Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-24-2014, 08:54 AM   #76
Veteran Member
Cuthbert's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,573
Istigated by Les and the others I decided to try the LX's fable auto exposure that last forever...or almost. I decline any responsability on the following images.



Ready? Last week I was changing the strings of my Kramer Baretta and I decided to take some close up pics about 2 AM with dim artificial light using my LX, the M50/f1.4 closed at f22 and Portra 160. These are the results:







Apologies for the lousy background (the table in my kitchen) and the grainy shots, I assume in Italy they still have to learn how to develop Portra correctly.

For the record I think the shutter remained open for at least two minutes.

12-24-2014, 03:18 PM   #77
Pentaxian
builttospill's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Utah, Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,642
QuoteOriginally posted by Cuthbert Quote
Ready? Last week I was changing the strings of my Kramer Baretta and I decided to take some close up pics about 2 AM with dim artificial light using my LX, the M50/f1.4 closed at f22 and Portra 160. These are the results:

For the record I think the shutter remained open for at least two minutes.
Very impressive for a subject dark in color...
12-24-2014, 03:25 PM   #78
Veteran Member
Cuthbert's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,573
QuoteOriginally posted by builttospill Quote
Very impressive for a subject dark in color...
Thanks, I also took this one at f16, it's interesting because you see a yellower light (I assume the shorter the exposure time is the more "real" shot you get) and you can see the two cubistic pictures in the reflection of the Baretta:



Interesting experiment however, it feels strange when you set up a camera, you start the self timer and watch it take the picture "deciding" how long the exposure should be.

The next time I'll try to make a more serious composition perhaps with a white guitar.
12-24-2014, 04:32 PM   #79
Pentaxian
builttospill's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Utah, Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,642
QuoteOriginally posted by Cuthbert Quote
Thanks, I also took this one at f16, it's interesting because you see a yellower light (I assume the shorter the exposure time is the more "real" shot you get) and you can see the two cubistic pictures in the reflection of the Baretta:
I'm not sure about this. I'm certainly not a film expert, but a different exposure time shouldn't make the colors more yellow or white, as the white balance is built into the film. My guess is this color difference is due to the developer's settings.

Someone correct me if wrong.

12-24-2014, 05:27 PM   #80
Site Supporter
ChrisPlatt's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Queens NYC
Posts: 4,433
Years ago I got some unexpected colors making time exposures with slide film.
IIRC my Ektachrome 400 tended to "go green".

Chris
12-25-2014, 08:24 AM - 1 Like   #81
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,929
QuoteOriginally posted by Cuthbert Quote
Istigated by Les and the others I decided to try the LX's fable auto exposure that last forever...or almost. I decline any responsability on the following images.

Ready? Last week I was changing the strings of my Kramer Baretta and I decided to take some close up pics about 2 AM with dim artificial light using my LX, the M50/f1.4 closed at f22 and Portra 160. These are the results:

Apologies for the lousy background (the table in my kitchen) and the grainy shots, I assume in Italy they still have to learn how to develop Portra correctly.

For the record I think the shutter remained open for at least two minutes.
I also conducted long exposure tests on both my LX's just to be sure they work correctly as well as see how different films respond since they are unaccounted for when used in this manner.



---------- Post added 12-25-14 at 10:32 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Pioneer Quote
Right now I have one of mine set up with the FB-1 + FC-1 configuration. A little heavier than normal but an absolutely beautiful view. I use this for Macro work as well.

The wonderful thing about the LX is that the viewfinder is always very, very bright, no matter what your setup. I love the viewfinder!!
It is really interesting that even though the LX's mirror does divert some light to the meter just how bright the viewfinder is. Using a dark mirror lens - in this case the Soligor 500mm f8 with a t mount adapter, I tried it on my range of bodies and clearly the LX's big bright finder is noticeably more useful in achieving critical focus. However, I may not have the appropriate finder or screens for the other bodies so that may require further investigation.

Taken on Lomography 100 film.


