Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-28-2018, 02:43 PM - 1 Like   #16
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,007
QuoteOriginally posted by Dartmoor Dave Quote
It's interesting to hear that Steve prefers his Zenitar with the rear filter while I prefer mine without it. I wonder if perhaps it's down to the notoriously wayward quality control with this lens, causing different copies to have different characteristics? Or perhaps we just have different preferences for the way we like a lens to render?
I vote for the variability in quality. Out of curiosity, what year of manufacture is your Zen? I got mine new in 2008 through a convenient new friend in Krasnogorsk who was willing to gift me a lens in exchange for a small monetary gift. (Gifts cross borders duty-free. Import duties for optics from Russia were and probably still are quite steep.) The bullet points on mine are:
  • Made-for-export MC version in Pentax-K (made in 2007)
  • The rear filter for my lens is coated, though I don't know if is the same process as for the lens itself
  • I have found mine to be surprising flare resistant
  • It came from the factory unable to attain focus on any subject further than about 7 meters. Fortunately, the adjustment is easy.
  • Surprisingly, mine performs a well on the K-3 as it did on the K10D


Steve

06-28-2018, 03:17 PM   #17
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
bobbotron's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Ottawa, ON
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,346
The filter is supposed to be part of the optics, from what I've heard.


One of my two zenitars had really rough threads, I had to use a wrench (very carefully) to convince it to spin on all the way. I found the optics were poor until I figured this out.
06-28-2018, 04:29 PM   #18
Junior Member
RedTurian's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Lyon / Rennes
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 39
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
I vote for the variability in quality. Out of curiosity, what year of manufacture is your Zen? I got mine new in 2008 through a convenient new friend in Krasnogorsk who was willing to gift me a lens in exchange for a small monetary gift. (Gifts cross borders duty-free. Import duties for optics from Russia were and probably still are quite steep.) The bullet points on mine are:
  • Made-for-export MC version in Pentax-K (made in 2007)
  • The rear filter for my lens is coated, though I don't know if is the same process as for the lens itself
  • I have found mine to be surprising flare resistant
  • It came from the factory unable to attain focus on any subject further than about 7 meters. Fortunately, the adjustment is easy.
  • Surprisingly, mine performs a well on the K-3 as it did on the K10D


Steve
@stevebrot Well mine was built in 1986 i guess but it has a rather uncommon serial number with a 0 in front of it, I don't know if it's common...

@bobbotron The filter is, indeed, part of the optical sheme, playing the role of the UV coating since the lens is not UV coated, apparentely.

Anyway, actually my camera does not want to operate the diaphragm bayonet.... maybe I sould sell it back and buy a M42 version...
06-28-2018, 04:37 PM   #19
Digitiser of Film
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 20,503
QuoteOriginally posted by RedTurian Quote
Anyway, actually my camera does not want to operate the diaphragm bayonet.... maybe I sould sell it back and buy a M42 version...
Per my previous response, did you check (a) whether the lens mount is coated / painted, and (b) if the camera is working correctly with other manual K-mount lenses?

06-28-2018, 04:46 PM   #20
Junior Member
RedTurian's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Lyon / Rennes
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 39
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
Per my previous response, did you check (a) whether the lens mount is coated / painted, and (b) if the camera is working correctly with other manual K-mount lenses?
Well, I'll let the pictures talk for me. And 2) well I didn't tried, but tomorrow I am supposed to recieve my Helios 44K-4 which was far away and I'll test, but since French post is terrible, well I don't think it will be tomorrow :P

---------- Post added 06-28-18 at 04:47 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by RedTurian Quote
Well, I'll let the pictures talk for me. And 2) well I didn't tried, but tomorrow I am supposed to recieve my Helios 44K-4 which was far away and I'll test, but since French post is terrible, well I don't think it will be tomorrow :P
Oh, and I apologize for the quality, I shot the picture handheld with my Industar 50-2 since it was the first lens that I was able to grab; without even looking through the viewfinder x)
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-30  Photo 
06-28-2018, 04:53 PM   #21
Digitiser of Film
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 20,503
QuoteOriginally posted by RedTurian Quote
Well, I'll let the pictures talk for me. And 2) well I didn't tried, but tomorrow I am supposed to recieve my Helios 44K-4 which was far away and I'll test, but since French post is terrible, well I don't think it will be tomorrow :P
...
Oh, and I apologize for the quality, I shot the picture handheld with my Industar 50-2 since it was the first lens that I was able to grab; without even looking through the viewfinder x)
OK, that mount shouldn't be a problem for your camera's communication pins. It should conduct just fine, though it's worth cleaning the lens and camera mounts, and the camera mount pins, just to be sure.

Let us know how you get on with testing your 44K-4 on the same camera at various apertures. I think you should rule out the possibility of a camera problem before you return your Zenitar-K 16mm (or sell it with disclosure)...
06-28-2018, 04:56 PM   #22
Junior Member
RedTurian's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Lyon / Rennes
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 39
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
OK, that mount shouldn't be a problem for your camera's communication pins. It should conduct just fine, though it's worth cleaning the lens and camera mounts, and the camera mount pins, just to be sure.

