera and lens, which is in the manual that I have).

[tuco]

Actually, mirror lockup alone won't allow you to use the 90 LS in pure leaf shutter mode. You need to lock open the camera's shutter as well which you can do in the special mode half way between 1/1000 and X-sync on the shutter speed dial.

[Graville]

Can someone explain what store with the springs relaxed means for the leaf shutter lenses? I sort of assume it means with the shutter closed but not 100% sure. Obviously I can't see any springs on mine! Apparently Hasselblad recommend you store their LS lenses with the shutter 'cocked', which I think means open. The Pentax manuals I've found online for both 90mm and 165mm don't mention a storage protocol.

[rdenney]

Can someone explain what store with the springs relaxed means for the leaf shutter lenses? I sort of assume it means with the shutter closed but not 100% sure. Obviously I can't see any springs on mine! Apparently Hasselblad recommend you store their LS lenses with the shutter 'cocked', which I think means open. The Pentax manuals I've found online for both 90mm and 165mm don't mention a storage protocol.

Springs relaxed mean the shutter has been released. Cocked on a Pentax LS lens means that you have rotated the cocking ring to charge the shutter.

The focal-plane shutter on a 6x7 is cocked when you advance the film.

Rick “who never really worries about how they are stored” Denney