---------- Post added 12-25-14 at 10:35 AM ----------

The bright viewfinder system becomes more important when using even darker setups . . .

Taken on Fuji 100

Last edited by LesDMess; 12-25-2014 at 08:32 AM.
12-25-2014, 10:19 PM   #82
Loyal Site Supporter
Pioneer's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Elko, Nevada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,167
Great work Les. Love this stuff.

Builttospill and myself have noted many times that we love working with our K1000s. But I do have to mention that there is a clear, visible difference in the available visibility when focusing a K1000 or an LX in a low light environment. This evening I happened to have my K1000 and my LX at my daughter's and was taking photographs with both cameras. On the LX I was using my 35/3.5 and I had the A* 85/1.4, which is a monstrous chunk of light gathering glass, on my K1000. Even with that big of a difference in working apertures, the LX had a clear advantage when focusing on my grandkids in the darker living room. In the well lit kitchen the difference wasn't as great, but it was still there.

Last edited by Pioneer; 12-25-2014 at 10:26 PM.
12-25-2014, 10:59 PM   #83
Pentaxian
MD Optofonik's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 900
I had the opportunity to get an LX at a reasonable price (still not cheap, though) but went for the KX due to it's ASA range. I also picked up a SMC-M 35mm f2.8, got it CLA'ed, and still saved a bit of dosh.

12-26-2014, 01:26 AM   #84
Site Supporter
ChrisPlatt's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Queens NYC
Posts: 4,433
QuoteOriginally posted by MD Optofonik Quote
I had the opportunity to get an LX at a reasonable price (still not cheap, though) but went for the KX
due to it's ASA range. I also picked up a SMC-M 35mm f2.8, got it CLA'ed, and still saved a bit of dosh.
The LX offers some interesting capabilities but my KX has everything I need.

Chris
12-26-2014, 08:50 AM   #85
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,929
QuoteOriginally posted by Pioneer Quote
Great work Les. Love this stuff.

Builttospill and myself have noted many times that we love working with our K1000s. But I do have to mention that there is a clear, visible difference in the available visibility when focusing a K1000 or an LX in a low light environment. This evening I happened to have my K1000 and my LX at my daughter's and was taking photographs with both cameras. On the LX I was using my 35/3.5 and I had the A* 85/1.4, which is a monstrous chunk of light gathering glass, on my K1000. Even with that big of a difference in working apertures, the LX had a clear advantage when focusing on my grandkids in the darker living room. In the well lit kitchen the difference wasn't as great, but it was still there.
Thanks!

I am not really sure how the LX viewfinder is brighter when a portion of the light is diverted. I've also been trying to find a way to test the brightness and quantify the differences between my cameras. Unfortunately, I am not aware if any camera came with a "finder brightness" spec that I can use as a reference for my test results.
12-26-2014, 03:29 PM   #86
Site Supporter
ChrisPlatt's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Queens NYC
Posts: 4,433
QuoteOriginally posted by Pioneer Quote
But I do have to mention that there is a clear, visible difference in the available visibility when focusing a K1000 or an LX in a low light environment. This evening I happened to have my K1000 and my LX at my daughter's and was taking photographs with both cameras. On the LX I was using my 35/3.5 and I had the A* 85/1.4, which is a monstrous chunk of light gathering glass, on my K1000. Even with that big of a difference in working apertures, the LX had a clear advantage when focusing on my grandkids in the darker living room. In the well lit kitchen the difference wasn't as great, but it was still there.
I'm sure focal length and relative depth of focus played a role in this case.
Fidgety young kids can be frustrating to keep in focus with a telephoto, period.

I traded my excellent 105mm Nikkor in for the less highly regarded 85/2 Nikkor
when my daughter was young and very active, and got a lot more keepers.

Yes, my LX seemed a little brighter but didn't "snap" in to focus like my KX does.