Let us know how you get on with testing your 44K-4 on the same camera at various apertures. I think you should rule out the possibility of a camera problem before you return your Zenitar-K 16mm (or sell it with disclosure)...
I check this out real fast, with a few drops of alcohol it should be good :P

06-28-2018, 04:59 PM   #23
Digitiser of Film
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 20,503
QuoteOriginally posted by RedTurian Quote
I check this out real fast, with a few drops of alcohol it should be good :P
Yup, that will be good for cleaning the lens and camera mount and pins

But the real test, in my view, is to see if your incoming 44K-4 operates at all apertures without problems. If it does, we know it's a problem with the Zenitar-K 16mm... if it doesn't, it's potentially an issue with the camera itself...
06-28-2018, 05:03 PM   #24
Junior Member
RedTurian's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Lyon / Rennes
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 39
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by RedTurian Quote
I check this out real fast, with a few drops of alcohol it should be good :P
Yeah like I was expecting nothing changed, actually I looked through the lens and it seems that the camera closes the diaphragm after actually taking the shot,which is quite... yeah, ebarrassing. But I think that's pretty normal, but with this lens it just won't close the diaphragm

---------- Post added 06-28-18 at 05:06 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
Yup, that will be good for cleaning the lens and camera mount and pins

But the real test, in my view, is to see if your incoming 44K-4 operates at all apertures without problems. If it does, we know it's a problem with the Zenitar-K 16mm... if it doesn't, it's potentially an issue with the camera itself...
In fact, I think that the camera isn't really designed for that purpose, so when I tell it to do a optical previsualisation, since the lens lack contacters, the camera thinks that there's no actual lens mounted. I know that this problem isn't on the K10D but I don't know about newer cameras
06-28-2018, 05:07 PM   #25
Digitiser of Film
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 20,503
QuoteOriginally posted by RedTurian Quote
Yeah like I was expecting nothing changed, actually I looked through the lens and it seems that the camera closes the diaphragm after actually taking the shot,which is quite... yeah, ebarrassing. But I think that's pretty normal, but with this lens it just won't close the diaphragm
Hmmm. If you operate the lens' diaphragm lever manually (with the lens removed from the camera, obviously), does it spring back quickly? Can you see the diaphragm open and close, and is it what you'd call "snappy"??

There is no reason why your camera shouldn't operate this lens perfectly well, unless there's a problem with either the lens or the camera. If the aperture lever operates snappily on the lens, and you've cleaned the lens and camera mount, it's possible there is a problem with the camera...
06-28-2018, 05:08 PM   #26
Junior Member
RedTurian's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Lyon / Rennes
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 39
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
Hmmm. If you operate the lens' diaphragm lever manually (with the lens removed from the camera, obviously), does it spring back quickly? Can you see the diaphragm open and close, and is it what you'd call "snappy"??
Indeed, Actually it's the first thing I tested when I recieved it.
06-28-2018, 05:11 PM   #27
Digitiser of Film
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 20,503
QuoteOriginally posted by RedTurian Quote
Indeed, Actually it's the first thing I tested when I recieved it.
OK, let's wait and see what happens with your 44K-4... We need to rule out a possible camera issue.
06-28-2018, 05:26 PM   #28
Junior Member
RedTurian's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Lyon / Rennes
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 39
Original Poster
OKAY SO, I've been on a thread, (I don't know how to put links but go here Aperture ring with manual lens on K-30 - PentaxForums.com) and the people here are having the same issues than me, BUT me I can't use the M mode since my mode-selector dial is broken, and only gives me access to P, TAv and AUTO/SCN so... yeah

The people also says that It's a well known default, and there's a petition somewhere on the net about it. HOWEVER, since I do not use my 50 1.8 and my 16-55 3.5-5.6 II WR, I was considering just to break the little pin that controls the aperture, so like that, no problem. But that's kinda... destructive, and even if my camera isn't under warrantee anymore, I don't really feel like doing that... tell me your thoughts, guys.
06-28-2018, 07:53 PM   #29
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,007
QuoteOriginally posted by RedTurian Quote
i guess but it has a rather uncommon serial number with a 0 in front of it, I don't know if it's common...
If the serial number has the year encoded, it is always the first two characters. Mine was made in 2007 and has SN 070354. My Jupiter-9, also made in 2007 and purchased a few weeks before has SN 0700467. All production in the first decade of this century would have "00" or "0#" numbers.


Steve
06-28-2018, 08:01 PM - 1 Like   #30
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,007
QuoteOriginally posted by RedTurian Quote
tell me your thoughts, guys.
From your description, your camera is not a good mate for K-mount lenses. The aperture actuator is dying and the mode selector is not able to engage for M mode (needed to shoot with K or KM mount lenses). Please don't snip the aperture actuators on the lens. That little bit cannot be undone and makes the lens much less practical for shooting with a body that is not broken. Your K-30 may still work with M42 lenses having A/M switch or with the aperture actuator pin reversibly set in the depressed position.


Steve
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
16mm, 16mm f/2.8 infity, 44k-4, benchmark, body, camera, day, diaphragm, diaphragm problem, f/2.8 infity focus, filter, focus, helios, infinity, infinity focus, lens, lenses, live view, pentax help, pentax k30, photography, pictures, post, test, tomorrow, troubleshooting, zenitar 16 2.8, zenitar-k 16mm f/2.8
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Zenitar 16mm f2.8 on K-1 redcat Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 11-15-2016 11:54 AM
For Sale - Sold: Russian lens set - Jupiter 9, Helios 44, Zenitar 16, Vario-zenitar 25-45 innivus Sold Items 8 01-30-2014 09:39 AM
For Sale - Sold: Zenitar 16mm 2.8 Fisheye Rupert Sold Items 3 06-01-2013 05:31 AM
Front-Focus issue with old Zenitar 16mm Fisheye NatureSeeker808 Pentax K-r 7 10-10-2011 04:39 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:08 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top