Chris

Last edited by ChrisPlatt; 12-26-2014 at 03:40 PM.
12-26-2014, 03:30 PM   #87
Loyal Site Supporter
Pioneer's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Elko, Nevada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,167
QuoteOriginally posted by LesDMess Quote
Thanks!

I am not really sure how the LX viewfinder is brighter when a portion of the light is diverted. I've also been trying to find a way to test the brightness and quantify the differences between my cameras. Unfortunately, I am not aware if any camera came with a "finder brightness" spec that I can use as a reference for my test results.
I'm not sure I totally understand this either. I have been doing some playing around trying to get some understanding.

This morning I took my Voigtlander 90/3.5 Apo Lanthar and did some viewing tests against the Pentax A* 85/1.4. To be completely honest I can't see any difference between the two with the LX. I know that wide open with one is on f/3.5 while the other should be brighter with f/1.4. But I can find no difference.

But when I mount the 85/1.4 onto the K1000 with the 90/3.5 on the LX, the LX is clearly easier to see through. I should clarify though that this does not mean the LX is necessarily any easier to focus. They both seem equally easy to focus with and the results at various distances in the house seem to be almost the same.

The only thing I can think of at this moment is that my own eyeballs are the limiting factor.

Based on that I would suggest, as I usually do anyway, that you should do your own testing on these things as your mileage may vary.

---------- Post added 12-26-2014 at 02:33 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by ChrisPlatt Quote
I'm sure focal length and relative depth of focus played a role in this case.
Fidgety young kids can be frustrating to keep in focus with a telephoto, period.

I traded my excellent 105mm Nikkor in for the less highly regarded 85/2 Nikkor
when my daughter was young and very active, and got a lot more keepers.

Yes, my LX seemed a little brighter but didn't "snap" in to focus like my KX does.

Chris
I can certainly agree with that Chris. The viewfinder I find the easiest to focus is in my Pentax SV, and it doesn't have a split image at all, only micro prisms. And it certainly doesn't compete with the LX for brightness.
12-26-2014, 06:05 PM   #88
Pentaxian
builttospill's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Utah, Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,642
Pioneer, although not as old as some here (or nearly as young either), a large and bright viewfinder is essential for me. I was diagnosed with diabetes as a young child, and have had the disease for more than 25 years. While I'm in great health and have no complications from diabetes, my vision is not consistent and changes often.

I've been a proponent of a full frame digital because I want a larger viewfinder for my DSLR. I'd be nearly as pleased with a new APSC digital from Pentax with a full frame-sized VF, and I think that would make an exceptional difference in the market.

My MX and K1000 do snap into focus as Chris mentions with the KX, and I really enjoy my MX VF with any lens attached to it.
12-26-2014, 07:21 PM   #89
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,929
To your point brightness is only one characteristic - albeit a very important one, when it comes to achieving critical focus. For instance the Nikon FM3A and the Canon New F-1 both have screens that have a split image rangefinder that never blacks out regardless how dark the lens setup is - even on bellows. Both are very bright too but I have found them to be very hard to focus particularly in dark settings because everything looks in focus!
12-27-2014, 06:17 AM   #90
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,116
The LX screen is one of the newer generation "bright" screens that has an engineered texture (like very fine microprisms) over the entire surface instead of the more random texture of ground glass, which was also duplicated on the earlier SLRs in plastic. The MX also used this newer-technology screen, as it makes the screen brighter. However the true ground-glass texture can't be beat for precision focus as the image can be judged better for sharpness.
I replaced the standard screen in both MX and LX with a plain matte, which seems to indicated sharpest focus more like the old ground glass.
Modern dSLR screens are even worse for focusing, as they are not designed for focus, but to give a bright image for composing an autofocus system.
I use only manual focus lenses, so I want focus precision over brightness, even with my old eyes.
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!
bodies, brightness, chris, color, density, exposure, exposures, film, filters, finder, focus, fun, light, lx, mirror, nikkor, pentax, portra, post, program, results, shots, sp, test, time, viewfinder
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:58 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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